This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Based on what I see on Facebook, lots of Boalties think the City of Oakland has acted terribly in evicting the Occupy Oakland protesters. But I'm at a loss to see how the City could have treated the protesters much better.
Here's my initial question: how many reports of sexual assault, violence, and fire should the City have received before it finally stepped in? Here's another: what should the City have done when protesters prevented EMTs from treating the victims, the police from investigating the crimes, or fire officials from preventing the risk of a deadly fire?
Some may argue that Oakland's show of force was unnecessary. But the facts proved otherwise. On Friday, the Mayor asked the protesters to leave, citing public health and safety concerns. The request was ignored. Meanwhile, the camp was reportedly growing more dangerous, and more militant, every day. In the end, the city was able to evict the protesters quickly and without anyone getting hurt. What else could the city really have done?
What's remarkable to me is the extent to which Oakland supported the protesters to begin with--and how little it mattered in the end. Oakland's mayor, Jean Quan, provide tons of support to both the protest and its complaints. Local politicians participated have marched and camped out on the square. But this wasn't enough By refusing the work with the City, the protesters forced the City to take action. Now that it did so, some are trying to escalate the conflict (and violence) and portray the City as a thug-booted police state. Don't be fooled.
Here's my initial question: how many reports of sexual assault, violence, and fire should the City have received before it finally stepped in? Here's another: what should the City have done when protesters prevented EMTs from treating the victims, the police from investigating the crimes, or fire officials from preventing the risk of a deadly fire?
Some may argue that Oakland's show of force was unnecessary. But the facts proved otherwise. On Friday, the Mayor asked the protesters to leave, citing public health and safety concerns. The request was ignored. Meanwhile, the camp was reportedly growing more dangerous, and more militant, every day. In the end, the city was able to evict the protesters quickly and without anyone getting hurt. What else could the city really have done?
What's remarkable to me is the extent to which Oakland supported the protesters to begin with--and how little it mattered in the end. Oakland's mayor, Jean Quan, provide tons of support to both the protest and its complaints. Local politicians participated have marched and camped out on the square. But this wasn't enough By refusing the work with the City, the protesters forced the City to take action. Now that it did so, some are trying to escalate the conflict (and violence) and portray the City as a thug-booted police state. Don't be fooled.
Labels: OWS
posted by Carbolic at 9:59 PM
4 Comments:
Like.
What's remarkable to me is that this is happening EVERY SINGLE DAY in People's Park and nobody does anything. Criminals and drug addicts roam free between the housing units of thousands of 18 year old undergrads and nobody does anything.
Good for Oakland. Next: Berkeley.
people's park has a crazy history and at some point "the man" just gave up and threw in the towel. that's berkeley for you.
It's not possible to shoot tear gas and rubber bullets at a crowd without hurting someone. It's one thing for you to argue about the seriousness of the injuries of the people in the hospital and whether they "deserved" it, but at least be honest that that police hurt people.
Post a Comment
<< Home