Building Type: The airport as public square and protest central
February 7, 2017 8:29 AM Subscribe
"I can’t say I’ve ever covered a scene quite like the one that played out last weekend at LAX and other airports across the country. ... If the rush to enact the order and the outraged response from protesters seemed similar in their freneticism, which may well be the default tone of this administration, what was new about the airport demonstrations was the way they used urban space — specifically, how they used what we think of as airports’ architectural deficiencies and turned them to their political advantage."
People have collective power and don't forget it. Public space disruption is good but imagine how the system would piss themselves if we actually stopped spending money/buying anything for even one day.
posted by Liquidwolf at 8:45 AM on February 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
posted by Liquidwolf at 8:45 AM on February 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
I was at JFK, which is like two hours from my apartment (and most people's in New York) by public transport. So that was rough for a lot of folks, especially when NYPD decided they would shut down public transport for non-ticket holders.
We were forced to protest outside, but having access to the airport's bathrooms and food spaces was a godsend. I was only able to stay at the Women's March for a few hours because of the lack of access to facilities and food.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:57 AM on February 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
We were forced to protest outside, but having access to the airport's bathrooms and food spaces was a godsend. I was only able to stay at the Women's March for a few hours because of the lack of access to facilities and food.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:57 AM on February 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
I volunteered for a few days about nine days ago with a lot of other volunteer attorneys out at DFW Airport as part of a group we were calling "DFW Detained". We were working on writs and helping getting people released. It was quite a long and grueling but effective experience. It seemed to me that all of the yelling, screaming, disruption and efforts to "shutting down things" wasn't what made a difference. It was lawyers asserting rights, filing pleadings and writs, and getting TROs and injunctions which turned the tide and got the thing halted. I wonder if maybe there is an object lesson there. Our legal system is always there as a backstop to protect rights, and it can be extremely effective in accomplishing tangible changes in ways I don't think I have ever seen "direct action", blocking highways, burning things, or black bloc tactics, which seems to be most effective at polarizing people and making things harder to bring people together.
posted by dios at 9:02 AM on February 7, 2017 [25 favorites]
posted by dios at 9:02 AM on February 7, 2017 [25 favorites]
That's nice, but does anybody have a link to this article that doesn't try to blackmail you into switching of your adblocker?
posted by MartinWisse at 9:02 AM on February 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
posted by MartinWisse at 9:02 AM on February 7, 2017 [7 favorites]
protesters showed up at Birmingham-Shuttlesworth International Airport in Alabama and at Chicago’s O’Hare. They clogged parts of JFK and SFO as well as terminals in Dallas, Boston, Miami, Washington, D.C., Phoenix, Seattle, Albuquerque, Denver, Missoula, Mont., and Portland, Maine.
And Philadelphia, where on Sunday, traffic on I-95 was backed up in both directions because of all of the cars trying to get to the airport for the protest. (I used public transportation, on a packed Regional Rail train.)
posted by desuetude at 9:11 AM on February 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
And Philadelphia, where on Sunday, traffic on I-95 was backed up in both directions because of all of the cars trying to get to the airport for the protest. (I used public transportation, on a packed Regional Rail train.)
posted by desuetude at 9:11 AM on February 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
The legal system is only effective if it's respected by the people in power.
posted by The Hamms Bear at 9:11 AM on February 7, 2017 [20 favorites]
posted by The Hamms Bear at 9:11 AM on February 7, 2017 [20 favorites]
That's nice, but does anybody have a link to this article that doesn't try to blackmail you into switching of your adblocker?
You might try blocking Javascript on the site.
posted by Celsius1414 at 9:12 AM on February 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
You might try blocking Javascript on the site.
posted by Celsius1414 at 9:12 AM on February 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
It seemed to me that all of the yelling, screaming, disruption and efforts to "shutting down things" wasn't what made a difference. It was lawyers asserting rights, filing pleadings and writs, and getting TROs and injunctions which turned the tide and got the thing halted.
