Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

They have not been dissolved because they left their phone at home, they have been dissolved because it was a violent organisation that was systematically attacking the police and destroying property.

And given the sort of stuff they brought to their protests: swords, machettes, baseball bats, jerrycan, bricks, fireworks, petanque balls, Molotov cocktails, fire bombs, etc, it is particularly disingenuous to pretend they have been dissolved for not talking to the police when arrested.

You can read the actual decret in French: https://twitter.com/GDarmanin/status/1671450289298198528




They indeed sometimes destroyed some properties

But you cannot blame them for the violence in the protest they co-organized. People are free to attend the protest, and they cannot control them. They never called for violence against police. And most protest now in France have some people fighting with the police.

The same way you can see firefighters throwing stuff (including petanque ball) to police during firefighers protest. But you cannot blame the firefigheter union for this.


If it happens once it's accident, if it happens constantly, its their responsibility if not starting a protest at all would prevent the violence

And if they put their label on it it's their responsibility.


So should we apply the same thinking with police constantly inciting violence at protests ? At this point anytime there's a major protest in France, I consider it a win if no one in the crowd lost an eye, hand or worse, their life, from the grenades thrown by police.


Just because someone is a catalyst, I don't see how it logically and necessarily follows that 100% of the causal responsibility falls on them.

This seems objectively reductive and represents ideological beliefs as objective facts.

Maybe the masses are upset and this is a sign of things to come, that should be listened to.


Myself, I'm a peaceful guy, if every protest I called (assuming I'm a "leader" of cause $INSERT_CAUSE_HERE ) resulted in violence, I would not call any more protests because that would go against my personal values. So it's hard to believe a group is peaceful if every time they have a protest it turns into a riot.


Would you be okay with being jailed for destruction of property because of a protest you organised that was co-opted by bad actors?


So now the state can silence you by simply sending plainclothes cops to start riots in all your protests


Then you could not organize any "leftist" protest in France :-) Note that they do destroy stuff, they just don't call violence against people. And definitely don't turn in riot every time


Again, accidents happen, but if you are the catalyst over and over again it's on you.

> This seems objectively reductive and represents ideological beliefs as objective facts.

No, you just didn't liked that thing you like got attacked for the thing they did and are making up excuses.


> Again, accidents happen, but if you are the catalyst over and over again it's on you.

Yeah, they "accidentally" carried swords, firebombs and molotov cocktails to a protest. It was an honest mistake, right? I mean, those are normal things people carry around on a daily basis, aren't they?


> Again, accidents happen, but if you are the catalyst over and over again it's on you.

Technically, it "is on" whoever objectively plays a role in the underlying causality.

You "may" be referring to your perception of what is going on, as opposed to what is actually going on (which is unreachable).

>> This seems objectively reductive and represents ideological beliefs as objective facts.

> No, you just didn't liked that thing you like got attacked for the thing they did and are making up excuses.

Except I have the ability to describe the various ways in which it is (at least plausibly) objectively reductive and represents ideological beliefs as objective facts, whereas you have a much harder problem: proving that you can actually read my mind (or, are omniscient).


If we'd implement what you says, you'd just found a way to systematically prevent protests. Doesnt work.


So we should forbid firefighter and farmer's union ? And all leftist union ? And we should forbid any protest where people using black block technique could agree with ?


I think as long as most of the protests don't end up in violence and shop lootings they could stay.


What do you say to evidence that plainclothes police officers are tasked with infiltrating protests and stirring up shit?


In France, in most of the cases you don't need police officer for it, some people are willing to donage bank or fight with the police (especially after police overreacting, or being violent for free)


The fact is you don't know how will end up protest... And even when a protest end up damaging 1 mac donalds and 2 banks, most people are pacific protester... The question is how do you handle this in a democracy ?


That’s not how protests work though, is it?


The responsibility is 100% on the police. They're the ones who are systematically coming armed to 100% of protests, they're the one gouging people eyes out, pushing people in rivers, causing limbs to be amputated, they're the ones who murdered my 80 yo neighbor during a protest. The ratio of police vs protestors injuries is about 1 vs 10.

Protesting for the survival of the planet we're all living on is not a crime it's a necessity to not go extinct.


Then the state can prevent demonstrations and protests, by paying some of their own men to join as protestors and start throwing stones.


> Then the state can prevent demonstrations and protests, by paying some of their own men to join as protestors and start throwing stones.

Oh, come on, as if that were a thing so common that there had been a specific word for it for nearly 200 years.


That's not a good assessment at all. Because no one holds the government or its police to that standard.

Do you know how many problems in America regarding human rights stem from qualified immunity? Don't let that BS keep spreading.


If some Neo-nazis co-organize a protest, and it becomes violent, do you blame the neo-nazis?

Just wondering if your reasoning is based on logic or political sides.


If the Neo-nazis is protesting something like workers rights, I would probably turn a blind eye. My reasoning is based on ACTIONS


Depend which kind of Neo-Nazi organization (they are illegal in France and most of them in France do like to punch people and say it), and co-organized with whom, and depend on what is saying these Neo-Nazi

But for sure I do blame Neo-Nazi for being Neo-Nazi !


Fighting back against totalitarianism by doing away with freedom of association and assembly. Cute.

No better than the gang laws we have here in the US. It seems Jefferson's rule about 200 years or so between revolutions was right after all.


What about just regular fascists then? Do you blame fascists for violence, perhaps caused by communists?


A significant majority (67%) of the currently active low ranking French police force (not counting the retirees) vote, or at least declare they intend to, for one the parties that has historically been as right wing as one can be.

Taking that into account, one could have reasons to believe cops wouldn’t be as tough on protesting fascists, and that protesting fascists wouldn’t be as violent towards cops.

