• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would you leave the park?

If the mayor evicts you, would you leave?


  • Total voters
    23
Well it really depends...

Are they just arresting campers with tents, or are they arresting protesters who aren't doing anything? If the latter, then I would let them arrest me, and make a court challenge.

Back in the 60's and 70's, civil disobedience and peaceful protest lead to a lot of people being arrested, but those people would be released almost immediately after. Then they would just go right back to the protest site and sit back down again.

The people who are attacking police and being rude need to learn a thing or two from their precedessors.

The other thing people have to realize is, the civil disobedience of the 60's and 70's was highly effective. It's why most major cities in North America now have designated protest zones. You can't exercise your First Amendment rights without getting a permit, and to get a permit you need to locate your protest in a designated zone. Those zones tend to be out of the way where they won't have any impact or visibility.

At some point Americans are going to have to just say no to disbandment, and keep protesting. Permits for peaceful gatherings are unconstitutional and need to be challenged. I accept if the city is removing campers; but if they are removing peaceful protesters who only have their person there, then it's unjustified.

IMO modern Americans have lost the ability to effectively protest. That includes the Tea Party, the Occupy movement, etc. Americans have been neutered of activist power.
 
What I liked about this morning is that only 30 were arrested, and many had left beforehand.

I know that's something like giving up on the cause, giving into the establishment, the system, the machine, or any other metaphor for the dehumanization of man, for some of you, but I consider it public decency and common sense.
 
Last edited:
What I liked about this morning is that only 30 were arrested, and many had left beforehand.

I know that's something like giving up on the cause, giving into the establishment, the system, the machine, or any other metaphor for the dehumanization of man, for some of you, but I consider it public decency and common sense.

Then never ending battle for freedom has never been an easy road; never will be.
 
Hey Tigger, out of interest, when do you think the turnng point came in history that this way of living became impossible? I believe it would be fruitless arguing your stance given I have no shared ideological grounds on which to begin it, but I genuinely am curious.

I would suggest that the downturn occured in the 1960's. Through the 1950's living this type of lifestyle was fairly common. As the protest movements of the 1960's went into action it became much more difficult and by the earlt to mid 1980's it was almost impossible and has progressively gotten even more and more difficult as time has gone on.
 
Let's say you were part of the Occupy, Tea Party or other movement you care about in large city. You've been camped out in this part for several weeks. The mayor of the city decides that enough is enough and you cannot occupy the park for as long as you want to. The mayor orders the police to evict you and your group from the park.

Do you leave or do you stand your ground?

The question becomes, how long does it take for a protestor to become a "squatter"? or, at what point does a protestor become just another homeless bum living in the park?
 
Back
Top Bottom