Race interference: Protests, Sabotage, and Assaults

[kingjr]

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.

I think one of the main obstacles is getting people to agree on the definition and value of sanity and progress.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

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

While some of the protesters moved barriers, and there was a physical clash...on the scale of political violence, that was nothing abnormal. I mean, there wasn't any tear gas or rubber bullets, or metal bullets. The attendant circumstances will escalate the violence. You ascribe only organizers of protest as being responsible for escalation of violence, and ignore the violent response by governmental enforcement and police, as a significant factor...I would suggest that they are responsible for escalating things to violence to a much larger extent than protesters. I've been an observer for the NLG (National Lawyers Guild...the yellow hats), and have many times seen the police escalate a situation...so maybe there are extremists ruling the police? <-Rhetorical

 

[the delgados]

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.

Exactly.
It was the rider who said they felt unsafe. I remember Pidcock complaining about the very same thing, saying no one will will be endeared to the "cause" by interrupting a bike race.
He is speaking for himself. His chances of taking a legitimate stage win were denied by those pesky protestors. No one was injured during the TTT race. Riders have been inadvertently injured by spectators since the sport was created, but not during the TTT. Remember the Omi Opi incident?
All of which goes back to my original point: Eliminate the problem and none of this would be occurring. I'm not saying forever, mind you. I don't wish for riders on any team to be negatively affected by politics in sports, but some people think geo-political events are more important than a bike race.
Nothing wrong with that.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

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.

Right, so the thought that protests are only peaceful if they don't inconvenience anyone has been banded about on this thread. I suggest reading some things on the philosophy of protest, as one of the main points is to inconvenience someone, so that the issue gains attention and hopefully, at some point, action to affect change in the situation. That does not mean you ahve been violent with them. Do you know that in the state of Florida, the governor says you can run over a protester with your car? He claims the proster standing in the road is the violent one. I say the guy who killed the proster has been the one who was actually violent...call me a radical extremist, I guess.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

I think one of the main obstacles is getting people to agree on the definition and value of sanity and progress.

You'd think it would be self evident, but so do they.

 

[proffate]

Sounds like anarchy and expanding the fight world wide.

Guess it depends on what you mean by "fight", as I consider these protests non violent, in fact if you ask the protestors I would wager they claim their goal is to reduce the amount of violence being done in the world... As to "worldwide", well I don't think holding up a banner inside a warzone is going to do much good.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

If anyone thinks governmental and law enforcement response to protest is never born of extremism, man do I have some history books for you to read...

 

[Netserk]

While some of the protesters moved barriers, and there was a physical clash...on the scale of political violence, that was nothing abnormal. I mean, there wasn't any tear gas or rubber bullets, or metal bullets. The attendant circumstances will escalate the violence. You ascribe only organizers of protest as being responsible for escalation of violence, and ignore the violent response by governmental enforcement and police, as a significant factor...I would suggest that they are responsible for escalating things to violence to a much larger extent than protesters. I've been an observer for the NLG (National Lawyers Guild...the yellow hats), and have many times seen the police escalate a situation...so maybe there are extremists ruling the police? <-Rhetorical

I think it matters a whole lot whether or not it takes place in a liberal democracy. I can only speak from a Danish context, and I think it's completely fine when the police lawfully apply force to enforce democratic laws. I know very well that my own context is not universal, and that yours may differ.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

I think it matters a whole lot whether or not it takes place in a liberal democracy. I can only speak from a Danish context, and I think it's completely fine when the police lawfully apply force to enforce democratic laws.

I've seen different, and there is plenty of historical evidence of the same. I'm from the US south, and have members of my ancestory who were both law enforcement, and members of the KKK...at a time when this was considered a liberal democracy (though technically a republic). I'm not sure what we're considered now, but it appears that violence from governmental and law enforcement entities is escalating...

 

[Red Rick]

Right, so the thought that protests are only peaceful if they don't inconvenience anyone has been banded about on this thread. I suggest reading some things on the philosophy of protest, as one of the main points is to inconvenience someone, so that the issue gains attention and hopefully, at some point, action to affect change in the situation. That does not mean you ahve been violent with them. Do you know that in the state of Florida, the governor says you can run over a protester with your car? He claims the proster standing in the road is the violent one. I say the guy who killed the proster has been the one who was actually violent...call me a radical extremist, I guess.

If you want to argue the main "aim" is raising attention, I can only laugh. Everybody knows about this issue, it's the problem witht he most attention bar none.

If the philosophy is to achieve something, then perhaps it should inconvenience those who wield an influence on the cause. But they don't.

Whatever happens in Florida has nothing to do with this, and my position on this case is in no way an endorsement of whatever crazy *** is going on on the other side of the pond.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

Jebus, this neighborhood was just invaded by someone I have no respect for, nor desire to engage (that reference is not about anyone I have responded to). I'm going to bounce, as I really don't think my thoughts are going to change anyone, and I think this thread now has the potential to be a place where I write something and get banned.

