Race interference: Protests, Sabotage, and Assaults

[GenericBoonenFan]

Protestors have been part of the sport since day one. How many races have been canceled due to protests?
And who are "they"? Who folded? Seems to me the race continued as planned.
I honestly don't understand why some people are skipping the overall point here. Netserk is asking what should be done about it.
What say you?

Lock up the protesters interfering with the continuance of the race. Leave the peaceful ones alone. Enjoy the cycling. Drink a beer, kick back and relax.

re: Removing the team inviting future protests: First, removing the team would detract future protests, because there would be nothing to protest.

No, it would set a precedent that would be too hard to get rid off. And not only for IPT but also for other teams such as UAE, Bahrein, Jayco...etc
Removing the team would show that threatening, violence and intimidation works and we don't want that.

 

[AmRacer]

Precedent

Protestors have been part of the sport since day one. How many races have been canceled due to protests?
And who are "they"? Who folded? Seems to me the race continued as planned.
I honestly don't understand why some people are skipping the overall point here. Netserk is asking what should be done about it.
What say you?

So far, the protesters haven't really won.

There's not much that can be done about it. Near the finish area, police should able to control the situation. But not during the rest of the race of course, see others who have explained it.

 

[proffate]

As someone wrote, if one group of protesters win it will create precedent for other protesters. Just gather a group and protest at something and they will fold.

I mean protests are meant to affect change, not just make a lot of noise. Sometimes they succeed. Are you suggesting that protests have no place in modern society? MLK is a hero of American history, that's what I was taught in school anyway. I'm glad the group of protestors he rallied "won", at least to a certain extent

 

[the delgados]

No one? You speak for everyone? In all cases? For all causes?

By “silencing speech” I refer to people wanting to cancel the very presence or even existence of IPT because of what the team represents…to them. Of course IPT is just a symbol being used to make a point. Sure, protest the symbol. By all means. Don’t interfere with the race and don’t try and cancel (silence) the team.

Free speech isn’t about removing any idea one objects to from the discourse. It’s about presenting one’s own POV.

But it seems many don’t want to have a debate. They just want to silence those who have a different POV. Or in this case those who can be seen to represent an idea. A tenuous connection at best.

I object to those tactics in all cases in all venues.

Clearly I don't speak for everyone; just the thought of doing so is disturbing. I wouldn't wish that on an enemy; things would go sidewise in a heartbeat, because I would clash with people who think like me.
I wish for people to approach a topic as serious as this in a rational and level-headed manner. That's all. I'm just a spoke in the wheel, so to speak.
I don't speak for everyone, but I don't agree with the idea of banishing IPT from the sport. My proposal to the question raised by Netserk was to remove IPT from the race. Not forever. But maybe now would be a good time to do so. That might be a solution to the problem in this race, the Vuelta.
Think about countries boycotting Olympic games in the past. Think about countries like Russia being banned from recent sporting events . Whether you like it or not, these things happen.

 

[AmRacer]

I mean protests are meant to affect change, not just make a lot of noise. Sometimes they succeed. Are you suggesting that protests have no place in modern society? MLK is a hero of American history, that's what I was taught in school anyway. I'm glad the group of protestors he rallied "won", at least to a certain extent

Protest for or against stuff is okay. But not interfering with other people's life.

 

[AmRacer]

Clearly I don't speak for everyone; just the thought of doing so is disturbing. I wouldn't wish that on an enemy; things would go sidewise in a heartbeat, because I would clash with people who think like me.
I wish for people to approach a topic as serious as this in a rational and level-headed manner. That's all. I'm just a spoke in the wheel, so to speak.
I don't speak for everyone, but I don't agree with the idea of banishing IPT from the sport. My proposal to the question raised by Netserk was to remove IPT from the race. Not forever. But maybe now would be a good time to do so. That might be a solution to the problem in this race, the Vuelta.
Think about countries boycotting Olympic games in the past. Think about countries like Russia being banned from recent sporting events . Whether you like it or not, these things happen.

Russia is boycotted by highest sports organisation, if they choose to boycott other countries as well. I'm fine with it.

