Submitted by rein_deer7 t3_125438y in worldnews
Comments
Gethisa t1_je2x09w wrote
Because they don’t rely on the same retirement plan as the ones Macron is modifying
Grosse-pattate t1_je3ve52 wrote
Because the French government is smart.
There are two large groups spared by the pension reform, the police and truck drivers.
One of these groups protects the government's power, while the other can paralyze the country in just a few days.
CyberianSun t1_je41g3y wrote
someone was taking notes from the last go round.
ImrooVRdev t1_je4cww5 wrote
And this is why sympathy strikes and general strikes should not only be a right but a base requirement for a free and moral society.
If you can not enact sympathy strike if you see your fellows suffer, you are no better than a serf.
sephelutis t1_je4vp0k wrote
Oldest tactic in the book LOL
MayaMiaMe t1_je3ipzx wrote
The police PROTECT rich communities (people) while POLICING poor communities. It is sad but true
[deleted] t1_je5p75w wrote
[removed]
Khalme t1_je42hx5 wrote
The police won't be affected by the changes, they can retire as soon as 52 y.o.
In the past few years they lowered the standards of the academy. If a police trainee has a history of domestic violence, anger issues, DUI, they can still become full fledged members of the police. At worst they might have to repeat a year, very few of them are actually fired from the academy.
So, you have a rising amount of unstable individuals with authority and weapons, who are not affected by the new law, and they know they won't get punished for beating up citizens.
ImrooVRdev t1_je4cy9v wrote
I see french are copying american notes on the topic
acebush1 t1_je3nwlo wrote
Police are professional class traitors.
UnrequitedRespect t1_je5bofi wrote
The idea of police has been softened by television, movies and stories but they have always been the Nottingham guards from Robinhood.
PaxNova t1_je389f4 wrote
Believe it or not, police are supposed to protect everyone, not just those that benefit them personally. That's what is supposed to separate them from any other gang of people.
PigeonMelk t1_je3cn7m wrote
The police are the armed paramilitary for capital owners. They are literally only protecting those who benefit them in this situation and most situations.
[deleted] t1_je46p9l wrote
[removed]
GreenCoatBlackShoes t1_je3lv9x wrote
Because the function of the policy is social control and protection of property. They do the bidding of the law makers, paid for by the rich. It’s systemic violence from the top and aimed at the bottom.
Prestigious-Letter14 t1_je452ox wrote
The police, as seen by them being excluded from this pension reform, are a force of oppression against these demonstrators.
Police in Europe has been started as professional paid wage slaves and they stayed the same till now. Somewhere along the way like-minded people like the privileges they got with becoming riot police (aka beating up leftists) and increasingly flocked into these positions.
The argument of „protect and serve“ can be at most be done for the classic patrol cop who is a first responder. Riot police is nothing else than a paid private army to protect the state from its citizens.
dclxvi616 t1_je4ivfk wrote
That’s what they want you to think. Seriously. They’re supposed to find any excuse they can to charge you with a crime. Misleading you into believing they are supposed to protect you only makes that easier. If you want protection, you get a lawyer, a bodyguard, or a condom, depending on what kind of protection you need.
meatismoydelicious t1_je8dhuv wrote
Failing that, firearms. Why do you think the US won't even consider giving up theirs?
dclxvi616 t1_je8enqg wrote
Sure I just try not to convince myself my pistol is "protection." It does not make me safe. It is a hail mary last resort act of desperation that might give me a small chance to survive a situation that might never occur in my life where I would otherwise certainly die. It's better to have and not need than need and not have. Nothing more.
There may be some people trained and skilled enough to consider their firearm protection, but I don't think that counts for most of us.
meatismoydelicious t1_je8g0yc wrote
Nah, just a means of leveling the playing field as well as technology can. I hope it was clear that "you" was used in the royal sense. Just making that clear for other readers.
dclxvi616 t1_je8g877 wrote
Oh it was clear to me, just figured I’d throw in my two cents since I met the demographic.