Cheers, and even those who posted things I disagreed with, I appreciate the dialogue.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

If you want to argue the main "aim" is raising attention, I can only laugh. Everybody knows about this issue, it's the problem witht he most attention bar none.

If the philosophy is to achieve something, then perhaps it should inconvenience those who wield an influence on the cause. But they don't.

Whatever happens in Florida has nothing to do with this, and my position on this case is in no way an endorsement of whatever crazy *** is going on on the other side of the pond.

I suggest reading books on the philosophy behind non-violent protest, to see if maybe your opinion changes. Continuation of awareness is a vital need. You seem to suggest that we have a Grievance Fest, where everybody can raise their issue just once, to a live TV audience, and be done with it, because then everyone will know. That isn't what protest is about, unless the attendant circumstance immediately changes, which rarely if ever happens.

 

[the delgados]

If you want to argue the main "aim" is raising attention, I can only laugh. Everybody knows about this issue, it's the problem witht he most attention bar none.

If the philosophy is to achieve something, then perhaps it should inconvenience those who wield an influence on the cause. But they don't.

Whatever happens in Florida has nothing to do with this, and my position on this case is in no way an endorsement of whatever crazy *** is going on on the other side of the pond.

You're right: Gaining attention is the point.
Those who wield an influence happen to sponsor a professional cycling team. Raising awareness occurs in many forms and contexts. I can't imagine a better way of raising awareness than addressing the source.
Can you?
I don't understand why people cannot see this fundamental point.
Just an edit to add that team sponsors can act with impunity, but those who watch are told to shut up. Why?

 

[Red Rick]

You're right: Gaining attention is the point.
Those who wield an influence happen to sponsor a professional cycling team. Raising awareness occurs in many forms and contexts. I can't imagine a better way of raising awareness than addressing the source.
Can you?
I don't understand why people cannot see this fundamental point.

Adressing the source? A cycling team is about as peripheral as it gets. What sets it apart, is due to cycling being cycling, it's an extremely easy target to disrupt.

And it's not even just IPT being affected, it's all riders, as well as organisers who didn't even get a choice in inviting IPT because that happened automatically.

There's clear elements of punishment by association in this, and it's surreal to me that is championed here.

 

[Red Rick]

.

Can I invoke Godwin's law here?

Between me not supporting the methods of a protest, and you making such a crass accusation as a response, I'm pretty sure which one of us is having the radical position.

And then people wonder why I prefer not to have discussions with these protesters.

 

[the delgados]

Can I invoke Godwin's law here?

Between me not supporting the methods of a protest, and you making such a crass accusation as a response, I'm pretty sure which one of us is having the radical position.

And then people wonder why I prefer not to have discussions with these protesters.

Red Rick,
I apologize for offending your sensitivities. Sometimes the written word is not conveyed in a way it's interpreted. That's on me.
I have no ill will toward you, and I'm sorry that I've closed the line of communication between us. For what it's worth, I've enjoyed reading your posts for a long time, even if I disagree with what you're saying.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Considering all my posts were deleted i will just post the gist of it, on why. Protest are now occurring mainly due to the lack of representation in the past. Back then when only one side was represented in the pro road peloton, back then nobody really needed to do anything, as there was no oppressing problem to be resolve per se, now that obvisuly changed, now parties involved will actually need to deal with it. So that is why.

 

[Pippo_San]

I can't stand these kind of protests.
There may be all the valid reasons on Earth, but you just can't ruin the job and even the safety of a common worker just because...reasons.
No way.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@Pippo_San

Out of curiosity what pisses you more, the protest per se or the fact now all parties involved will need to deal with it, as it obviously isn't going away and won't get resolve by itself?

 

[aphronesis]

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

I don’t want to open this line of discussion, but you’re presumably still in the US, so maybe you can outline that contemporary free society (for yourself as notes) beyond liberal shibboleths.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

I don’t want to open this line of discussion, but you’re presumably still in the US, so maybe you can outline that contemporary free society (for yourself as notes) beyond liberal shibboleths.

I just learned a new word. Thanks, great word! The sentence that was used in the source for the definition, to contextualize, was "Hamiltion's besetting fear was that American Democracy would be spoiled by demagogues who would mouth populist shibboleths to conceal their despotism." - Ron Chernow...I mean, learning this definiteion, the context, and learning about the author of the quote (which has relevance to yesterday's protest) is the most interesting thing I've done today. Chapeau!

 

[aphronesis]

Good to see you.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

You as well.

 

[red_flanders]

I don’t want to open this line of discussion, but you’re presumably still in the US, so maybe you can outline that contemporary free society (for yourself as notes) beyond liberal shibboleths.

Probably you should have stopped after the first phrase. Cheers.

 

[GenericBoonenFan]

In the Tour the french police gives you a whack with their baton if you run to close to the riders. Here the Spanish police doesn't even use them when you're blocking the road...