 

[the delgados]

Russia is boycotted by highest sports organisation, if they choose to boycott other countries as well. I'm fine with it.

Cool! What sport organization in cycling is higher than the UCI?

 

[AmRacer]

Cool! What sport organization in cycling is higher than the UCI?

Has UCI boycotted other countries than Russia? And was it their idea or did they just follow other sport organisations?

 

[proffate]

Protest for or against stuff is okay. But not interfering with other people's life.

Is this satire? How can you get attention without causing interference? Usually at least a traffic jam.

The line I draw is at human rights (as defined by Geneva convention and other official documents and bodies). I don't want some annoyed farmer to cause a nuisance just to vent steam. But if human rights are being violated and you are accepting money from the perpetrators then you can expect some backlash. Obviously violence would not be an acceptable form of pushback.

 

[aphronesis]

What scares me is that today's success, affecting the outcome of the event, will lead to more. More protests, more escalation of tactics.

Scary is a(i won’t say strong), but affected word. This is the world. Offer more.

 

[AmRacer]

Is this satire? How can you get attention without causing interference? Usually at least a traffic jam.

The line I draw is at human rights (as defined by Geneva convention and other official documents and bodies). I don't want some annoyed farmer to cause a nuisance just to vent steam. But if human rights are being violated and you are accepting money from the perpetrators then you can expect some backlash. Obviously violence would not be an acceptable form of pushback.

Sounds like anarchy and expanding the fight world wide.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

Cool, imma rally some fellow fans and protest against every sportwashing team ahead of the Flemish classics, maybe Wout can win one for once...

I mean, dandruff shampoo isn't a political stance, so I think Wout will still have an issue...but did you have to scrape that wound on this topic?

 

[the delgados]

Has UCI boycotted other countries than Russia? And was it their idea or did they just follow other sport organisations?

My point being is the UCI is able to remove a team from a race. At least I believe so. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[jono]

Protest for or against stuff is okay. But not interfering with other people's life.

I can't think of a single major protest movement that achieved anything without at least a little bit of the bolded.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

re: Removing the team inviting future protests: First, removing the team would detract future protests, because there would be nothing to protest. People will always protest, regardless of the cause, especially on open roads spanning many miles. But people do not protest and interrupt an event unless, in the eyes of the protestors, the the cause supersedes the event. These decisions are not taken lightly.
The whole point is to raise awareness. Sometimes it's impossible to separate sports from real world events. I'm not going to say I'm sorry for the interruption because I'm not.
No one is attempting to silence speech. In fact, the exact opposite is occurring.
No one cares about how much you pay to watch sports. That's up to you and your service provider. And no one is going to ruin a long-standing tradition -- i.e. The Vuelta -- for raising awareness.

I disagree with this, as with the current topic, some issues have a much larger reach. Issues with French farmers, rarely if ever disrupt entire college campuses, across the globe. The issue protested yesterday, is being protested in a wide variety of arenas.

The rest, I 100% agree with.

 

[AmRacer]

My point being is the UCI is able to remove a team from a race. At least I believe so. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

They sure can, but since no other sport organisations have been doing the same. Why should UCI move first or be the single one doing it?

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

Yes. It's the rule of extremist, intransigent minorities. Whoever can organise and enforce political violence gets to dictate the terms. That's how you slide from liberal democracy towards anarcho-tyranny.

While we can't touch the pink elephant, ascribing the issue yesterday to extrimists is absurd.

 

[Netserk]

While we can't touch the pink elephant, ascribing the issue yesterday to extrimists is absurd.

Giving in to political violence invites the (partial) rule of extremists, absolutely.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

No one? You speak for everyone? In all cases? For all causes?

By “silencing speech” I refer to people wanting to cancel the very presence or even existence of IPT because of what the team represents…to them. Of course IPT is just a symbol being used to make a point. Sure, protest the symbol. By all means. Don’t interfere with the race and don’t try and cancel (silence) the team.

Free speech isn’t about removing any idea one objects to from the discourse. It’s about presenting one’s own POV.

But it seems many don’t want to have a debate. They just want to silence those who have a different POV. Or in this case those who can be seen to represent an idea. A tenuous connection at best.