A noble observation, but the media interest was driven by the sheer number of people participating. The experts and the masses are interlocking pieces of this DIY machine.
posted by late afternoon dreaming hotel at 9:15 AM on February 7, 2017 [39 favorites]
A noble observation, but the media interest was driven by the sheer number of people participating. The experts and the masses are interlocking pieces of this DIY machine.
posted by late afternoon dreaming hotel at 9:15 AM on February 7, 2017 [39 favorites]
The legal system is only effective if it's respected by the people in power.
In case the happy coverage of a few individual cases getting into the US with green cards made you think you took care of that.
posted by Naberius at 9:21 AM on February 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
In case the happy coverage of a few individual cases getting into the US with green cards made you think you took care of that.
posted by Naberius at 9:21 AM on February 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
The legal system is only effective if it's respected by the people in power.
posted by The Hamms Bear at 11:11 AM on February 7
And yes a district judge in Washington shut down Trump, despite Trump's lack of respect for him. So I think we have pretty clear proof that the legal system works despite the lack of respect by the person in power.
The ultimate result of this will be litigated over the next year, and it's not clear what the end result will be. It seems to me that at worst, the EO will be significantly limited to the point that it does not do all that much more than what we were doing before Trump. But it's the courts--and probably the Supreme Court--that will decide what Trump can and cannot do.
A noble observation, but the media interest was driven by the sheer number of people participating. The experts and the masses are interlocking pieces of this DIY machine.
posted by late afternoon dreaming hotel at 11:15 AM on February 7
If media interest is the goal of the endeavor, then by all means, set something on fire or disrupt something. You'll get interest and a lot of people will turn against you--probably more than will turn for you.
However, if the goal of the endeavor is to get people free or stop an executive order, media interest does not accomplish that. The legal system does.
posted by dios at 9:22 AM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by The Hamms Bear at 11:11 AM on February 7
And yes a district judge in Washington shut down Trump, despite Trump's lack of respect for him. So I think we have pretty clear proof that the legal system works despite the lack of respect by the person in power.
The ultimate result of this will be litigated over the next year, and it's not clear what the end result will be. It seems to me that at worst, the EO will be significantly limited to the point that it does not do all that much more than what we were doing before Trump. But it's the courts--and probably the Supreme Court--that will decide what Trump can and cannot do.
A noble observation, but the media interest was driven by the sheer number of people participating. The experts and the masses are interlocking pieces of this DIY machine.
posted by late afternoon dreaming hotel at 11:15 AM on February 7
If media interest is the goal of the endeavor, then by all means, set something on fire or disrupt something. You'll get interest and a lot of people will turn against you--probably more than will turn for you.
However, if the goal of the endeavor is to get people free or stop an executive order, media interest does not accomplish that. The legal system does.
posted by dios at 9:22 AM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
See previous comment...
posted by Naberius at 9:26 AM on February 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
posted by Naberius at 9:26 AM on February 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
Do you think the Trump administration would show any respect for the law without media coverage and people in the streets? I'd like to see one historical example where a people litigated their way out of fascism.
posted by The Hamms Bear at 9:32 AM on February 7, 2017 [10 favorites]
posted by The Hamms Bear at 9:32 AM on February 7, 2017 [10 favorites]
Naberius: the concerns raised in that article in part have been superceded by events. It appears to be from Wednesday from last week, before a host of other rulings and Robart's TRO which was a game changer. So it's not exactly the complete rebuttal you think it is. As we went into this last weekend, the situation had changed. We still have lawyers monitoring things and ready to file to keep them honest, but for the most part, the current situation is more positive.
posted by dios at 9:34 AM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by dios at 9:34 AM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
But, again: Would the executive feel any need to respect the rulings of the judiciary if the people were not taking to the streets to express their support for the judiciary?