SGTwhocares t1_je4evc7 wrote
Because police are the first line of defense for capitalists and serve their interest only even if they are working class as well.
merit33 t1_je4sshd wrote
Police can retire in their 50s.
LordBoobington t1_je5sizy wrote
I don’t get this protest, the retirement age is moving from 62 to 64. Most of the world is 65-68.
Average lifespan is increasing. You either have to increase retirement age or increase how much you pay into retirement.
Drostan_S t1_je6yeki wrote
What the fuck is the point of working for your whole life to improve your lot, if you're gonna get punished by being forced to working the few extra good years you've earned?
LordBoobington t1_je7fzsy wrote
You either have to pay more in retirement pension or work longer if your average lifespan keeps getting longer.
Because if you don’t you won’t be able to live on your pension when you are in retirement.
I get your reasoning but 62 is low for retirement age.
Throwaway08080909070 t1_je2nr9w wrote
Maybe the police are just fans of not burning the place down, plus once one of your "brothers" tosses a bomb at you, I'm guessing you stop caring about their cause in a hurry.
Romecam t1_je2zbf7 wrote
Couldn't see them as "brothers" if they were ready and willing to stand on the other side. Their retirement plans haven't been effected by this
PoopIsAlwaysSunny t1_je3hqv4 wrote
But the police and you are fans of burning away two years of people’s lives?
Ok_Video6434 t1_je37pha wrote
Come back and say this on your main coward
Throwaway08080909070 t1_je39mev wrote
Why must you people always make things personal? I think it's because on some level you know that angry confrontation is all you have, or maybe it's just that people drawn to violence tend to lack in... other areas.
What do you think?
Mr_Puddintaters t1_je3gn6q wrote
I think, therefore I am. See you in the Wendy’s parking lot.
[deleted] t1_je8cyym wrote
[removed]
tky_phoenix t1_je3fzkw wrote
Protesting is one thing but burning things down and looting shops definitely goes too far.
Kypsys t1_je57lcl wrote
Main issue here is that our government doesn't give a flying fuck about peaceful protests. The country must be in absolute chaos to make them reconsider, and even then it's not won. Concrete example : 1968 protests, or right now, the gigantic water basin project, there has been peaceful protests for weeks, no one even talked about it, but now that there's rioting and combat at least we're hearing about it in mainstream medias
tky_phoenix t1_je73ip5 wrote
Would it be possible to at least limit the damage to public facilities and not private businesses? They have absolutely nothing to do with it. Even then looting wouldn’t be ok.
On a side note, I think it’s great that the people stand up and make their voice heard. With all the technology we should work less and not more.
meatismoydelicious t1_je8daip wrote
And yet we're more indentured than we've ever been thanks to the negligence of the ruling class. Wake up.
Kypsys t1_jedycrk wrote
I agree 💯 with you, and i do regret the damages, especially like you said private Businesses, and also on politicians houses or offices (weirdly, also some of the opposing parties offices has been damaged).
Even for the public facilities it pains me (it's my money from taxes after all).
but then again, if there is no destruction, if you don't pretty much stop the country...nothing will be done, you can't vote against it because there's no referendum, you can't ask your deputy to vote against it because they are a bunch of kids with no intention on people well being, but more focused on sticking it to the other party, at the expense of others So there's no way really.....other than maximum disruption...
meatismoydelicious t1_je8d41g wrote
So sacrificing the lives of the people isn't too far but sacrificing buildings is? You're seriously fucking up in the way of priorities.
tky_phoenix t1_je8eflu wrote
The democratically elected government is making a change. You are welcome to protest and to vote them out of office. No one is sacrificing anybody. They are nor executing people. 64 is also still lower than many other developed countries to put it into perspective. We are also talking about damaging private property and businesses of people who have nothing to do with the increase in retirement age. They might even be protesting on the streets as well.
meatismoydelicious t1_je8flz0 wrote
I'm not French so I don't think my vote, or anyone else's for that matter, will change a damn thing. They're sacrificing the time of others. That's their lives. If someone forces you to work more than is necessary to provide for yourself, they are literally taking your life. Not to mention, how many people die between the ages of 62 and 64? More than will likely die from these protests. Other countries disallowing their citizens to enjoy the benefits of retirement does not absolve Macron from jumping on the bandwagon late, especially when it is the effect of he and his constituents' bad decisions. If you hurt the nation's economy, you hurt its leaders. Economics are a bitch like that. And if I'm to the point of rioting in the street, it means I'm willing to risk more than a brick and mortar property. People's time, i.e. their lives matter more than fucking pastry shops.
Lord_Viktoo t1_je4gyi5 wrote
Depends on the store.
rein_deer7 OP t1_je2c7ej wrote
correction
A previous version of this article incorrectly said that France’s interior minister blamed far-right instigators for violent actions at recent protests. In fact, he blamed far-left instigators. The article has been corrected.
Police in France have responded to a wave of recent protests with heavy-handed and sometimes brutal tactics, according to local and international rights groups, prompting calls for an independent investigation into allegations of police brutality as the country grapples with its worst unrest in years.
Protesters opposed to government efforts to raise the retirement age have destroyed cars and buildings, burned trash and newspaper kiosks, and clashed with law enforcement in cities such as Paris and Bordeaux in recent days. But the forceful and apparently indiscriminate nature of the police response, including arbitrary arrests and the use of violence against peaceful demonstrators and reporters, has also drawn scrutiny.
“There are now hundreds of testimonies of police brutality that cannot be justified by the law,” said Sebastian Roché, a professor at Sciences-Po Grenoble who researches French policing.
As protests continue in France, videos show police beating protesters, firing tear gas at crowds, and making seemingly arbitrary arrests. (Video: Leila Barghouty/Reuters) Police and government officials have defended security forces, saying they were working to maintain order and protect peaceful protesters from violence. French Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin said hundreds of police officers had been injured and blamed far-left instigators for the clashes.
Story continues below advertisement
“It is possible that, individually, some police, often because they are tired, commit acts that do not conform with what they were taught,” he said, adding that 11 inquiries into police behavior were opened by the force’s internal affairs watchdog over the past week.
But top human rights officials at the United Nations and the Council of Europe, which is headquartered in Strasbourg, France, have also weighed in, condemning what they said was excessive use of force by law enforcement officers.
Even if some protesters engaged in “sporadic acts of violence,” Dunja Mijatovic, human rights commissioner for the Council of Europe, said in a statement Friday, it “cannot justify excessive use of force by agents of the state.”
Story continues below advertisement
The unrest started earlier this month after French President Emmanuel Macron, seeking to raise France’s retirement age from 62 to 64, pushed through an unpopular bill he said was necessary to ensure the future of the country’s pension system. Since then, both the protest movement and the police response have heated up, turning less predictable and more violent, rights groups say.
On Thursday, more than a million people took to the streets and blocked critical services across France in an outpouring of anger over the measure. Riot police clashed with protesters in Bordeaux, Nantes and Rennes, and in Paris, tens of thousands of mostly peaceful demonstrators marched in the streets, while some burned trash cans, vandalized property or threw objects at police.
In response, “the use of force by the police became excessive,” said Patrick Baudouin, president of the Ligue des droits de l’homme (LDH), or Human Rights League, one of the premier human rights groups in France.
Story continues below advertisement
In particular, he cited police officers’ use of flash-ball launchers — whose projectiles “can be very, very dangerous if they touch the face” — as well as their “excessive use of tear gas.”
Police have also engaged in kettling, Baudouin said, in which officers surround large crowds and prevent them from leaving. The practice is “not totally illegal,” he said, but should only be used when absolutely necessary and under certain conditions, according to France’s Council of the State, the top body for administrative justice.
Some viral clips show police striking protesters in the face while they are walking down the street, or surrounding large crowds and bringing batons down on the backs of demonstrators. On live television Thursday, police sprayed tear gas at a group of teenagers, perched atop a bus stop shelter and talking to journalists.
Story continues below advertisement
Several journalists covering the protests have reported being injured or harassed by police as well, said Pauline Adès-Mével, a spokeswoman for press freedom advocacy group Reporters Without Borders.
One independent journalist, Paul Boyer, told the French newspaper Liberation that while he was covering a protest in Paris Thursday night, a member of the BRAV-M police force, which was “hitting everyone” in the crowd, had brought his baton down twice toward Boyer’s face, even after Boyer shouted “Press!” and held up his press card. The impact of the baton fractured Boyer’s hand, which he had used to protect his face.
“What we are seeing now is ultra worrying,” Adès-Mével said.
Story continues below advertisement
The incidents have reignited a national debate on police tactics, one that most recently emerged during the “yellow vest” protests that began in 2018. That movement, triggered by opposition to a planned fuel tax, included weekly protests against the cost of living. Police responded with tear gas grenades, ball-shaped rubber projectiles and chemical spray, burning and maiming protesters, according to Human Rights Watch, which documented the injuries.
The backlash prompted France’s Interior Ministry to codify in one document, for the first time, a framework for appropriate police conduct, said Roché, the policing expert. Since then, however, the government has pursued “a strategy of refusal, in fact, to confront police violence,” he said, adding that the police violence of the yellow vest era appears to have returned.
One case this month, captured in an audio recording obtained and verified by the French newspaper Le Monde on Friday, has generated a particular outcry, intensifying public ire toward the special riot police force known as the BRAV-M. Created in 2019 to tamp down the yellow vest demonstrations, the unit deploys in pairs on motorcycles to help quell protests.
Story continues below advertisement
In the audio clip, excerpts of which were published by news site Loopsider on social media, members of one BRAV-M unit can be heard threatening, slapping and directing sexual innuendo at a group of seven young people during an arrest in Paris on Monday, according to Le Monde.
“You’re so lucky to be sitting there, now that we’ve arrested you. I swear, I’d have broken your legs, literally. I can tell you, we’ve broken elbows and faces ... but you, I’d have broken your legs,” one officer says in the recording, Le Monde reported. Two slapping sounds can be heard, the report says, along with an officer saying, “Wipe that smile off your face.”
Later in the clip, a police officer warns the young people they have detained: “Next time we come, you won’t be getting in the car to go to the police station. You’ll be getting in another thing called an ambulance to go to the hospital.”
Story continues below advertisement
Paris police chief Laurent Nuñez said Friday he was “very shocked” by the audio clip and that police misconduct was unacceptable and would be investigated.
Some activists and leftist lawmakers are calling for the dissolution of the specialized brigade. But on French radio Saturday, Nunez voiced his support for BRAV-M, calling it “an indispensable unit for the maintenance of the republican order.”
Baudouin, the LDH president, also called for the formation of an independent body to investigate allegations of police brutality.
He said he worries heavy-handed police tactics will only fuel violence on the streets.
For the government, “it is absolutely necessary to recognize the legitimacy of the popular movement, take it into account and return to a real social dialogue, to calm the current tensions,” he added, “otherwise there will be an escalation that will no longer be controllable.”
GeebyYu t1_je3zsvn wrote
Doesn't surprise me in the slightest.
I went to the Euros in Paris a few years back, and a bunch of fans from different countries were gathered in the dedicated fanzone having a singalong. Genuinely having a great time. Probably around 150 of us. English, Portuguese, Polish, German etc. all getting along.
The French police didn't like that for whatever reason. Out came the riot vans, batons and riot shields. They surrounded us in a circle, forcibly removed us from the fan zone, and literally shoved us down the metro - as in, folks were being pushed down flights of stairs. Plenty of injuries and blood.
Still not entirely sure what we'd even done. The police just seemed desperate for fight.
TimeTravelMishap t1_je2e8ne wrote
Of course not by American standards. Let the French police kill a protester. The French citizens would literally start launching nukes.
guitarmaniac17 t1_je2eqvc wrote
But we're Le tired sees head line of protestors death fire our shit
OblivionJunkie t1_je3sha6 wrote
Take a nap first though!
a_tiny_ant t1_je4qtss wrote
Then fire ze missiles!
kirk-o-bain t1_je31oiu wrote
Everywhere you go in the world the police exist to protect the interests of the rich
meh1434 t1_je4m7qh wrote
You seem to visit only shitholes countries, maybe it's time you start to pay attention.
Plenty of places in this world where the Police is just a normal dude.
cspruce89 t1_je3gn47 wrote
...duh... they're police.
Mrxcman92 t1_je47zew wrote
No shit. Police exist to serve the state and control its citizens. They themselves like to claim they serve the public but they always end up abusing the powers granted to them. Police everywhere love to beat up protesters, especially if they are left-wing protesters.
ektat_sgurd t1_je4o2yj wrote
I was reminded recently that the french police motto isn't "Protect and Serve", this is the US police motto.
In France the motto is "Law and Order". Quite not the same approach.
Also I'm surprised an US newspaper is shocked by France beating communists, usually they'd be congratulating France for that. :s
[deleted] t1_je30lue wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_je3daq3 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_je2ebbn wrote
[removed]
longrastaman t1_je30l09 wrote
Wow, downvoted for what?
meatismoydelicious t1_je3is5g wrote
Bots likely. Whoever doesn't like the freedom loving masses. Wouldn't be surprised if they're Chinese or Russian.
[deleted] t1_je3qqyf wrote
[removed]
MayaMiaMe t1_je3j3ht wrote
Probably just Russian trolls.. there are lots of them coming out of the woodwork. Maybe the rich are actually getting scared
meatismoydelicious t1_je5je9s wrote
One can only hope they are.
UpmostGenius t1_je54k48 wrote
If the majority of a country wants something and I’m not talking about 51%, im talking about an absolute majority. If the government can’t abide by this then the people are not represented and is not a democracy, it’s that simple.
potatoears t1_je414bp wrote
trying to out-American us.
RuinLoes t1_je4p677 wrote
Police being brutal political tools is not unqiue to the us.
Just_Goat5739 t1_je5u4dx wrote
Where's all the firefighters that hate the police? Seems like a good time for them to fight the police back with their water cannons !!
AutoModerator t1_je2btye wrote
Hi rein_deer7. Your submission from washingtonpost.com is behind a metered paywall. A metered paywall allows users to view a specific number of articles before requiring paid subscription. Articles posted to /r/worldnews should be accessible to everyone. While your submission was not removed, it has been flaired and users are discouraged from upvoting it or commenting on it. For more information see our wiki page on paywalls. Please try to find another source. If there is no other news site reporting on the story, contact the moderators.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
[deleted] t1_je2ql5x wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_je3372c wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_je3hf8i wrote
[removed]
mfomatratzen t1_je4nspk wrote
Protesters have weak skulls, study finds. Replicates give strong statistical evidence.
RuinLoes t1_je4p1ns wrote
Non.... la police est l'outil de la classe dirigeante.... pas de merde.....
[deleted] t1_je5p4cz wrote
[removed]
ThirdSunRising t1_je64wtn wrote
The fact that this has become a battle with fires and cops and injuries and everything makes no sense at all in a democracy when they're discussing a matter of public policy of interest to all. It obviously calls for a conversation and a democratic decision. But here we are.
amibeingadick420 t1_je8bbt9 wrote
Pigs gonna pig.
[deleted] t1_je40vj3 wrote
[removed]
TheMaskedTom t1_je4664r wrote
I have not heard of this happening in France. But then again the movements do not rely on external funding and don't have key leaders outside of unions. Not very comparable to the "freedom trucks" in Canada.
Anakinss t1_je47k1x wrote
Why would they ? There's very very few rich people even in favor of the protests, let alone who is behind those protests. What is the government gonna do, freeze a bank account with -49.30€ ?