I object to those tactics in all cases in all venues.

No, it isn't.

I agree that IPT shouldn't be forced to leave anything, nor do I blieve that the owner should be disallowed to own the team. But lets not pretend he is who he is, and believes what he believes, and I kinda think protesting that is okay, regardless of venue.

 

[Red Rick]

What violence has occurred? Was anyone killed during the Vuelta protest?
I can go into details about violence and the damage incurred, but this isn't a political message board --as you have mentioned on more than one occasion.
You are the one who introduced this topic of conversation, so you might want to be careful. I would never report you to authorities, but I will remind you that you can't have it both ways.

No, but there is a clear, implied threat of an impending, unsafe situation. That's a line that was very clearly crossed all the while claiming "peaceful protest"

When protest is truly peaceful, people don't feel unsafe to the degree that they're changing professional sports events that have nothing to do with the cause that is protested.

 

[red_flanders]

Scary is a(i won’t say strong), but affected word. This is the world. Offer more.

I'm saying it sets a precedent I don't want. And I think a free society doesn't want.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

Protestors have been part of the sport since day one. How many races have been canceled due to protests?
And who are "they"? Who folded? Seems to me the race continued as planned.
I honestly don't understand why some people are skipping the overall point here. Netserk is asking what should be done about it.
What say you?

Adapt as the situation arises.

I hate to be the bearer of bad prophecy, but with the state of the world right now, and the apparent esclation of edcological, societal, and political unrest, I don't think things are going to move towrd less protest. In fact, I think we are in a relatively peaceful, and calm place, comparted to what I believe is coming. What I fear is the access cycling races have for spectators, and deadly violence occurring. There is little to nothing anyone can do to eliminate that possibility.

I am an adherent to provocative, non-violent action and protest. While I understand why violence happens, I do not believe it is ever a pathway to permanent resolution. Non-violence is a much harder path, but if mankind is to evlove away from the constant clash of warring factions, not killing people who disagree with you, will have to become the predominate path. As a species, we have not shown a great ability to proceed in that way, but that doesn't alter the fact that it is the only sane path for humanity to progress. I am very pesimistic about our chances as a species, but that is a topic for another day, and forum.

 

[red_flanders]

No, it isn't.

I agree that IPT shouldn't be forced to leave anything, nor do I blieve that the owner should be disallowed to own the team. But lets not pretend he is who he is, and believes what he believes, and I kinda think protesting that is okay, regardless of venue.

I don't know what he believes, it doesn't matter to me. I'd speculate many of the folks in the protests don't either, they are protesting a symbol which is a stand-in for the actions of the current administration of a country. Again, I have no objection to protest, I object to interference and attempts to remove the team, for reasons I've already stated.

My comments are in regard how protests should be handled at sporting events, the particulars of any of this debate are to me inherently political discussion, and beside any point in which I'm interested.

 

[the delgados]

No, but there is a clear, implied threat of an impending, unsafe situation. That's a line that was very clearly crossed all the while claiming "peaceful protest"

When protest is truly peaceful, people don't feel unsafe to the degree that they're changing professional sports events that have nothing to do with the cause that is protested.

That's your interpretation of events.
Were any weapons confiscated? Did anyone cause harm to another person?
And who are the "people" you're referring to? What sports event did they go to to remain safe?
I wasn't there, so I cannot account for how people in the crowd felt. I wouldn't be surprised if some were a bit freaked out, but no one was hurt.
That is the definition of a peaceful protest.

 

[Red Rick]

That's your interpretation of events.
Were any weapons confiscated? Did anyone cause harm to another person?
And who are the "people" you're referring to? What sports event did they go to to remain safe?
I wasn't there, so I cannot account for how people in the crowd felt. I wouldn't be surprised if some were a bit freaked out, but no one was hurt.
That is the definition of a peaceful protest.

Pidcock said that riders don't feel that safe anymore. The finish was changed and and there was no winner because of safety concerns. A few days ago a rider crashed due to protesters. And in the team time trial riders were forced to stop by "peaceful" protesters because if they were to do their job and race they'd hit protesters and hurt themselves in the process.