To answer this, consider the administration's comments about the judges who ruled against them.
posted by tobascodagama at 9:36 AM on February 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
To answer this, consider the administration's comments about the judges who ruled against them.
posted by tobascodagama at 9:36 AM on February 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
Do you think the Trump administration would show any respect for the law without media coverage and people in the streets? I'd like to see one historical example where a people litigated their way out of fascism.
posted by The Hamms Bear at 11:32 AM on February 7
I do not think media coverage about people in the streets has any effect on Trump. I'm pretty sure Trump administration doesn't give one tenth of one shit about "the people in the streets." In fact, I think noisy protests emboldens him and his base. It was judges who stopped this. All the protests in the world wouldn't have made a dent in Trump. But when a judge issues a TRO, the bureaucracy that has to implement Trump's executive order follows it for fear of contempt. And there are plenty of historical examples where the courts have shut down executive power and implemented changes that social protests could not. See the important rulings in the civil rights movement which were the real engines of change.
posted by dios at 9:40 AM on February 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
posted by The Hamms Bear at 11:32 AM on February 7
I do not think media coverage about people in the streets has any effect on Trump. I'm pretty sure Trump administration doesn't give one tenth of one shit about "the people in the streets." In fact, I think noisy protests emboldens him and his base. It was judges who stopped this. All the protests in the world wouldn't have made a dent in Trump. But when a judge issues a TRO, the bureaucracy that has to implement Trump's executive order follows it for fear of contempt. And there are plenty of historical examples where the courts have shut down executive power and implemented changes that social protests could not. See the important rulings in the civil rights movement which were the real engines of change.
posted by dios at 9:40 AM on February 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
Thanks for clarifying, dios. Lot of orders flying around and it's hard for a layman to sort out their scope and impact. Glad things are continuing to move in the right direction. And of course we should be grateful to the army of lawyers who have been putting in long hours on the front lines pro bono to help people in trouble.
That said, I don't think legal action alone is going to do this in the long run. A more competent administration would have produced the same effect by simply ceasing to issue new visas instead of trying to invalidate existing ones, and especially locking out green card holders. Someone seeking to do evil can do a hell of a lot of it from the Presidency.
And I still have very little confidence in the willingness (or frankly even the ability) of this administration to actually comply with laws or court orders.
posted by Naberius at 9:47 AM on February 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
That said, I don't think legal action alone is going to do this in the long run. A more competent administration would have produced the same effect by simply ceasing to issue new visas instead of trying to invalidate existing ones, and especially locking out green card holders. Someone seeking to do evil can do a hell of a lot of it from the Presidency.
And I still have very little confidence in the willingness (or frankly even the ability) of this administration to actually comply with laws or court orders.
posted by Naberius at 9:47 AM on February 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
I do not think media coverage about people in the streets has any effect on Trump. I'm pretty sure Trump administration doesn't give one tenth of one shit about "the people in the streets."
Agreed. I don't think anything influences Trump. But protest - especially on a mass scale like we've seen - does impact the Republican Senators and Representatives that support him. There are a lot of scared Republican congresspeople ducking their own constituents these days.
In Virginia.
In Colorado.
Even in Idaho, of all places.
posted by Naberius at 9:53 AM on February 7, 2017 [18 favorites]
Agreed. I don't think anything influences Trump. But protest - especially on a mass scale like we've seen - does impact the Republican Senators and Representatives that support him. There are a lot of scared Republican congresspeople ducking their own constituents these days.
In Virginia.
In Colorado.
Even in Idaho, of all places.
posted by Naberius at 9:53 AM on February 7, 2017 [18 favorites]
The courts are indeed the bulwark that's needed. Unfortunately, thanks to GOP Senators sitting on vacancies under Obama, Trump is in a position to stack the courts with deplorables. The SCOTUS is just the tip of the iceberg.
posted by jetsetsc at 9:56 AM on February 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
posted by jetsetsc at 9:56 AM on February 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
Uh, no, the lawyers organizing the legal push, as they themselves would tell you, did not achieve this independent of the protests.
Trump absolutely, demonstrably does "care about" people in the streets-- it's upsetting to him. Judges absolutely, demonstrably care about people in the streets-- judges are people too. CBP complied differently in different airports around the country and it's reasonable to believe that in some they were responding more to protests than in others.
But more to the point, the legal work required in these cases was funded, fed, supported, motivated, and very literally only possible because of organizers and the protesters that made space, built capacity, cheered on, provided for, and eventually paid for the work. Immigration legal services orgs are not well-heeled. This would not have been possible without a mass movement. It wouldn't even have been close.
posted by peppercorn at 10:04 AM on February 7, 2017 [31 favorites]
Trump absolutely, demonstrably does "care about" people in the streets-- it's upsetting to him. Judges absolutely, demonstrably care about people in the streets-- judges are people too. CBP complied differently in different airports around the country and it's reasonable to believe that in some they were responding more to protests than in others.