Letsbebff t1_je48b8p wrote
Doesn't help when the organizers collecting money were a sons of odin leader (white supremacist group) racist truck company owner, and a woman who is politically involved in a separatist party.
If it was any other competent country they wouldve been arrested with a terrorist charge. Ironically, the truckers in Ontario are majority brown, yet you only saw white people there.
Sunniigod t1_je4dd91 wrote
My question is are the police also okay with working until a later age before retirement? If not, they might be on the wrong side of the line.
StarOceanPrincess t1_je4uyze wrote
Police are spared from the reform. It won’t affect them.
Sunniigod t1_je542fy wrote
Does it affect their husbands and wives, or their kids? What about their children’s children. Their incentive is short sighted.
AndrekinKimawa t1_je4c64x wrote
And protesters are all calm and behaving like ghandis?
ShinyHappyAardvark t1_je76lc4 wrote
Exactly. If I saw someone throwing a cinder block through a shop window, or setting a store on fire, fuck them. The store didn’t do anything to deserve that. I’d have the baton and pepper spray ready to go!
PurpD420 t1_je53pn9 wrote
The French bitch about everything, it’s almost like a national sport to riot and complain
erectedmidget t1_je5htfa wrote
Dumbass take hotshot
Kypsys t1_je58ehj wrote
Man it's up to you if you don't want better living conditions or just don't want to keep what your grand parents gave you in terms of social progress. But we do.
Alchemist2121 t1_je3ovsq wrote
They're using tear gas and arresting reporters. Where are the cries about war crimes?
aimgorge t1_je3vsvr wrote
It's not a war though. Tear gas are the least of worries. Riot guns and grenades are the dangerous ones
[deleted] t1_je40xz0 wrote
[removed]
QubitQuanta t1_je3zjkp wrote
This is okay because France is not Hong Kong. Warcrimes do apply to US allies.
Wild_Equus t1_je3oi3n wrote
Excessive force? I mean aren't they just matching the force used by the rioters?
Affectionate_Can7987 t1_je3zbal wrote
Nom nom boot
markthe t1_je3vsi0 wrote
I don't see any rioters with body armor and batons?
[deleted] t1_je585qe wrote
[removed]
ShinyHappyAardvark t1_je76s8l wrote
So? You don’t need either of those to be a violent asshole.
markthe t1_je7e2x0 wrote
Correct, but if you've got on body armor and are wielding a baton, you most definitely ARE a violent asshole.
aimgorge t1_je3vus3 wrote
Who has the more to gain by decredibilising protests with violence?
[deleted] t1_je76piy wrote
[removed]
Tonyhillzone t1_je2lid0 wrote
Excessive looting and destruction of property probably should be met with excessive force tbh.
😉
Edit: I support the protests. I support democracy. I support law abiding people.
I don't support thugs (police or protesters). I don't support criminals who destroy public or private property. Disagreeing with your elected government does not give anyone the right to be violent and destroy the property of innocent people.
FusRohBert t1_je3q40t wrote
There wasn't any destruction till the police shoot us dude
Tonyhillzone t1_je4xpoe wrote
Naturally violence shouldn't be used against any innocent person or group.
But honestly, if someone was setting fire to my car, home, or business, I'd use more than a little force and would be happy for the police to do the same.
Secondly, even if the police used excessive force against innocent protesters, that doesn't then give the protesters the right to go and destroy private property.
It wasn't the police burning cars, buildings or looting.
I support the protesters. I stop supporting individuals when they become thugs and dangerous criminals.
Drostan_S t1_je6zg37 wrote
Look I get it, you're a civilian. You don't have the heart to actualy take on the fight. You'd much rather go about your day without the interruption of the unwashed masses making a mess of the place because their ever decreasing quality of life is ignored.
Tonyhillzone t1_je77vv0 wrote
What exactly do you want people to do? Burn down the entire country to force the government to change their policy? Maybe kill a few people?
