SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The CHAZ Has Become America's Fascination
The Stranger describes it as an "anti-capitalist police-free Vatican City inside Capitol Hill." The New York Times deems it "part street festival, part commune." President Donald Trump alludes to it, via tweet, as a bastion for "anarchists" who "must be stooped [sic]."
Seemingly overnight, the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone—or, "the CHAZ," as everyone's calling it—has become a local and national fascination. It was only Monday that the Seattle Police Department loaded up trucks and ditched the East Precinct at 12th and Pine, the site of tear gas-clouded confrontations between officers and Black Lives Matter-inspired protesters in the days after the Minneapolis police killing of George Floyd. Protesters have since barricaded and transformed a cluster of city blocks into a mostly peaceful enclave of free food, face coverings, resistance art, educational town halls, and even some live music. Seattle Police Department chief Carmen Best says she's heard of armed people patrolling the area and businesses having to pay "protection" fees, but as of this writing, no formal police reports related to either situation have been filed.
At a time when cities are mulling the defunding and, in a few cases, abolition of their police departments, some people might be looking at Seattle's police-free movement with a mix of amusement and genuine curiosity: Is this communal version of the American experiment a blip, or is it a preview of what's to come in other population hubs this summer? For many, however, the questions are more fundamental: How long will the CHAZ (or the People's Republic of Capitol Hill, or Free Cap Hill, depending on your sign preference) stick around? And what are its aims?
Raz Simone, a local rapper, has apparently taken a leading role in declaring a several-block area of a residential Seattle neighborhood to be an independent revolutionary state called the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (The CHAZ). Simone and a few friends, armed with several guns and a megaphone, have declared themselves the new police. He came to national attention on Wednesday when a video of him assaulting someone over graffiti came to light online.
[...] The president tweeted Wednesday and Thursday morning that the area has been taken over by a "Terrorist Warlord" and "Domestic Terrorists."
See also: The Future of Capitol Hill's New Autonomous Zone Is Predictable
Businesses Extorted? Armed Checkpoints on Capitol Hill? Yes, and Also Mercer Island Is for Sale
An Exceedingly Chill Day at the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone
(Score: 3, Disagree) by UncleSlacky on Friday June 12 2020, @05:49PM (29 children)
Relevant Existential Comics: https://i.redd.it/ndhaniyx4a451.jpg [i.redd.it]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday June 12 2020, @05:57PM (22 children)
Legitimacy of government goes hand-in-hand with a monopoly on violence.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DannyB on Friday June 12 2020, @06:14PM (21 children)
The government doesn't have a monopoly on violence. They simply have a much larger supply of it in stock.
The people who rely on government handouts and refuse to work should be kicked out of congress.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Thexalon on Friday June 12 2020, @07:02PM (19 children)
In general, the more the government has the support of the people they're governing, the less they rely on or even have a supply of violence.
For instance, in Norway, cops basically never kill people, the government there abolished the death penalty a long time ago, and while they have a military and a defense strategy they've been at peace ever since they kicked the Nazis out. And one reason they don't have to use force much at all is that Norwegians are regularly in the running for the happiest and best-off people on the planet, and their government is on average quite responsive to their people's demands, so they can use the "carrot" approach rather than the "stick" approach for controlling their population to the degree that they need to.
By contrast, in Nicaragua, the government is routinely "disappearing" and killing its own citizens without trial, and that kind of thing has been common for decades. And one reason they have to use force a great deal to maintain control over their area is that the situation in Nicaragua has sucked for a very long time, and the government routinely ignores the peoples' demands while lining its own pockets, so they only have the "stick" approach for controlling their population.
The US is somewhere between those two, and what experience of the US government you get depends on a lot of factors, most of which are completely out of your control.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2020, @07:32PM
Tropical Fish: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/68/Orange-lined_Triggerfish3.jpg/1024px-Orange-lined_Triggerfish3.jpg [wikimedia.org]
North Atlantic Fish: http://img0.etsystatic.com/000/0/5634851/il_fullxfull.231280060.jpg [etsystatic.com]
Arctic Fish: http://www.arcodiv.org/Fish.html [arcodiv.org]
Notice anything? That this fish get less colorful and more practical as you move north and food becomes less prevalent?
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2020, @07:52PM (12 children)
Nicaragua didn't end up being a hell hole on its own. The disappearances, torture and death squads were initiated by and supported by Ronald Reagan and his administration. Nearby in Guatemala, "Reagan the Butcher" sponsored a genocide against the indigenous. Reagan's administration also illegally closed the border to the fleeing Guatemalan refugees-- deporting them without a hearing. Sometimes the refugees were executed on the tarmac of the airport immediately after the US planes deporting the refuges were unloaded. Reagan was responsible for the displacement, torture, rape and murder of millions of innocent people including many many children.
It is good to put a face to evil. The revisionist history that Reagan's supporters are peddling needs to be countered-- most people who were not alive in the 80s are unaware of Reagan's crimes (the above is just a tiny subset of his crimes).
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Saturday June 13 2020, @12:35AM (10 children)
Reagan didn't start the School of the Americas [wikipedia.org]. The horrible Republicans Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman did. The SoA trained officers from Latin American countries, several of whom went on to stage coups in their home countries and set themselves up as dictators. The United States tolerated that as long as participants were anti-communist.
The Cold War was going on at the time. The fear of communist infiltration and subversion of countries around the world was real. The Domino Theory it was called. It was not a purely American obsession, either. NATO was tightly bound together to defend against the Warsaw Pact. The Five Eyes, and other alliances, did likewise in different spheres of the world.
So, since it was a war, people died. It was mostly proxy wars fought in client states, but people on both sides died. Yes, even in Central America.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @03:42AM
Supporting fascists because they're on your side means you need to reevaluate your decisions and ideology, not that it's OK because communists.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Joe Desertrat on Saturday June 13 2020, @03:45AM (5 children)
Was the "fear" real? It seems to me it was always just another manufactured scapegoat used to justify the funneling of vast sums of money to supposedly fight this. Make no mistake, none of that money went to help struggling people. Democracy was certainly never the goal, Democratically elected governments in Chile and Iran were overthrown ostensibly because they were led by or partnered with communists. If there was fear, it was entirely based on fear of communist success. That is why we continue to have punishing economic policies in place with countries like Cuba and Venezuela, if they are to succeed they will have to overcome a great deal of negative bias first to do so.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Phoenix666 on Saturday June 13 2020, @12:14PM (1 child)
Yes, it was. Countries around the world were falling to communist revolutions. Stalin murdered tens of millions of his own people [wikipedia.org]. Mao murdered tens of millions of his own people [wikipedia.org]. The Khmer Rouge murdered millions of their own people [wikipedia.org] (one quarter of their population at the time). The Comintern was constituted and funded by the Soviet Union and its allies to foment further revolution and death around the world. The Soviets put missile bases on Cuba to enable a first strike against the US before the US could react.
There were Western oil companies that advocated for Mossadegh's removal out of greed and self-interest, but there was also a larger strategic concern that allowing the Soviet Union to draw in Iran as a client state would endanger the oil supply from the entire Middle East, a key strategic concern then, and now. Cuba and Venezuela are vestiges of the Monroe Doctrine and the Cold War struggle to keep communist influence out of the Western Hemisphere. You may disagree with those reasons, but they are real reasons that can engender real fear. Of course, if you are a communist the idea of brutally murdering millions of your fellow citizens is not a bug, but a feature, right?
Those are just a handful of the hard facts that entirely justify fear. If you're old enough to have lived through the Cold War, shame on you for whitewashing what communism is and has done. If you're too young to have experienced it, go back to a real school and get a real education on modern history.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @06:21PM
maybe by the lower level people(like presidents), but at the very top of the pyramid, it's the same people running the communists and the capitalist states, funding both sides of the wars and maneuverings between them.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @06:17PM (2 children)
On top of the peer comment here I'd also suggest observing what happened to the nations in question. Communism is a very appealing ideology for many people because it promises basically you can get everything for free and that no man need ever go without. But the actual implementation of it is probably simply impossible. That's not because of complexity but because it requires everybody (or at least the majority of people) to play their role more or less selflessly. And we're just not wired to work that way on a large scale. Some of the self sustaining hippy commune projects are awesome, but there's a huge difference between a dozen or two super ideologically/ethically/morally/etc homogeneous folks working together in a tiny environment and this working on a scale with hundreds of millions of people, invariably with many of whom will end up disliking other subgroups for whatever reasons.
But this makes communism very dangerous because the promise is so appealing, but the cost is extensive only to ultimately culminate in failure. Russia's success, then and now, in various technical fields such as rocket science, mathematics, etc emphasizes that they have some of the best minds on this planet but their country has not really developed in accordance with that. And I think a big part of that is because they spent nearly a century under communism which severely retarded their country's economic and industrial development. There's a joke from the old Soviet Union - The capitalists may have the biggest skyscrapers, but we have the biggest transistors!
It's the same deal now a days except that our government has become completely devoid of any ethics. Imagine either party was given a magic deal where they'd be guaranteed to have a majority and the presidency for the next 20 years if they let all rapists out of prison immediately. Would either reject such a deal? I very much doubt it. It's all become so extremely Machiavellian. And so even if the politicians understand behind the scenes that e.g. communism may likely lead to collapse of the US, they'll never oppose it if they can think it's politically beneficial.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @06:36PM (1 child)
Eh, I don't think you can consider the economic system as a sole reason for collapse. The US has always used economic means such as trade embargoes and sanctions against any communist country they couldn't overthrow through force alone. Would Vietnam or Cuba be in the situation they are today without US embargoes and constant interference?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday June 13 2020, @11:28PM
Creating nations of slaves is another reason for the collapse.
Sure would.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @04:02AM (2 children)
WTF are you smoking boy? Pure acid? Did you mean Teddy Roosevelt maybe? FDR was famously a DEMOCRAT. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt [wikipedia.org] Although to be fair, today's Democratic party is almost nothing like the 1930s Democrats.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Saturday June 13 2020, @12:15PM
It was a rhetorical inversion meant to emphasize that they were NOT Republicans. The School of Americas was started by Democrats. The parent was laying all of it at Reagan's door, which is historically incorrect.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @06:23PM
you're an idiot.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Saturday June 13 2020, @06:09PM
The current Nicaraguan death squads are being run by Daniel Ortega, who was mostly a fighter against the Reagan death squads. And while I absolutely agree that Nicaragua didn't get this way on its own (and the history of US military interventions and coups there goes back to long before the 1980's), I also hold him responsible for his actions.
What is absolutely true is that *every* poor country has had a period of European or American colonization, and generally have their resources taken from them at discount prices with the threat of a US-backed invasion or coup to back up the multinationals. And invariably, the US has preferred fascist dictatorships over left-leaning democracies: Recent US targets in Latin America for electing leaders with the "wrong" policies include Brazil, Venezuela, Bolivia, and Honduras, to varying degrees of success.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by istartedi on Friday June 12 2020, @07:53PM (2 children)
You're Comparing countries near the poles with countries near the equator [cnn.com]. Anecdotally I've always noticed that the hot spots tend to be "hot spots", and it looks like there might be some science to back that up.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 1, Disagree) by istartedi on Saturday June 13 2020, @05:20PM (1 child)
Mods on crack. Remember, there is no "disagree" mod, and this is most certainly not "off topic". If you disagree, don't mod. Comment.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by istartedi on Sunday June 14 2020, @12:00AM
What? Really? Soylent devs added a disagree mod. Not sure if I like that or not, but at least it's appropriate moderation this time.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Phoenix666 on Saturday June 13 2020, @12:21PM (1 child)
You cited Norway, Thexalon, so it's mete to point out that a lot of Norway's social spending is funded by North Sea oil. When you're flush with oil money you don't need to use the stick at all. Historically Norwegians were a lot meaner before oil came along. They used sticks and many other implements a lot.
Norwegians are not constitutionally kinder or gentler than others.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday June 17 2020, @05:56PM
I never claimed Norwegians were never mean - of course they were, from the Viking Era to when they tried to hold off the Nazi invasion in early WW II. I said their government doesn't need to use much violence today, and it's in no small part because the government has been using its money to fund social programs that Norwegians like.
You can say the same thing about Sweden, which doesn't have the same oil revenues but has a similarly happy population, and it seems to be the result of the government fulfilling John Locke social contract theory. Swedish political leaders routinely go about their lives without being surrounded by bodyguards, for instance.
Oil money alone isn't enough to make the difference, unless Saudi Arabia turned into a democratic paradise when I wasn't looking.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2020, @07:34PM
They have a monopoly on *legitimate* violence. Where legitimate means whatever is condoned by the community, ie is not necessarily good. They can also perform illegitimate violence as well.
Also, the term "aggression" would be better than "violence".
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2020, @06:39PM (5 children)
Do people really think this is what happens, like at all?
Here [twitter.com] is a slightly more realistic clip of what happens when you get into anarchy. For those who don't like watching Twitter clips - it's a video of the now self declared 'warlord' of the CHAZ trying to get somebody to stop spraying graffiti on the home of some guy who's aligned with them. The "artist" ignores them, so the new-found CHAZ law enforcement become violent. Isn't ironic, don't you think?
And that's within just a matter of days with a group that's about as ideologically homogeneous as you can get. This [zerohedge.com] one directly relates to your comic: "ALERT#2: the homeles people we invited took away all the food at the Capital Hill Autonomous Zone. we need more food to keep the area operation. please if possible bring vegan meat substitutes, fruits, oats, soy products, etc. - anything to help us eat". It's a copy of a Tweet since the guy has since set his account [twitter.com] to followers only, but he's very much a part of their organization.
Now imagine a 'CHAZ' that had hundreds of millions of people, many of whom *really* *really* didn't get along. Welcome to what a country is, and it's absolutely remarkable how peaceful we've remained, for the most part. It doesn't take much for society to descend into anarchy - there are only 3 police per 1000 people. And anarchy is not some place you want to go. It's not a peaceful flourishing commune - it's a violent power vacuum where the next government is decided not by vote but by force. After all, all a government really is is the group who has a monopoly on violence.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by meustrus on Friday June 12 2020, @10:15PM (2 children)
Yup, that's what happens in every revolution. Running a government is hard.
Thing is, revolution happens. Especially when a large number of people start to feel like trying their chances in a revolution. We all know revolutions are dangerous. Sometimes it's the least dangerous option.
Rather than point out the obvious flaws of revolution, maybe we should be more responsive to the people before they start revolting.
Of course, if the protests were always peaceful, always orderly, always deferential to the authorities, then the authorities could simply ignore them indefinitely.
We should want the threat of revolution to be ever-present in the minds of the ruling class. They'll figure out how to run a better government, but only if the alternative is CHAZ.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 12 2020, @11:53PM (1 child)
Really? You WANT that? Are you welcoming a counterrevolution?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @03:46AM
I'm pretty sure we could do the same thing where I live, and it would work, because I don't live in the middle of a concrete wasteland. Not sure if it's a great system for places that produce nothing "real".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2020, @06:27PM
You mean "chaos", not "anarchy". "Self rule" does not necessarily mean "chaos", even if it sometimes can be.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday June 13 2020, @11:39PM
The ideological extremes actually get pretty diverse. But of course, there's plenty of other reasons for interests to diverge than ideology. Not every ideology is equipped to deal with divergence of interest.