But more to the point, the legal work required in these cases was funded, fed, supported, motivated, and very literally only possible because of organizers and the protesters that made space, built capacity, cheered on, provided for, and eventually paid for the work. Immigration legal services orgs are not well-heeled. This would not have been possible without a mass movement. It wouldn't even have been close.
posted by peppercorn at 10:04 AM on February 7, 2017 [31 favorites]
Well, as an attorney who went out (and will continue to go out) with over 100 other lawyers and set up a de facto law firm at DFW airport, let me just say that your comment does not comport with the reality here in Dallas. Lawyers like me donated hundreds of hours of their own time and resources and self-funded the efforts here, and as I understand it at many other places, since we were in contact with them and coordinating. Two local lawyers donated $100k to the effort just for supplies and operations, and that happened in other cities as well. It was lawyers helping on the individual cases and the district attorneys for states across the country doing their jobs that have moved this along.
But let me be clear: all of the peaceful supporters here were empowering. Of that, there is no doubt. If you'll note my comment above, it was directed to this notion of "disruption" and blocking lines and all this direct action junk which was completely ineffective and not helpful. There were a lot of protestors and religious groups and others who came out there and were peacefully opposing this. I think their contributions were great.
The one point I will agree with in your post is that judges are people too. And they may be offended too on a personal level with the injustices. But, I don't think they are moved by the disruptions, etc. which were what I was addressing. Judges will recognize and be motivated by the injustice of the people who were actually impacted by the EO. They will not be motivated because a bunch of people shut down the taxi line.
posted by dios at 10:20 AM on February 7, 2017 [14 favorites]
But let me be clear: all of the peaceful supporters here were empowering. Of that, there is no doubt. If you'll note my comment above, it was directed to this notion of "disruption" and blocking lines and all this direct action junk which was completely ineffective and not helpful. There were a lot of protestors and religious groups and others who came out there and were peacefully opposing this. I think their contributions were great.
The one point I will agree with in your post is that judges are people too. And they may be offended too on a personal level with the injustices. But, I don't think they are moved by the disruptions, etc. which were what I was addressing. Judges will recognize and be motivated by the injustice of the people who were actually impacted by the EO. They will not be motivated because a bunch of people shut down the taxi line.
posted by dios at 10:20 AM on February 7, 2017 [14 favorites]
I apologize for my inappropriately absolutist tone. For the record, I was also an attorney at the airports; I was at SFO. My role was pretty minor but some of my friends had much bigger parts. We obviously had very different experiences.
I don't think we would have gotten to the people who were actually impacted by the EO-- at least at SFO-- with just lawyers holding up signs. It was vital that we were plugged into community groups, it was vital that we had hundreds of people there speaking Arabic and Farsi, and some of them were there for the lawyers, but way more of them were there for the protests. And they have the right to set the tone of the protests, protesting something that'll have a far greater effect on their lives than it will ever have on mine, despite how much it'll hurt my friends, and family, and clients. That's one reason I don't think there's any clear bright line between legal work, peaceful protest, disruption, crowdfunding, lawyer-hours donated, personal stories, and people power.
posted by peppercorn at 10:26 AM on February 7, 2017 [19 favorites]
I don't think we would have gotten to the people who were actually impacted by the EO-- at least at SFO-- with just lawyers holding up signs. It was vital that we were plugged into community groups, it was vital that we had hundreds of people there speaking Arabic and Farsi, and some of them were there for the lawyers, but way more of them were there for the protests. And they have the right to set the tone of the protests, protesting something that'll have a far greater effect on their lives than it will ever have on mine, despite how much it'll hurt my friends, and family, and clients. That's one reason I don't think there's any clear bright line between legal work, peaceful protest, disruption, crowdfunding, lawyer-hours donated, personal stories, and people power.
posted by peppercorn at 10:26 AM on February 7, 2017 [19 favorites]
Why are we pitting these two forms of action against each other? Everyone has a role to play. Protests don't produce TROs, but they hurt Trump's feelings and send a clear message to Trump supporters still trying to delude themselves that they're the real America, the powerful America, that we are actually a larger group than they are and we are fighting back. Without the amazing turnout of the Women's March as backdrop I'm sure the events of the ban weekend would have been covered quite differently in the media. Surely we don't need to disparage the efforts of others to be incredibly proud of how our profession showed up.
posted by praemunire at 10:34 AM on February 7, 2017 [48 favorites]
posted by praemunire at 10:34 AM on February 7, 2017 [48 favorites]
Two classical studies―Gamson (1975) and Piven & Cloward (1979)―provide empirical support to the argument that demonstrations can directly change political agendas by disruption. In an attempt to settle the issue of protest, politicians put it on the political agenda. Politicians are more inclined to do so in case of disruptive than calm demonstrations, and for large rather than small demonstrations. However, O’Keefe and Schumaker (1983) showed that violence―except when the group of protesters was large―negatively influences protest-outcomes because repression is more likely. Hence, evidence from the disruption mechanism is inconclusive. From London School of Economics.
posted by Sophie1 at 10:56 AM on February 7, 2017 [15 favorites]
posted by Sophie1 at 10:56 AM on February 7, 2017 [15 favorites]
definitely on board with that reading, praemunire.
posted by peppercorn at 10:58 AM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by peppercorn at 10:58 AM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
People have collective power and don't forget it. Public space disruption is good but imagine how the system would piss themselves if we actually stopped spending money/buying anything for even one day.
On one hand, a "don't spend money" day would likely have some PR/symbolic value. Making it clear to businesses that the people are upset and they have to help us stand up to Trump, et al.
On the other hand, it suffers from the same flaw "don't by gas" days have: most people aren't not buying stuff; it's just they aren't buying stuff that day. I can avoid buying the new bike part or vacuum cleaner today, but I may still buy it tomorrow, as I still need to ride my bike and clean my floor. The only money that left my pocket today was on lunch. On a day without money, I still have to eat--it may just be something I bring from home, made with things I purchased yesterday.
posted by MrGuilt at 11:04 AM on February 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
On one hand, a "don't spend money" day would likely have some PR/symbolic value. Making it clear to businesses that the people are upset and they have to help us stand up to Trump, et al.
On the other hand, it suffers from the same flaw "don't by gas" days have: most people aren't not buying stuff; it's just they aren't buying stuff that day. I can avoid buying the new bike part or vacuum cleaner today, but I may still buy it tomorrow, as I still need to ride my bike and clean my floor. The only money that left my pocket today was on lunch. On a day without money, I still have to eat--it may just be something I bring from home, made with things I purchased yesterday.
posted by MrGuilt at 11:04 AM on February 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
I see a somewhat darker picture of the airport events. Simultaneously, I have both huge love for the outpouring of community action, as well as the selfless actions of the lawyers who took up the cause. The unity of people erasing all constructs of identity. Lawyers fighting for both professional and personal beliefs, for people from different parts of society, from different parts of the world. Communities standing up together in support of each other. Forming human walls and instant, ephemeral legal practices.
That being said, my outlook of the situation is grim. There are machinations at work behind the Twitter accounts and raft of executive orders that remain as yet unseen. Far from bumbling, this administration appears to be extremely calculating and driven by slight wins. The DeVos appointment today as an example. This administration needs the support of 50 senators to appoint their candidate. No less, no more.
The election was won by using deep data to target specific people, in specific places toward securing the electoral college vote. Winning the popular vote may not have even been on the agenda. These are people who know the business game, where huge profits are made in grey areas – legal and otherwise.
The first concern I have is that they are diagnosing the country at the moment. Pin-pricking different parts to understand social dynamics. How things are interrelated. How people make decisions and how information flows work. If I'm completely data driven, the process of issuing a failed executive order is highly interests. Because I wake up the defense mechanisms of those who oppose me. I see how they react. They generate content that I can analyse. I see where they are strong, and where they are weak.
The second concern is how that diagnosis will be used to facilitate the next wave of changes.
Overall, while the TRO was a huge victory and well-deserved, this administration has not even been in office for three weeks. While Trump plays angry king, there's huge activity going on the background that we cannot see. And I have a feeling a lot of it is data analysis and training machine learners. Given the true power of machine learning, for this administration, there may well be no losses, only victories they have not yet won.
posted by nickrussell at 11:07 AM on February 7, 2017 [12 favorites]
That being said, my outlook of the situation is grim. There are machinations at work behind the Twitter accounts and raft of executive orders that remain as yet unseen. Far from bumbling, this administration appears to be extremely calculating and driven by slight wins. The DeVos appointment today as an example. This administration needs the support of 50 senators to appoint their candidate. No less, no more.
The election was won by using deep data to target specific people, in specific places toward securing the electoral college vote. Winning the popular vote may not have even been on the agenda. These are people who know the business game, where huge profits are made in grey areas – legal and otherwise.
The first concern I have is that they are diagnosing the country at the moment. Pin-pricking different parts to understand social dynamics. How things are interrelated. How people make decisions and how information flows work. If I'm completely data driven, the process of issuing a failed executive order is highly interests. Because I wake up the defense mechanisms of those who oppose me. I see how they react. They generate content that I can analyse. I see where they are strong, and where they are weak.
The second concern is how that diagnosis will be used to facilitate the next wave of changes.
Overall, while the TRO was a huge victory and well-deserved, this administration has not even been in office for three weeks. While Trump plays angry king, there's huge activity going on the background that we cannot see. And I have a feeling a lot of it is data analysis and training machine learners. Given the true power of machine learning, for this administration, there may well be no losses, only victories they have not yet won.
posted by nickrussell at 11:07 AM on February 7, 2017 [12 favorites]
Why are we pitting these two forms of action against each other?.. Surely we don't need to disparage the efforts of others to be incredibly proud of how our profession showed up.
As I mentioned above, I am not trying to pit those who peacefully came to oppose this against anyone. I support that. And I'm not trying to disparage anyone. I was just commenting on what seemed to me worked. My experiences made something plain to me, at least: those that came to disrupt were not effective and in fact were counterproductive. The article seems to applaud disruption, as does this first post. That was what I responding to--this idea that direct action and closing highways and taxi lanes may seem attractive, but it wasn't what made change. It was the legal system. The best thing I have seen recently is a political cartoon in which Lady Justice says to the Statute of Liberty "I got this" in holding Trump back. And maybe there is an object lesson there. Maybe the justice system is the way we are going to constrain Trump. I can tell you that I don't think blocking highways or taxi lines are going to do it, and I think it may embolden Trump and his base. I don't think that is a disparaging remark.
posted by dios at 11:12 AM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
As I mentioned above, I am not trying to pit those who peacefully came to oppose this against anyone. I support that. And I'm not trying to disparage anyone. I was just commenting on what seemed to me worked. My experiences made something plain to me, at least: those that came to disrupt were not effective and in fact were counterproductive. The article seems to applaud disruption, as does this first post. That was what I responding to--this idea that direct action and closing highways and taxi lanes may seem attractive, but it wasn't what made change. It was the legal system. The best thing I have seen recently is a political cartoon in which Lady Justice says to the Statute of Liberty "I got this" in holding Trump back. And maybe there is an object lesson there. Maybe the justice system is the way we are going to constrain Trump. I can tell you that I don't think blocking highways or taxi lines are going to do it, and I think it may embolden Trump and his base. I don't think that is a disparaging remark.
posted by dios at 11:12 AM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
Far from bumbling, this administration appears to be extremely calculating and driven by slight wins.
Those two activities are not mutually exclusive from bumbling.
posted by Celsius1414 at 11:50 AM on February 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
Those two activities are not mutually exclusive from bumbling.
posted by Celsius1414 at 11:50 AM on February 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
I really want to read this article but I can't figure out how to get past their whitelist popup. I have tried disabling the adblocker, etc. but at this point I've sunk so much time into trying to comply with their stupid request that no way am I going to subscribe to their site.