Though I’d be curious to see wether or not facts support this hunch.


[flagged]


Have to call you out to give you credit, that was an elegant riposte.


> …, petanque balls, …

While I won't argue with the fact that these are indeed formidable missiles, it does make for a unique French touch.


> "Eh Roger, tu tire ou tu pointe sur le CRS !?"


Okay, so if the government ever wants to shut anything down for any reason, get a few dozen goon squad members to show up as fellow protestors with weapons and cause property damage and smack cops around a little bit?


Pretty much, yes? There's even a French term for it! Agent provocateur. There is no shortage of accusations of such in the US and abroad.


Impressive mix of lies.

The total value of items destroyed has been estimated to be about 8 million by the French state. While not a small number, I haven't seen the antiterrorist police be sent to the FNSEA's headquarters for their history of violence and destruction ever since 1960. It is part of their methods ever since their inception, but greasing some palms high up in the government certainly helps.

>And given the sort of stuff they brought to their protests: swords, machettes, baseball bats, jerrycan, bricks, fireworks, petanque balls, Molotov cocktails, fire bombs, etc, it is particularly disingenuous to pretend they have been dissolved for not talking to the police when arrested.

Violence. Is. Caused. By. The. Police. None of these, not a single one of these items were used until the police started indiscriminately tear gassing thousands of protesters, the vast majority of them peaceful. Five thousand grenades and weapons classified as war weapons used on protesters. Half of the items you mention were taken by the police with roadblocks more than twenty kilometers away. Sorry for driving with petanque balls in my trunk, I guess.

>You can read the actual decret in French: https://twitter.com/GDarmanin/status/1671450289298198528

Sure, let's read the sexual abuser, the national-socialist-journal-writing sack of shit's declaration. One part in particular is very interesting:

Considérant d'autre part que le groupement SLT diffuse a ses membres et sympathisants, via ses réseaux sociaux, des modes opératoires directement inspirés de ceux des <<Black Blocks>>; que parmi ces préconisations figurent le port de tenues interdisant leur identification par les forces de l'ordre, en contradiction avec les habitudes des militants écologistes de manifester a visage découvert, le fair de laisser son téléphone mobile allumé a son domicile ou de le mettre en <<mode avtion>> en arrivant sur les lieux de la manifestation pour éviter le bornage, le fait de ne pas communiquer les codes dévérrouillage de l'appareil ou de ne pas répondre aux forces de l'ordre en cas d'interpellation; qu'y figurent également des consignes d'ordre médical <<en cas de nécessité d'hospitalisation, dans la mesure du possible, se rendre dans un hôpital éloigné de l'action, rester flou, ne pas donner son identité, prévoir de l'argent liquide>>; que par ailleurs est préconisé le port du masque FFP3; de lunettes de protection contre les gaz; ...

For the HNers that to not have the privilege to read the beautiful language of the country of Human Rights, where protesters get arbitrarily arrested in the hospital and in their homes, this is a translation of how they justify being a single step below "declaring ecologist protestors an actual terrorist group":

Considering that the SLT group spreads to its members and sympathizers through social networks, operative modes directly inspired from those of <<Black Blocks>>; that amongst those suggestions include wearing outfits preventing their identification by the police forces; in contradiction with the habit of protesting with their face out usually had by ecologist protestors; the fact of leaving their mobile phones turned on in their homes or to put them in airplane mode when arriving at the protest to avoid triangulation; to refuse to communicate their passwords or to refuse to respond to the police when being arrested; that also contains medical related orders: <<in case of hospitalization, as much as possible, go to a hospital far away from the action, stay quiet, do not give your identity, have some cash>>; that wearing FFP3 masks and gas protection glasses is recommended...

Want to add some more ? Sure. They arrested an EELV member that was not present at any of the protests. Why ? Because he left his phone at home and used it in airplane mode. https://twitter.com/marinetondelier/status/16714362394494935...?


Thanks for the traduction; I haven't seen an account of this yet in UK media.


> Violence. Is. Caused. By. The. Police. None of these, not a single one of these items were used until the police started indiscriminately tear gassing thousands of protesters, the vast majority of them peaceful. Five thousand grenades and weapons classified as war weapons used on protesters.

It's obvious violence must have existed from both side. It's a bit obvious you're from the far left, just be neutral.


I hope you're kidding, but just to be sure: The average position isn't always right. Also, what even is neutral in this case?


I didn't mean him to be neutral in his position but in what he is writing. You can clearly see he is biaised and is anti-police. Like the police is responsible of everything and that people are peaceful protesters while it's not truth, it's not black and white and he is a fool to believe that.


You can ensure that the average position is always more right than you by staying on the left!


So now you're deflecting by "both sides"-ing the issue. Do you not hold the police to a higher standard? It's pretty telling you have to assume the political leanings of the person you're responding to rather than engaging with the argument or quantifying your position.

It's completely unacceptable for any police force to use "crowd control" devices that are explicitly disallowed in warfare under the Geneva Accords. Full stop.


I didn't mean him to be neutral in his position but in what he is writing. You can clearly see he is biaised and is anti-police. Like the police is responsible of everything and that people are peaceful protesters while it's not truth, it's not black and white and he is a fool to believe that.


Neutrality is often the wrong thing to do.


Yeah I meant more like "unbiaised comments" and not black and white comments complaining that one is responsible of everything.


They're voicing their position in writing. There's no way to make that "neutral" unless they have a neutral position. Of course someone on the left is going to write like they're on the left. Likewise, someone on the right is going to write like they're on the right. There's no incentive for people to take the time to neuter their writing just because you disagree with how they stated things. It's not impossible that this is a "black and white" kind of thing in their mind, right?





Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: