Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone

capitolhillautonomous.zone

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 920 posts

Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone

#51

Post by rayiner »

yingw787 wrote: post #7

I wonder if it's bigger than Sealand: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand When I look at the list of demands I'm pretty quick to dismiss it. Then I remember how I dismissed the 1999 WTO protests in Seattle too, and how many of the fears those protesters had were realized over the next two decades. I might be too hopeful, but I really think the city leadership should talk to them and hear them out, i…

The list of demands is extremely tame for a fricking anarchist commune. Look at the list of "economic demands." The biggest ask is de-gentrification and rent control.

Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone

#52

Post by jdhn »

Minor49er wrote: post #18

Seattle doesn't want to be beaten by Minneapolis to becoming the next Detroit

As someone who currently lives near Detroit, the city is faring remarkably well in light of everything that's been going on. I haven't heard anything about rioters, just people who are peacefully protesting.

Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone

#53

Post by balls187 »

kf wrote: post #20
Trasmatta wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His threat to use the Insurrection Act last week was one of the most unpopular acts of his entire presidency, and directly led to the major rebukes from people like Mattis. So I doubt it.

While that’s a fair point, this situation is a more literal insurrection than the previously seen protests and taking of goods from stores. CHAZ has declared their independence from the USA and historically that kind of thing is really not allowed. Has Trump so thoroughly lost control that secession is legal now?

They haven't actually declared themselves independent from the US.

That blurb on the website "You are now leaving the USA" is tongue in cheek.

The actual demands make no such claim about independence, all US Federal, State, and Local laws still apply.

There will eventually be arrests, and the WORST thing Trump can do is attempt to use the military to squash relatively peaceful protests.

Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone

#55

Post by KozmoNau7 »

blaser-waffle wrote: post #8

I believe Denmark had something like this for a while. It started with squatters taking over an area kind of like this. Turned into a serious drug venue and eventually fell apart. Sounds like it sort of restarted, albeit with regular Danish law enforcement and other city resources. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freetown_Christiania

> Turned into a serious drug venue and eventually fell apart. Sounds like it sort of restarted, albeit with regular Danish law enforcement and other city resources.

As someone living in Copenhagen, I would not consider that anything near an accurate description of the history of Christiania. What happened was that an old military area and barracks was left abandoned and disused, so a group of squatters moved in, fixed up the place and built a community.

It did not turn into a "serious drug venue". They had issues with hard drugs in the 1970s, but kicked all of that to the curb and there is a strict community-supported ban on all hard drugs. Over the years various sellers have popped up here and there, but they are generally shunned and chased out by the community.

It also did not "fall apart", although it has had its ups and downs. The political winds have varied from indifference to acceptance to attempts to abolish the entire things, raze the area and built apartments. The current state is that the area is owned by a foundation and is treated partly as a part of the city of Copenhagen and partly as an independent enclave. Danish law enforcement is grudgingly accepted in cases of actual crimes, but otherwise not exactly openly welcomed.

Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone

#56

Post by smkellat »

kf wrote: post #4

So my question: will Trump quickly and lethally invoke the Insurrection act? Will the Joint Chiefs comply or create a constitutional crisis? If this isn’t shut down quickly, I predict we see a national movement like this by Juneteenth.

From 10 USC 253:

“ The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it—

“(1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or

“(2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

“In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.”

I don’t know. Without sufficient intel as to what is happening on the ground I wouldn’t know if civil rights are being denied. If they are and the local authorities are cooperating with the rebellious group then there might be a way to utilize the act. It is just too soon to tell.

Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone

#57

Post by Taikonerd »

kf wrote: post #20
Trasmatta wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His threat to use the Insurrection Act last week was one of the most unpopular acts of his entire presidency, and directly led to the major rebukes from people like Mattis. So I doubt it.

While that’s a fair point, this situation is a more literal insurrection than the previously seen protests and taking of goods from stores. CHAZ has declared their independence from the USA and historically that kind of thing is really not allowed. Has Trump so thoroughly lost control that secession is legal now?

I think the Seattle Police are thinking, "these are a bunch of kids who want to play-act La Revolución. If we just ignore them for a week, they'll get bored or disillusioned and go home."

So the police aren't going to storm the barricades -- they figure they won't have to.

Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone

#58

Post by [deleted] »

Pfhreak wrote: post #40
jerf wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, not even remotely "by all accounts". There are plenty of accounts that isn't "cool and unique" but is just another place ruled by violent thugs: https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/h077uv/raz_simone_... I'm not passing judgment yet since the days are young and the political bias on the ground is thick in both directions. But it is definitely not "by all accounts". But my personal bias on the table is that y…

I watched that video, I saw someone coming in and defacing peoples homes. The people filming asked if they had permission, then asked the person to stop. The person refused to stop painting and pushed the group of folks and there was a scuffle that ended with the tagger walking away. Aside, intentionally or unintentionally, calling a group of predominantly black people "thugs" is a common dog whistle.

[deleted]

Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone

#59

Post by dawg- »

Their first demand is that the Seattle Police Department be abolished, as in 100% defunded, as in completely deleted. Coming out with a demand like that is just asking to lose right off the bat.

I wish they would delete it and stick with their second demand - take all weapons away from police. No guns, no batons, no tasers. It's also crazy, but at least it's crazy in a "this might just be crazy enough to work" kind of way.

Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone

#60

Post by ncallaway »

tomschlick wrote: post #29
ncallaway wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The list of demands came from an open mic discussion. They let anyone come up and suggest a demand. Someonen transcribed those demands and then posted them. I think it would be better to view those demands as the union of demands of each person willing to speak to a crowd. Which is why you see inconsistency in then, why it's such a long list, etc. I just think that list of demands is better understood in that context…

Its not a list of demands if it's ridiculous and can't be realistically filled. At that point its just a list of wishes.

Okay. You can semantically call it whatever you want!

I'm just trying to give some additional context to how this list of (demands|wishes) came about.

If you view it as a single list of (demands|wishes) it doesn't make as much sense. If you view it as the (demands|wishes) from a wide variety of people, that were made on an open mic at a protest that was transcribed, then categorized, then posted to the internet, it's easier to understand what it is.

There are organized protest leaders that have curated their list of demands and put it out. This very much isn't that! This is basically the raw list of demands from a wide variety of different speakers. The only editing was in the transcription and the categorization of those demands.

Post reply on HN