Thanks for all the comments here so far, helps me get the gist of it (and discussion here is always ace anyway).
posted by iamkimiam at 11:51 AM on February 7, 2017
Thanks for all the comments here so far, helps me get the gist of it (and discussion here is always ace anyway).
posted by iamkimiam at 11:51 AM on February 7, 2017
Sorry about that, iamkimiam. While I am a subscriber on Safari, I was also able to view the article in Chrome by disabling Javascript for the website.
posted by Celsius1414 at 11:53 AM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by Celsius1414 at 11:53 AM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
the in-betweenness of the airport landscape is not simply architectural. It’s also legal.
This is something I have been thinking a lot about, even during the halcyon Obama years, the way citizenship and rights and the rule of law break down precisely in these in-between spaces like airports and border checkpoints.
posted by jackbrown at 11:53 AM on February 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
This is something I have been thinking a lot about, even during the halcyon Obama years, the way citizenship and rights and the rule of law break down precisely in these in-between spaces like airports and border checkpoints.
posted by jackbrown at 11:53 AM on February 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
I'm glad to see this article because, from Day One of our New World Order, I've been trying to game out where the physical locations will be that the average, non-lawyer person can go to, and when, to intercede between a policy being implemented by this administration and the innocent people being damaged by it. When the airport protests started I was struck that, although the order's timing and contents were designed for maximum surprise, a great many people already knew exactly where the pressure points would be, and mobilized effectively to get themselves there--either as legal counsel, protesters, interpreters, or whatever. It's good to see the space of the airport being analyzed in this way; it makes it easier to recognize productive parallels for other actions.
posted by helpthebear at 12:14 PM on February 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
posted by helpthebear at 12:14 PM on February 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
> those that came to disrupt were not effective and in fact were counterproductive.
They (we) were instrumental in raising an enormous media and social network ruckus that was directly responsible for organizations like the ACLU receiving a gabillion dollars in donations, which they will be able to use to further the legal battles. I'd say that's pretty productive.
posted by rtha at 12:26 PM on February 7, 2017 [12 favorites]
They (we) were instrumental in raising an enormous media and social network ruckus that was directly responsible for organizations like the ACLU receiving a gabillion dollars in donations, which they will be able to use to further the legal battles. I'd say that's pretty productive.
posted by rtha at 12:26 PM on February 7, 2017 [12 favorites]
It was my first major protest (if you see an "I love my refugee students" sign from SFO, that's me), and it was a nice gentle introduction to protesting: climate control, places to sit for people who ran out of spoons/had kids/were elderly/etc., clean bathrooms, water-bottle-refilling station...
Lots of protest noobs out there like me, though, who didn't get the "mic check" thing etc., and there was no unified hashtag, and thus the majority of the crowd had zero idea what was going on at any particular moment.
posted by wintersweet at 12:34 PM on February 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
Lots of protest noobs out there like me, though, who didn't get the "mic check" thing etc., and there was no unified hashtag, and thus the majority of the crowd had zero idea what was going on at any particular moment.
posted by wintersweet at 12:34 PM on February 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
If media interest is the goal of the endeavor, then by all means, set something on fire or disrupt something. You'll get interest and a lot of people will turn against you--probably more than will turn for you.
I'm uncomfortable at the implication here. I work in public advocacy, and a tremendous part of the work done by people in my position is ensuring wide media coverage. It's how people--experts and non-experts--glean information relevant to their pursuits. Considering ACLU's massive and rapid flush of donations to continue pursuing relevant legal challenges, I would hope that the first thing that comes to mind when "media attention" comes up is something other than setting something alight. Unless you mean "set something on fire" metaphorically, in which case, yes, media attention helps warm the coffers of non-profit orgs with the strategic capacity to channel broad public sentiment into clear and transparent actions.
posted by late afternoon dreaming hotel at 12:45 PM on February 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
I'm uncomfortable at the implication here. I work in public advocacy, and a tremendous part of the work done by people in my position is ensuring wide media coverage. It's how people--experts and non-experts--glean information relevant to their pursuits. Considering ACLU's massive and rapid flush of donations to continue pursuing relevant legal challenges, I would hope that the first thing that comes to mind when "media attention" comes up is something other than setting something alight. Unless you mean "set something on fire" metaphorically, in which case, yes, media attention helps warm the coffers of non-profit orgs with the strategic capacity to channel broad public sentiment into clear and transparent actions.
