Search results

In When Riot Cops Are Not Enough, sociologist Mike King examines the policing, and broader political repression, of the Occupy Oakland movement. King's active and daily participation in that movement provides a unique insider perspective to illustrate how the Oakland police and city administrators lost the ability to effectively control the movement

"In When Riot Cops Are Not Enough, sociologist and activist Mike King examines the policing, and broader political repression, of the Occupy Oakland movement during the fall of 2011 through the spring of 2012. King's active and daily participation in that movement, from its inception through its demise, provides a unique insider perspective to illustrate how the Oakland police and city administrators lost the ability to effectively control the movement. Drawn from King's intensive field work, the book focuses on the physical, legal, political, and ideological dimensions of repression--in the streets, in courtrooms, in the media, in city hall, and within the movement itself--When Riot Cops Are Not Enough highlights the central role of political legitimacy, both for mass movements seeking to create social change, as well as for governmental forces seeking to control such movements. Although Occupy Oakland was different from other Occupy sites in many respects, King shows how the contradictions it illuminated within both social movement and police strategies provide deep insights into the nature of protest policing generally, and a clear map to understanding the full range of social control techniques used in North America in the twenty-first century"--

"In When Riot Cops Are Not Enough, sociologist and activist Mike King examines the policing, and broader political repression, of the Occupy Oakland movement during the fall of 2011 through the spring of 2012. King's active and daily participation in that movement, from its inception through its demise, provides a unique insider perspective to illustrate how the Oakland police and city administrators lost the ability to effectively control the movement. Drawn from King's intensive field work, the book focuses on the physical, legal, political, and ideological dimensions of repression--in the streets, in courtrooms, in the media, in city hall, and within the movement itself--When Riot Cops Are Not Enough highlights the central role of political legitimacy, both for mass movements seeking to create social change, as well as for governmental forces seeking to control such movements. Although Occupy Oakland was different from other Occupy sites in many respects, King shows how the contradictions it illuminated within both social movement and police strategies provide deep insights into the nature of protest policing generally, and a clear map to understanding the full range of social control techniques used in North America in the twenty-first century"--

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- 1. The Commune by the Bay: The Origins of Occupy Oakland -- 2. From Permits to Storm Troopers: Repression, Social Control, and the Governmentality of Protest -- 3. The Oakland Commune, Police Violence, and Political Opportunity -- 4. Legitimating Repression through Depoliticizing It: Federal Coordination, "Health and Safety," and the November 2011 Occupy Evictions -- 5. Putting the Occupy Oakland Vigil to Sleep: Anti-Gang Techniques and the Oakland Police Department's State of Exception -- 6. The Meshing of Force and Legitimacy in the Repression of Occupy Oakland's Move-In Day -- 7. Poison in the Garden: A Spring of Seeds That Never Grew -- 8. Beyond Control: Fostering Legitimate Counter-Conduct -- Notes -- References -- Index

"In When Riot Cops Are Not Enough, sociologist and activist Mike King examines the policing, and broader political repression, of the Occupy Oakland movement during the fall of 2011 through the spring of 2012. King's active and daily participation in that movement, from its inception through its demise, provides a unique insider perspective to illustrate how the Oakland police and city administrators lost the ability to effectively control the movement. Drawn from King's intensive field work, the book focuses on the physical, legal, political, and ideological dimensions of repression--in the streets, in courtrooms, in the media, in city hall, and within the movement itself--When Riot Cops Are Not Enough highlights the central role of political legitimacy, both for mass movements seeking to create social change, as well as for governmental forces seeking to control such movements. Although Occupy Oakland was different from other Occupy sites in many respects, King shows how the contradictions it illuminated within both social movement and police strategies provide deep insights into the nature of protest policing generally, and a clear map to understanding the full range of social control techniques used in North America in the twenty-first century"--

In the fall of 2013, the 'knockout game' – random black-on-white assaults – became the dominant storyline in the US media. Despite no measurable increase in these types of attacks, a moral panic emerged that drew from and amplified numerous previous panics around race and violent crime. While in many ways the 'knockout game' is the latest iteration of exaggerated and projected white fears of black violence in the US, the current racial formation is one that increasingly promotes the idea that white Americans are systematically subordinated. In spite of a lack of material evidence to support this claim, media outlets have played a key role in stoking racialised moral panics and normalising what had once been fringe theories of white racial victimhood – to the extent that more than half of white working-class Americans feel they are part of an oppressed racial group.