I'm pro-protesters. I'm just anti-vandals and thugs. Burning and looting isn't democracy, its thuggery.
And FYI, I've been arrested 4 times for being involved in protests, but I've never used violence or intimidation or engaged in wanton vandalism. I've also suceeded in helping to get a small change in Irish law in August 2008 by engaging with various politicians and putting forward a damn good argument based on facts and research. So I'm not afraid to actually do something.
MayaMiaMe t1_je3iwxh wrote
Right because it is perfectly ok to protect inanimate objects while STEALING peoples very lives. Cuz stealing lives is just ok right ? Fuck off
terminal_sarcasm t1_je3vjl7 wrote
Peoples livelihoods depend on those inanimate things, so yea
flappers87 t1_je3wyfl wrote
Destroying other people's property because you're angry at the government is NOT the way to go about it.
I mean, I support the protests. But I don't support setting buildings, cars on fire... attacking people and the general violence. It solves nothing.
What good does setting your neighbours car on fire do? How does that help the message that you're trying to send?
At the end of the day, there are the actual people protesting... and then there are people who are taking advantage of the situation by damaging property and being incredibly violent.
Yes, the government is trying to take 2 years away from the people (while still being one of the lowest retirement ages in Europe...). But these people are taking away - in some cases - more than 2 years of savings from others by destroying their property that they spent years on acquiring.
Why are you supporting violence against people and people's property?
Would you still be happy if a protester set your house on fire? Would you still be making such a nonsensical comment?
No you wouldn't. And I wouldn't believe you if you said otherwise.
This is a classic "I'm not affected by this, so I support it". Yeah... just wait till there's a violent protest in your neighbourhood and your shit gets set on fire.
There should be no violence from EITHER side. Violence never solves anything.
Lord_Viktoo t1_je4hs71 wrote
Yeah non-violent protesting doesn't solvz anything either. And neither does using the countey's democratic processes. So what do we do ? We say "too bad" and go home ?
NehEma t1_je45d47 wrote
Y'all are mixing private, public, and personal property that's wild...
No one's burning anybody's house. Destruction of personal property is rare af.
And what would you do if your "democratic" government tried so hard to pass a reform against 70% of your country's population (90% of workers) that blatantly helped corporations and disserved citizens? They didn't even manage to get token assentment from small businesses.
We fucking tried to make it go peacefully but through some regalian magic trick it didn't even get voted in the constituent assembly. So yeah we're thrashing against the bourgeoisie bc it's the only thing that seems to get us heard.
Piotrekk94 t1_je4kw6y wrote
What population wants and what needs to be done frequently doesn't match. French government seems to try make the economy at least a bit more competitive compared to other EU countries.
RuinLoes t1_je4onhm wrote
"We know whats good for you, so stop resisting"
Piotrekk94 t1_je4pkxj wrote
Resist all you want, even change retirement age to 60 or less, we'll see in 40 years which retirement policy was better.
RuinLoes t1_je4sr67 wrote
"We have tried nothing and we are all out of ideas"
Piotrekk94 t1_je4t165 wrote
"Let's eat the cake and have it too, rich will pay"
RuinLoes t1_je4w0f0 wrote
Thats not even the quote and not what it means.
Piotrekk94 t1_je4wrxx wrote
And what that means?
RuinLoes t1_je511nx wrote
Qu'est-ce que vous dites??
Piotrekk94 t1_je5ffal wrote
F*ench
RuinLoes t1_je5j2yb wrote
Oui, c'est le sujet.....
Tonyhillzone t1_je4z2qv wrote
If protesters that I support tried to burn my car (an inanimate object), I'd be more that happy to beat the crap out of them.
I support democracy. I support protests. I support the French people with this issue.
I do not support destruction of property (public or private) as a form of protest. It's criminal and it's morally wrong.
Frostbitten_Moose t1_je3t81x wrote
Considering each of those inanimate objects were made and bought with the proceeds of people spending their time, it's all shit that can be weighed on the same scale.
qtpnd t1_je3uwf1 wrote
People have been paid for the time they gave, they have been compensated already, there is no tie from the time spent to the object anymore.
