MUST READ: 'The Roots Of The UC-Davis Pepper-Spraying' - Glenn Greenwald/Salon

[WillyT]

And yeah... I'm gonna bold the whole thing.

The roots of the UC-Davis pepper-spraying
Glenn Greenwald - Salon
SUNDAY, NOV 20, 2011 4:09 AM PACIFIC STANDARD TIME

<snip>

The now-viral video of police officers in their Robocop costumes sadistically pepper-spraying peaceful, sitting protesters at UC-Davis (details here) shows a police state in its pure form. It’s easy to be outraged by this incident as though it’s some sort of shocking aberration, but that is exactly what it is not. The Atlantic‘s Garance Franke-Ruta adeptly demonstrates with an assemblage of video how common such excessive police force has been in response to the Occupy protests. Along those lines, there are several points to note about this incident and what it reflects:

(1) Despite all the rights of free speech and assembly flamboyantly guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, the reality is that punishing the exercise of those rights with police force and state violence has been the reflexive response in America for quite some time. As Franke-Ruta put it, “America has a very long history of protests that meet with excessive or violent response, most vividly recorded in the second half of the 20th century.” Digby yesterday recounted a similar though even worse incident aimed at environmental protesters. The intent and effect of such abuse is that it renders those guaranteed freedoms meaningless. If a population becomes bullied or intimidated out of exercising rights offered on paper, those rights effectively cease to exist. Every time the citizenry watches peaceful protesters getting pepper-sprayed — or hears that an Occupy protester suffered brain damage and almost died after being shot in the skull with a rubber bullet — many become increasingly fearful of participating in this citizen movement, and also become fearful in general of exercising their rights in a way that is bothersome or threatening to those in power. That’s a natural response, and it’s exactly what the climate of fear imposed by all abusive police state actions is intended to achieve: to coerce citizens to “decide” on their own to be passive and compliant — to refrain from exercising their rights — out of fear of what will happen if they don’t.

The genius of this approach is how insidious its effects are: because the rights continue to be offered on paper, the citizenry continues to believe it is free. They believe that they are free to do everything they choose to do, because they have been “persuaded” — through fear and intimidation — to passively accept the status quo. As Rosa Luxemburg so perfectly put it: “Those who do not move, do not notice their chains.” Someone who sits at home and never protests or effectively challenges power factions will not realize that their rights of speech and assembly have been effectively eroded because they never seek to exercise those rights; it’s only when we see steadfast, courageous resistance from the likes of these UC-Davis students is this erosion of rights manifest.

Pervasive police abuses and intimidation tactics applied to peaceful protesters — pepper-spray, assault rifles, tasers, tear gas and the rest — not only harm their victims but also the relationship of the citizenry to the government and the set of core political rights. Implanting fear of authorities in the heart of the citizenry is a far more effective means of tyranny than overtly denying rights. That’s exactly what incidents like this are intended to achieve. Overzealous prosecution of those who engage in peaceful political protest (which we’ve seen more and more of over the last several years) as well as rampant secrecy and the sprawling Surveillance State are the close cousins of excessive police force in both intent and effect: they are all about deterring meaningful challenges to those in power through the exercise of basic rights. Rights are so much more effectively destroyed by bullying a citizenry out of wanting to exercise them than any other means. These two short video clips — regarding the openly abusive treatment of Bradley Manning and the extra-judicial attempt to destroy WikiLeaks — are how I’ve been trying to make this point over the past month in the various speeches I’ve given around the country:

<snip>

Much More: http://www.salon.com/2011/11/20/the_roots_of_the_uc_davis_pepper_spraying/singleton/

:kick:

[Sarah Ibarruri]

1. God, that's a great article! And yes, the U.S. treats the Constitutional right of assembly ...

as if it were non-existent.

This is a very important sentence in the article:

“America has a very long history of protests that meet with excessive or violent response, most vividly recorded in the second half of the 20th century.”

[Fumesucker]

2. Mostly recorded..

Only because on location recording really became possible about mid century..

[Sarah Ibarruri]

4. And thank goodness for that! We are now recording the bullying ordered by the powers-that-be

That wasn't possible during the 60s protests! God they even killed people back then.

Also, the powers-that-be LOVE IT when people express fear. That's their goal. That's why I HATE IT when people express fear of this movement in here, and fear for those in this movement. The last thing we need is even MORE cowardice than that which got us 30 years of right wing, unbridled capitalism which so deeply damaged our country.

[Warpy]

6. And in the first half, also, when unions were being formed

The right to assemble is the one the government most frequently ignores. It's inconvenient to have a mass of people with signs marching around saying you're not doing your job properly.

