The correct response to these sorts of actions by law enforcement is for individuals to collaborate in a legal manner to collect intelligence on law enforcement and share it on the internet.
If we must live in a world with surveillance than the burden of surveillance must be carried by all.
The protesters in this case were destroying company property on company land over a pipeline that was routed around a native American reservation.
It would be weird if the police DIDN'T warn companies/individuals about protesters planning on destroying property at other locations.
That's the police's job - to prevent crime. If the protesters were smashing cars in your neighborhood, I suspect you'd want the police to warn the residents there as well.
I'm trying to figure out what sort of intelligence would be collectable that isn't already.
Do you mean officer movements in-field? That's often done by protesters (I remember seeing examples of it during both the BLM protests and the WTO protests; police movements tracked by monitoring police scanners and updated in realtime to chatrooms and Twitter).
Do you mean who they are personally? As public servants, that's generally a matter of public record.
Do you mean camera recording of specific encounters? That's become best practice.
Well as soon as a bunch of officers and politicians realize someone followed their every movement and we know where they buy their groceries, where they go to church, who their friends are, who their children are and what elementary school they attend, the route their 8 year old walks home after school and any other creepy but legal information one could easily obtain by surveillance in public. I don’t condone this type of action. But I also don’t believe we should be tracked across everything we do so perhaps doing something like this could send a message.
Why are you believing Fascist propaganda? Yes, Mussolini said that a Fascist corporation was a collective owned by the state with employees having most of the control. In reality that's not what he intended.
In practice the state did not have economic control over the corporations. In the example of Nazi Germany, the cooperation of large industrialists was necessary for accession to power, and the state was too incompetent to achieve even basic control over the economy, so it was privatised and the leaders of corporations instead were integrated into the social Darwinist structure of society that the Nazis loved so much. Which turned out to work pretty well with unbounded free markets.
Police:
in exploiter states, a system of special bodies of supervision and coercion, as well as domestic punitive troops that protect the existing social system by means of direct and overt suppression. [...] As one of the chief instruments of the state, the police in an exploiter society is always separated from and inimical to the people. [...] In modern capitalist states the police are used primarily in the struggle against the revolutionary and working-class movement — against democratic progressive forces.
- The Great Soviet Encyclopedia, 3rd Edition (1970-1979)
Hmmm, I think I've read things about the US police — especially in the second part of 2020 — that were eerily close to this definition.
I think this is a misquote because nobody used the word "corporation" to refer solely to big companies in those times. I didn't study Mussolini deeply but I assume he means it in the sense "collectives of small family businesses where the collective is owned, proportionally, by said families".
I'm sure there's a better definition, but iirc "corporation" as a synonym for "enormous faceless public investor-controlled megacompany" is a pretty recent definition.
ah yes, cops warning companies about protesters that effectively siege buildings by blocking roads in and out so workers can't safely leave and disrupt critical infrastructure is fascism. (◔_◔)
- Police share information on protestors with pipeline company.
- NSA, after lying under oath to say that it doesn’t, conducts mass surveillance of Americans, and then shortly after that bungles security of its own hacking tools, so they end up in the hands of, well, just about anyone.
- Large trusted organizations from credit agencies to banks to phone companies leak millions of private records.
- US government deliberately — yes, deliberately! — turns over personal identifying information about people associated with the US *TO THE TALIBAN* because, what… the Taliban are “the authorities” now and thus utterly and completely trusted with this information.
And with this backdrop, the US government wants keys to unlock our encryption, and claims it will keep them secure and safe. What’s the worst that can happen… well I don’t know, it’s not like they would turn our information over to the Taliban, right? Oh, wait…
Please remember what they did here next time they say the keys will be held in escrow only to be accessed by trusted authorities.
"In one case, the official passed along intelligence to Enbridge’s security chief for Line 3: a list of people who attended an anti-pipeline organizing meeting."
Aside from clandestine attendance for the purposes of intelligence gathering, there were more than a few things that needed to be done to accurately identify and produce the list of people who attended.
If corporations with a history of property theft, and property, human and ecologic destruction came through my neighborhood, I hope my neighbors would join me in protest too.
They primarily protect property. But a pipeline through a neighborhood would mean my land would be seized by eminent domain. So the authorities would protect the pipeline company, who had property in the dispute.
The authorities show up to help pipeline companies break treaties. Some now ex-property owner like myself wouldn't even be a speed bump.
Readit News
If we must live in a world with surveillance than the burden of surveillance must be carried by all.
My point: Shifty, illegal, underhanded things are just wrong. Do it all above board.
The protesters in this case were destroying company property on company land over a pipeline that was routed around a native American reservation.
It would be weird if the police DIDN'T warn companies/individuals about protesters planning on destroying property at other locations.
That's the police's job - to prevent crime. If the protesters were smashing cars in your neighborhood, I suspect you'd want the police to warn the residents there as well.
Do you mean officer movements in-field? That's often done by protesters (I remember seeing examples of it during both the BLM protests and the WTO protests; police movements tracked by monitoring police scanners and updated in realtime to chatrooms and Twitter).
Do you mean who they are personally? As public servants, that's generally a matter of public record.
Do you mean camera recording of specific encounters? That's become best practice.
I think what you're describing is what we do now.
"Corporate" means body, and isnt used in its modern sense. Fascism is, as you'll see, exactly the opposite of what you're suggesting.
A fascist corporation is a collective owned by the state.
awful: causing dread
https://www.etymonline.com/word/awe?ref=etymonline_crossrefe...
Words are weird. Adults understand context, limits of reductionism.
In practice the state did not have economic control over the corporations. In the example of Nazi Germany, the cooperation of large industrialists was necessary for accession to power, and the state was too incompetent to achieve even basic control over the economy, so it was privatised and the leaders of corporations instead were integrated into the social Darwinist structure of society that the Nazis loved so much. Which turned out to work pretty well with unbounded free markets.
I'm sure there's a better definition, but iirc "corporation" as a synonym for "enormous faceless public investor-controlled megacompany" is a pretty recent definition.
- Police share information on protestors with pipeline company.
- NSA, after lying under oath to say that it doesn’t, conducts mass surveillance of Americans, and then shortly after that bungles security of its own hacking tools, so they end up in the hands of, well, just about anyone.
- Large trusted organizations from credit agencies to banks to phone companies leak millions of private records.
- US government deliberately — yes, deliberately! — turns over personal identifying information about people associated with the US *TO THE TALIBAN* because, what… the Taliban are “the authorities” now and thus utterly and completely trusted with this information.
And with this backdrop, the US government wants keys to unlock our encryption, and claims it will keep them secure and safe. What’s the worst that can happen… well I don’t know, it’s not like they would turn our information over to the Taliban, right? Oh, wait…
Please remember what they did here next time they say the keys will be held in escrow only to be accessed by trusted authorities.
Also: Apple, are you seeing this?
Aside from clandestine attendance for the purposes of intelligence gathering, there were more than a few things that needed to be done to accurately identify and produce the list of people who attended.
If protesters with a history of property destruction were scheduled to come through my neighborhood, I hope the police would warn me too.
Deleted Comment
Wouldn't you want the authorities to protect you against that danger?
The authorities show up to help pipeline companies break treaties. Some now ex-property owner like myself wouldn't even be a speed bump.