Frostbitten_Moose t1_je419wj wrote
The people who built it, yes. The people who paid to currently own it? No.
That's a portion of their life being smashed.
qtpnd t1_je41g2k wrote
That's what insurance is for.
edit: but yeah I do agree that I misunderstood his first message.
Frostbitten_Moose t1_je41pld wrote
Insurance really isn't the magic fix people make it out to be. Not everything is insurable, having to deal with raising rates because of shit like this means having to spend more just to keep what you already have, and that's not including the fact that you need to spend time in order to get the insurance payout and then replace everything that got burned down.
And that's assuming it's practical to replace everything that got torched.
qtpnd t1_je424om wrote
Agreed.
flappers87 t1_je3x4f3 wrote
And if it was your house that got set on fire? What would you say then?
"Oh I already put time into developing my house and a safe place for my family... I don't need it anymore"?
Be real.
qtpnd t1_je3xyum wrote
That is not what is happening, so I don't see why I'd have to consider that situation. The only burning things are trashes and public furnitures with no one and no one's stuff inside.
And as someone whose house already burnt by accident and almost died in it, thank you for making me relive those memories...
flappers87 t1_je406dx wrote
I said something, and you tried to make it sound like I personally attacked you - like I know anything about your life...
Grow up. When you try to make it sound like you're being victimised because someone wrote a counter argument to your post, then you've already lost the argument.
And you're wrong. People's property are being destroyed.
Christ, they even set a town hall on fire, while there were people STILL INSIDE.
If you can't handle a discussion about these protests because it's triggering some form of PTSD, then perhaps you shouldn't be getting involved in the discussion.
qtpnd t1_je40uhb wrote
>And if it was your house that got set on fire?
I mean, you talked about MY house, so yeah I felt personnally attacked.
In my original answer I just pointed out that in our economies the compensation for your time spent is monetary, and in general once that has been paid you have no ties to the produtcs of your work anymore. You are the ones who right away jumped the ship and talked about something totally different, i.e. my house, that I paid with my money and that is then tied to me. And this is totally different from talking about objects that people spent time working on but then sold and where properly compensated for it.
For the town hall if you are talking about bordeux, it was only the door that leads to a courtyard in a building with multiple exits designed to safely get crowds of people out in case of an emergency. No one was at risk of death or serious injury, and people where more sad for the historical value of the gate than anything.
edit: rereading your original comment, I might even have misunderstood it, but you could have kept the discussion civilised and discuss that, instead of right away going the emotion way.
flappers87 t1_je41470 wrote
>I mean, you talked about MY house, so yeah I felt personnally attacked.
It was an example to show you being a hypocrite by supporting destruction of property while these protests don't affect you. If you felt "personally attacked" then you need to grow up and grow some thicker skin.
Since you can't have a discussion without feeling 'personally attacked' when there was CLEARLY no intention of that, then this thread is not worth continuing. I don't want you in tears because you decided to hop onto discussing a subject that triggers PTSD.
That sounds like a you-problem that you should deal with in your own time with a therapist, instead of taking it out on people on the internet.
qtpnd t1_je41ecb wrote
Ok, let's go this way, show me articles that talk about private housees being set on fire on purpose?
And I'm not sure I'm a hypocrite since I'm french and the public equipment being set on fire has been paid with my taxes, so it is mine in some way.
kleveinRipperThird t1_je44qtk wrote
The wink emoji is an excellent indicator of your maturity level. Make sure the teacher gives you an extra juice box at lunch time today.
[deleted] t1_je4whlg wrote
[removed]
Kypsys t1_je57uwh wrote
Yes because we all know that journalists and press are known for looting and rioting, this is why many of them have broken hands and faces !
Amazingawesomator t1_je2dpkr wrote
Why are the police protecting the person that just stole two years of their life away? That doesnt make sense to me....