They always pull this shit and it always makes the protests grow because people with little left to lose just get angrier.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

7. The powers-that-be and their govt lackeys shit all over the Constitution

And the majority is just sitting home, afraid, unaware, and uneducated about these things.

[shanti]

8. didn't baby bush

say that the constitution was "only a piece of paper"? really?

[Sarah Ibarruri]

9. He sure did, didn't he? That pretty much explained the Repuke view of the Constitution nt

[starroute]

13. I'm not sure I agree with the "second half of the 20th century part"

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWespionage.htm

The Espionage Act was passed by Congress in 1917 after the United States entered the First World War. It prescribed a $10,000 fine and 20 years' imprisonment for interfering with the recruiting of troops or the disclosure of information dealing with national defence. Additional penalties were included for the refusal to perform military duty. Over the next few months around 900 went to prison under the Espionage Act.

Criticised as unconstitutional, the act resulted in the imprisonment of many of the anti-war movement. This included the arrest of left-wing political figures such as Eugene V. Debs, Bill Haywood, Philip Randolph, Victor Berger, John Reed, Max Eastman, and Emma Goldman. Debs was sentenced to ten years for a speech in Canton, Ohio, on 16th June, 1918, attacking the Espionage Act.

On 23rd August six members of the Frayhayt, a group of Jewish anarchists based in New York were arrested. Charged under the Espionage Act, the group were accused of publishing articles in the Der Shturm that undermined the American war effort. This included criticizing the United States government for invading Russia after the Bolshevik government signed the Brest-Litovsk Treaty.

One of the group, Jacob Schwartz, was so badly beaten by the police when he was arrested that he died soon afterwards. Mollie Steimer was found guilty and sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment. Three of the men, Samuel Lipman, Hyman Lachowsky and Jacob Abrahams received twenty years.


http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USApalmerR.htm

In 1919 Woodrow Wilson appointed A. Mitchell Palmer as his attorney general. Palmer recruited John Edgar Hoover as his special assistant and together they used the Espionage Act (1917) and the Sedition Act (1918) to launch a campaign against radicals and left-wing organizations.

Worried by the revolution that had taken place in Russia, Palmer became convinced that Communist agents were planning to overthrow the American government. His view was reinforced by the discovery of thirty-eight bombs sent to leading politicians and the Italian anarchist who blew himself up outside Palmer's Washington home. Palmer recruited John Edgar Hoover as his special assistant and together they used the Espionage Act (1917) and the Sedition Act (1918) to launch a campaign against radicals and left-wing organizations.

A. Mitchell Palmer claimed that Communist agents from Russia were planning to overthrow the American government. On 7th November, 1919, the second anniversary of the Russian Revolution, over 10,000 suspected communists and anarchists were arrested. Palmer and Hoover found no evidence of a proposed revolution but large number of these suspects were held without trial for a long time. The vast majority were eventually released but Emma Goldman and 247 other people, were deported to Russia.

On 2nd January, 1920, another 6,000 were arrested and held without trial. These raids took place in several cities and became known as the Palmer Raids. A. Mitchell Palmer and John Edgar Hoover found no evidence of a proposed revolution but large number of these suspects, many of them members of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), continued to be held without trial. When Palmer announced that the communist revolution was likely to take place on 1st May, mass panic took place. In New York, five elected Socialists were expelled from the legislature.

[polichick]

3. American rhetoric has little to do with reality. K&R

[Stuart G]

5. Kick and Rec nt

[myrna minx]

10. K&R n/t

[Brigid]

11. Wonderful article!

K & R, of course.

And that brings up another advantage we have today: The internet. Just look how quickly the UC Davis incident went viral. They can burn books and magazines, and destroy film footage, they can even censor what news makes TV, radio, and newspapers; but they cannot stop anything from getting around once it hits cyberspace.

[starroute]

15. They could if they pass SOPA / PROTECT IP

Under the guise of preventing the sale of counterfeit products, it actually takes direct aim at services like YouTube. That's why it absolutely have to be stopped.

[EFerrari]

12. K&R

[LoZoccolo]

14. Glenn Greenwald: automatic unrecommend n/t

[cui bono]

19. Geez. You are so misguided it's very, very sad. n/t

[Admiral Loinpresser]

21. Thoughtful recommend.

Let me guess... you think Obama is the greatest thing since a sliced Constitution?

[Raster]

24. Need you ask?

[bullwinkle428]

25. Convenient roundabout way to give a thumbs-up to pepper spraying.

How bold and edgy of you.

[Ignis]

26. There's no roundabout about it.

[whatchamacallit]

27. "Hey everybody, dig my brazen ignorance!"

