Proposed law could allow authorities to charge protesters with "economic terrorism"


#1

Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2016/11/22/proposed-law-could-allow-autho.html


#2

The first of many petitions, I think but umm…yeah. The trouble is that the US government is currently chock full of lawmakers who absolutely love this shit, and are deeply ensconced within a culture that reinforces such thinking quite powerfully.

Personally? I don’t think anything short of mass demonstrations will dent this law.

And even then.


#3

But really, don’t we already have that? See: the difference in treatment between Bundy and his crew and the pipeline protestors. Imagine how much worse things would get if they actually codified it into law…


#4

This is because he is pissed off that protestors have been blocking trains going to refineries in his district.

And Gov. Inslee would presumably just veto this if it somehow got through the Dem-majority state house.


#5

Thanks tRump!


#6

You bring up a great point. When are we going to do something about the serious problem of legislative terrorism?

And even though I know it might not be popular to say it around here, we all know that it’s a certain type of person who commits these acts of legislative terrorism…


#7

That’s exactly the point, and always has been: these lawmakers want to warp the systems of governance to alter the social fabric of society itself, in the mistaken belief that people need to be locked down in as many ways as possible for their own good and the good of civilization.

You know, given the cheapness of purchasing senators and such, I wonder if there isn’t some sort of cultish thing going on, where belief holds as much sway as currency in washington?


#8

'merica, freeiest goodest county ever!

/s


#9

Bigly

writing down here again to make BB happy


#10

I read the headline and thought “I suppose that’s in America. No, wait it could be the UK … huh, I wonder which it is.”^

It didn’t occur to me that the proposed law could be from, say, Germany, or Russia, or Iran, or China, or Zimbabwae, or Hong Kong, or North Korea.^^ I think that probably says something about the state of democracy in the west.

^ also, clickbait :mad:
^^ No, I don’t think the German govt is the moral equivalent of DPRK. I was just pondering their reputation for order and efficiency, and Germany’s traditional favouring of the konzern.


#11

And here we have the hyperbolic use of the word “terrorism” to push an agenda. Pretty soon, being slow with your coffee order will be considered “consumer terrorism”.


#12

This is the only effective response. There are other methods, including wildcat general strikes, that cannot be touched with this law and are far more devastating economically that should also be employed, preferably beforehand, to demonstrate that the alternative is less desireable.


#13

I see what you did there.


#14

They can propose all the laws that want. Without a constitutional convention called for by 34 states, these lawmakers do not have the power to enact such legislation.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

It seems to me that the correct way to counter this sort of idiocy is to publicly make fun of lawmakers who do not understand how the constitution works.


#15

Did you notice this is not a law, not even a bill? It’s the bright idea of one legislator in a notoriously sane state. The sponsor will probably never introduce the bill. If he does, it will probably never see a vote. If it does, it will fail. Even if it passes, it is a prima facie First Amendment violation. Even crazy justices like Thomas would strike it down, or who was Trump planning to appoint again? Kim Kardashian?


#16

Very troubling but not at all surprising. There are plenty of pols (I will assume mostly republican) that are absolutely fine with the perverse erosion of civil liberties (free speech zones, anyone?). It has always seemed that they saw most freedoms in this country that pushed the bounds of their christian morals as a threat to the very fabric of society. These are the same folks that have no qualms about legislating laws that dictate their morals on everyone else. They use and pervert the laws to this end. Economic terrorist? F**k that grey slippery slope. Someone mentioned above legislative terrorism. That I can get behind but, geez, the cards are so stacked against.

Are we at a point yet where we can declare no confidence in the government?


#17

Not sure I’d go that far. It has a notoriously sane city in it but the state itself is a bit iffy. The House and Senate are near as damn it 50:50.


#18

You say that as if the current congress, senate, President and (soon to be) Supreme Court would actually give a fuck about what the constitution actually says.

Also, easy to see 34 states getting behind this. There are already 32 GOP controlled governments state legislatures.


#19

We are free to choose our soda and our wireless providers.


#20

Believe the autocrat. He means what he says.