There has been some significant debate over the last decade concerning a purported trend in 'Western' public order policing policy and practices away from a primarily reactive, confrontational and protester dispersal model, to one that is based more within the notion of de-escalation of conflict, entailing intelligence-led policing, mutual communication and negotiated accommodation, i.e. towards the 'management' of crowds. The reasons for such a shift have been located variously within a general movement towards a more liberal democratic society in these countries, and the process of social change generally, resulting in an increasing movement from modern to advanced-modern society. Again, the reasons why the police are involved in this developmental change is seen as being due to their relationship with the state, concerns about legitimate action and their operating within an increasingly risk-based society. However, the police themselves are not solely effecting change by responding to external pressure, but also act as agents for change themselves on the basis of police knowledge and lessons learned. ; Šiame dešimtmetyje vyksta nemažai svarbių diskusijų dėl "vakarų" viešosios tvarkos palaikymo politikos ir praktikos nuo atsarginio reaktyviojo, konfrontacinio ir protestuotojo modelio iki modelio, kuris yra labiau paremtas konfliku rizikos mažinimo sąvoka, apimančia protinių sugebėjimų pasitelkimą, abipusį bendravimą bei derybų metu priimtą susitarimą, t. y. ėjimu minios "valdymo" link. Tokio pasikeitimo priežastys yra bendras judėjimas laisvesnės demokratinės visuomenės link šiose valstybėse ir apskritai socialinių pokyčių procesas, vykstantis dėl didėjančio judėjimo nuo modernios iki toliau pažengusios moderniosios visuomenės. Be to, priežastys, dėl kurių policija yra įtraukta į šiuos raidos pokyčius, yra susijusios su jos ir valstybės ryšiu, susirūpinimu dėl teisėtų veiksmų bei jos darbu visuomenėje, kur vis labiau susiduriama su rizika. Vis dėlto pati policija ne tik lemia pokyčius reaguodama į išorinį spaudimą, bet ir veikia kaip faktorius, padedantis jai pačiai keistis turimu policijos žinių bei įgytos patirties pagrindu. Ligi šiol moksliniai tyrimai šiais klausimais daugiausia buvo atliekami labiau orientuojantis į Vakarų Europą ir Jungtinės Vastijas negu i Kanadą, be to, labiau i viešają tvarka nei į antglobazacijos protestus. Šis straipsnis kompensuoja šį stygių; jame pateikiami lyginamojo tiriamojo darbo rezultatai. Taigi tiriama buvo du antiglobalizacijos protestų Kanadoje kontroliavimo atvejai. Tiksliau Amerikos viršūnių susitikimas Kvebeko mieste 2001 m. ir 2002 m. vykusi Didžiojo aštuoneto (GB) konferencija Kananaskyje bei protestai prieš Didįjį aštuonetą (GB) Kalgaryje ir Otavoje. Darbo autorius surinko interviu, paimtus iš viešosios policijos institllcijų visoje Kanadoje 2003 m. vasarą. Pirmasis susitikimas įvyko Genujoje, antrasis - dėl padidėjusios terorizmo grėsmės po ntgsėjo II-osios teroro akto buvo palyginti nekonfrontacinis, nes Kananaskio uolėtų kalnų vietovė buvo išskirtinė ir prižiūrima kariuomenės, tvarkos palaikymas miestuose siejamas su protinių gebėjimų, "soft hat" (tiesioginis vertimas "švelnioji kepurė"), protestutoų ir tarpininkų ryšiu mažinimu. Remiantis šiais dviem tyrimais turėtu būti pažymima, jog antiglobalizacijos protestų kontroliavimas Kanadoje pasikeitė nuo reaktyviojo modelio iki modelio, kuriame daugiau dėmesio skiriama miniai suvaldyti. Vis dėlto tam, kad būtų galima sukonkretinti šiuos kontrastingus įvykius ir nuodugniau nustatyti tokio kontroliavimo pokyčius, šiame straipsnyje nagrinėjami penki Kanados viešosios tvarkos palaikymo 1997 ir 2001 m. atvejai. Kaip pažymėta šiame straipsnyje, jis yra baigiamas remiant diskusijas dėl tendencijos pereiti nuo vieno modelio prie kito, atsižvelgiant į formaliąją politiką, kartu jame svarstomas tos politikos diegimo praktikoje mastas. Šiame straipsnyje taip pat nagrinėjama, iki kada minios valdymas gali būti apsvarstytas abiejų derybose dalyvaujančių dalyviu šalių, nes įvairios antiglobalizacijos protestlutojų grupės lieka už pagrindinio institucionalizmo proceso ribu. Be to, nurodoma, jog protestų kontroliavimas, įskaitant tarptautiniu mastu saugomu asmenų (iškelta Kanados akademikų dėl 1997 m. įvykų) apsaugą, sudaro viešesnę priverstinę bei išskirtinę kontroliavimo formą, šiek tiek peržengiančią šios tendencijos ribas. K Straipsnyje taip pat ginčijamasi, jog "soft hat" valdymo sąvoka kartu su viešu sekimu yra tiesiog aiškus protinių gabumų surinkimo, infiltracijos bei sekimo pavyzdys ( kartais ir bereikalingas "tvarkos drumstėjų" suėmimas), ypač nukreiptas į tas grupes, kurios yra už institucionalizuotų "derybų ir susitarimų " spektro ribų.