:eyes: :puke:

[Cali_Democrat]

28. What did you think of the article?

[LoZoccolo]

33. I think it's pretty obvious to most people here that there are problems with police brutality.

I got the impression that what he wrote wasn't all that novel. Sometimes he is, but not this time. I would probably recommend a similar article on the topic by a different author. But Glenn Greenwald has been put on automatic unrecommend.

[Raster]

29. So without even reading what Mr. Greenwald has to say...

...you edict an automatic unrecommend?

[LoZoccolo]

34. If I judged each article on it's own merits, there wouldn't be as much incentive to be honest.

A writer could simply try new lies each time the old one is discovered, and if they fail, they could simply try again. With automatic unrecommend, they have to be careful because it may mean that many posts are unrecommended.

[Raster]

38. I think you may have fogotten your SARCASM emoticon,

or your BULLSHIT emoticon.

[rhett o rick]

30. You have a right to be closed-minded. But why do you need to announce it? nm

[Zorra]

16. ^“Those who do not move, do not notice their chains.”^

[RZM]

17. I think he draws the wrong conclusion here

'Every time the citizenry watches peaceful protesters getting pepper-sprayed — or hears that an Occupy protester suffered brain damage and almost died after being shot in the skull with a rubber bullet — many become increasingly fearful of participating in this citizen movement, and also become fearful in general of exercising their rights in a way that is bothersome or threatening to those in power.'

I think the opposite is true, actually. The word is out about OWS. Those who want to participate and are capable of participating are doing so. Those who aren't participating are no less likely to do so because people have been pepper sprayed - they aren't there because they don't want to be there in the first place. For those who are there or are otherwise very favorably disposed to the movement, these types of moments only help. It makes the movement look better and increases the resolve of its supporters to stick it out.

And it's ridiculous to say that this is evidence of a 'police state in its pure form.' In a real police state, movements like this are crushed early on and for good.

[Dover]

20. I think fear has diminished considerably. We've crossed a threshold

where the consequences of not responding far outweigh the dangers. TPTB may not realize it yet, but they've awakened the dragon.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

22. He's describing a paradox.

The systematic police brutality has certainly made the movement burgeon. On the other hand, the American population is relatively fat, dumb and lazy due to decades of bad nutrition and soma. Now that the soma in its various forms is becoming more scarce and austerity is the watch word of the RW, people are rousing from apathy. Many of those being roused are, imo, being intimidated from particpating because of the brutality even as others are overcoming their fear and putting their bodies on the line. Surely you agree that the US government and those local and state agencies participating in this suppression of dissent are morally bankrupt?

[tblue37]

37. When the police in Tunisia beat that young man to death, they were engaging in

their standard operating procedure, and it also was intended to cow the citizenry. But they went too far once too often and galvanized not just a revolution in Tunisia, but in several others nearby.

When film became available of Bull Connor and his bully-cops attacking peaceful Civil Rights marchers, that just caused the Civil Rights movement to become more powerful, and it especially attracted the notice of Northerners who didn't understand previously how bad it was in the Deep South.

I think that police brutality against OWS is similarly galvanizing the resistance, not undermining it, though I am sure TPTB meant for it to intimidate potential protesters.

[DirkGently]

35. The police state's in place. The fact people are pushing back doesn't undermine the point at all.

[RZM]

36. Not so much

'In Soviet Russia, Democratic Underground really is underground!'

The US is not a police state, not by a long shot.

People need to put this in perspective. Syria is a country with less than 10 percent of the population of the US. Since their uprising began, over 3500 people have died.

I don't think that Pike should have pepper sprayed those people. But to say that is evidence of a police state is to insult the hundreds of millions of people around the world who live in actual police states, not to mention the many people in the US who have no reason to fear the government or the police force.

It's like complaining loudly about your small first degree burn while somebody in the next room just had arm lopped off. Yes it does hurt, but it's a hell of a lot better than losing an arm and should never be compared to losing an arm. You should still seek attention for your burn, but you shouldn't pretend as if your suffering is on the same level.

[DirkGently]

39. You're suggesting the house isn't on fire until it's reduced to ashes.

That's simply not the case. A burgeoning police state is not NOT a police state. Which is Greenwald's point. Complaining that things are not yet as bad as they could possibly be deliberately misses the point. Police states don't spring fully formed from a functioning democracy.

They get there because people argue that everything's just fine and everyone should stop complaining, because they're not lopping people's arms off in the street just yet.

[Quantess]

18. Good article.

[Bozita]

23. That's MUST READ stuff! ... Recommended

[rhett o rick]

31. We are allowed to believe we have democracy until we actually try to use it. nm

[DirkGently]

32. Greenwald's spot-on, as usual. Thanks for posting this, Willy T.

[LWolf]

40. Good read. Thanks. nt