In the immediate aftermath of the ICE killing of Renée Good in Minneapolis last week, the Trump administration smeared her as a “domestic terrorist,” claiming that she had weaponized her vehicle. They labeled Good a “violent rioter” and insisted every new video angle proved their version of the truth: Good was a menace and the ICE agent a potential victim. That’s despite video evidence to the contrary, showing Good, by all appearances, trying to leave the scene of the altercation, while ICE agents acted aggressively. Kristi Noem, the Secretary of Homeland Security, spent Sunday doubling down, insisting that Good had supposedly been “breaking the law by impeding and obstructing a law enforcement operation.”
So, on Sunday, I joined the throng in Manhattan for one of many dozens of protests held around the country this past weekend. In the middle of Fifth Avenue, surrounded by raucous, defiant New Yorkers, I asked protesters the simple question: What did you see?
“I mean, it seems like the bottomless, self-radicalizing thing that the government is going through,” said Anne Perryman, 85, a former journalist. “Is there any point when they’re actually at the bottom, and they’re not going to get any worse? I don’t think so.”
“I think there’s a small minority of Americans who are buying that,” said Kobe Amos, a 29-year-old lawyer, describing reactions to the government’s gaslighting. “It’s obviously enough to do a lot of damage. But if you look around, people are angry.”
“I saw an agent that overreacted,” he added, “and did something that was what—I think it’s murder.”
Why don’t protestors spray ICE with the same pepper spray that they use? That’s a genuine question. It’s not like that’s an attack or anything, and they could easily justify it in court if it was.
Not that they seem to need court rulings to imprison people these days, but ICE jackboots are still U.S. citizens and federal agents. Someone pepperspraying a federal agent would set themselves up for a number of potential charges related to assault with a weapon and interfering with law enforcement.
Don’t forget that with law enforcement officers, it’s “rules for thee but not for me.” You are held to a higher standard than they are, and they have more rights than you.
If a federal agent is conducting an illegal violent action at you, can you not defend yourself? It’s probably smart to study up on specifics for anyone involved in the streets
Dude, they just shot a woman in the face 4 times for driving NEAR them with literally no consequences. You think they won’t just open fire on a group if one of them gets hit with pepper spray?
I genuinely don’t know what they’d do, which is why someone should try it defensively if they’re being attacked. It’s easy to say that sitting in a chair hundreds of miles away from it, but I think protestors need to try other tactics, because just whistles ain’t doin shit.
Someone else should try [violence] defensively if they’re being attacked because YOU don’t know what they’d do in return? When the whole thing is about trying to manufacture justification for martial law? What the fuck is wrong with you?
If YOU want to go get violent with ICE, no one is stopping you. Stop trying to get others to do it for you.
Then why are the House Republicans crying about it?
lol read my comment again
I said it’s easy to say when you’re not the one doing it. We, as people against this regime, ought to be trying all kinds of different strategies and observe their reactions to probe for weaknesses. I don’t think outright violence on its own will be productive.
Who do you think isn’t doing what? You personally are free to try all the strategies you want. Stop trying to get others to do them for you “for science” as you put elsewhere, like this is all just a big fucking joke to you. “lol”
I’d like to remind you that it was NON-VIOLENCE in protests that got the National Guard out of Portland in November. From the first paragraph of the final ruling:
https://www.opb.org/pdf/FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW_1762564569662.pdf
And that’s Portland. Today, Minnesota and Illinois filed suit as well, and if the protests remain peaceful, both have every reason to win. Here’s today’s suit from Minnesota against ICE:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mnd.230268/gov.uscourts.mnd.230268.1.0.pdf
Here’s the Illinois suit:
https://aboutblaw.com/bkDs
You should read them. They’re not difficult. And they are how non-violence will win: it’s far easier to fight fascists via the still-operational courts now than to try to evict them once martial law is in place.
Non-violent protests work in all kinds of ways, not just toward the regime but in community and network building, resource sharing, immunizing those present against propaganda that says they’re alone and media distortions of the protests they personally attend, with all the felt solidarity of walking out with people determined to prove that they all feel the same way.
Violent protests – or to use the government term for them, riots – do the opposite. They repulse peace lovers, invite media exaggeration and misrepresentation, are used even years later in propaganda, and above all they are the pretext the government is looking for to institute martial law, by law, across ALL 50 states.
It’s not a joke to me. Stop trying to suggest “various strategies” for your personal entertainment that include violence because they provably do not work.
EDITED to add link to Illinois suit
Regime changes have been more successful with mainly non-violent protests than violent protests in history. The goal should be to remove the current people in power through legal means. I fully understand that.
However, would you call pushing an agent “violence”? Because there has been a ton of that. I’m saying a few pepper sprays here or there when they’re genuinely defending a violent aggressor who is illegally attacking them would make those on the ground think twice.
I’m not saying attack anyone. Don’t shoot anyone, etc. Also all over social media there are massive astroturfing campaigns from Russian, Chinese, Iranian, hell maybe even American bots/provocateurs to get protesters to start more violence, to cause the US to implode quicker. I understand all of that. You seem to be overly angry at random social media users.
You’ll be arrested, and even if you get out I doubt you’ll ever feel safe again since the current regime is vindictive.
Or shot.
The past week has shown them that the federal government will defend their claims of “self defence” using flimsy video evidence that shows the contrary. Just imagine how emboldened one of them would be in using disproportionately lethal force against an actual threat instead of a perceived one.
I’m not planning on doing that anytime soon, but I’d like to see what happens when someone does it in a larger group, for science.