posted by late afternoon dreaming hotel at 12:45 PM on February 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
Dios and peppercorn: thank you.
posted by Stynxno at 3:03 PM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by Stynxno at 3:03 PM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
My local US Rep called us "extremists, kooks and radicals." Definitely running scared.
posted by workerant at 3:43 PM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by workerant at 3:43 PM on February 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
On the other hand, it suffers from the same flaw "don't by gas" days have: most people aren't not buying stuff; it's just they aren't buying stuff that day. I can avoid buying the new bike part or vacuum cleaner today, but I may still buy it tomorrow, as I still need to ride my bike and clean my floor. The only money that left my pocket today was on lunch. On a day without money, I still have to eat--it may just be something I bring from home, made with things I purchased yesterday.
Yeah I know we can't stop buying things permanently , I meant just as an example of the power we have simply by NOT doing something. To make a point.
posted by Liquidwolf at 6:47 PM on February 7, 2017
I participated in the JFK protest for a couple of hours.
My favorite takeaway was all the taxi and other drivers going by--many, many looking like people who could have faced detention--driving up near us to wait for a light, looking us over carefully, realizing what we were shouting and what our signs said, and then whipping out their cameras to video us and blow their horns and wave their fists in support.
As the protest went on, and word got out, their joy grew louder. And so did ours.
And thank you, lawyers!
posted by etaoin at 8:54 PM on February 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
My favorite takeaway was all the taxi and other drivers going by--many, many looking like people who could have faced detention--driving up near us to wait for a light, looking us over carefully, realizing what we were shouting and what our signs said, and then whipping out their cameras to video us and blow their horns and wave their fists in support.
As the protest went on, and word got out, their joy grew louder. And so did ours.
And thank you, lawyers!
posted by etaoin at 8:54 PM on February 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
I heard the taxi union also called for a one hour strike on going to JFK during the protest eventually, which made the whole thing all the more effective. I also saw a lot of airport staff, most of them also immigrants, marveling or smiling at the protests. Even the cops at JFK seemed pretty chill and not on edge for most of the time I was there; most were watching from a distance.
posted by gusandrews at 9:51 PM on February 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
posted by gusandrews at 9:51 PM on February 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
I participated in our airport's demos. I'm very glad I did.
Remember long ago when you could go to an airport simply to watch the planes take off and land? My Dad used to take the whole family to the airport as an outing. I guess no one does that any longer. I guess you can't.
In our teens, my Cousin and I used to go and stake out a place near the foot of a runway, lay down to watch and take photos of the planes coming in above us. We loved doing that. Today you can't get with 3 miles of where we used to perch.
posted by james33 at 7:03 AM on February 8, 2017 [2 favorites]
Remember long ago when you could go to an airport simply to watch the planes take off and land? My Dad used to take the whole family to the airport as an outing. I guess no one does that any longer. I guess you can't.
In our teens, my Cousin and I used to go and stake out a place near the foot of a runway, lay down to watch and take photos of the planes coming in above us. We loved doing that. Today you can't get with 3 miles of where we used to perch.
posted by james33 at 7:03 AM on February 8, 2017 [2 favorites]
NickRussell and everyone, who else studies social physics, besides Bannon and crew?
posted by Baeria at 10:44 AM on February 12, 2017
posted by Baeria at 10:44 AM on February 12, 2017
« Older boxer crabs | 1. g4 d5 2. f3 e5 3. d3 Qh4 4. Kd2 h5 5. h3 hxg4... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
But that narrow strip of land we managed to block at the airport was intriguingly fertile. I was at JFK, and the combination of blocking drop-offs and the taxi strike managed to disrupt business as usual for hours. Post-9/11, the tactics played out in Seattle were increasingly hard to pull off; penalties for arrests were stiffer, and police were more prepared. But now I'm wondering whether we'll see more protests trying to shut cities down again.
posted by gusandrews at 8:39 AM on February 7, 2017 [11 favorites]