Pepper Spray, Tear Gas, and Rubber Bullets: A Witches’ Brew of Toil and Trouble

2020 ◽  
Vol 138 (12) ◽  
pp. 1319
Author(s):  
Julia A. Haller
Keyword(s):  
Tear Gas ◽  
Author(s):  
Jodi Rios

This interlude details the death of eighteen-year-old Michael Brown Jr., who was shot by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson on August 9, 2014. Several witnesses of the shooting claim that Brown had had his hands above his head at the time he was shot. For over an hour, Brown remained uncovered with an increasing trail of blood moving down the street as his body bled out. As time went on, more people began arriving at the scene from across the St. Louis region, as did law enforcement officials. The Ferguson and St. Louis County police departments struggled to secure the area, and many people later reported that it was unclear who was in charge. Continued protests, arrests, and militarized police responses, which included repeated use of tear gas and the firing of rubber bullets into the crowd, escalated over the following days. Many people who witnessed Brown in the street recalled specific ways in which the image of his body conveyed their own vulnerability—as people out of place. Most viewed his death as a lynching. Residents also spoke of a disturbing irony they had long felt but saw play out before them on that day: their experience of being targeted, harassed, and regarded as less than human by those who simultaneously practice a most extreme inhumanity.


Author(s):  
Herman Wasserman

This chapter provides an overview of the literature on conflict, democratization, and the media and positions the book within key debates in the field. The chapter explains the book’s approach to the topic of media and conflict from the angle of democratization and social transition and provides an overview of the key arguments made throughout the book. The chapter also introduces key questions regarding the media’s ethical responsibilities in times of conflict and crisis. These questions are complicated by the rise of social media platforms and the widening of access to content production and curation by media users. The chapter argues that conflict provides a lens through which to examine the media’s relationship to publics, politics, and society in a globalized world.


2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Genevieve Barrons

For the last decade, a debate has raged over the place of social media within popular uprisings. The 2011 Egyptian revolution shed new light on this debate. However, while the use of social media by Egyptians received much focus, and activists themselves pointed towards it as the key to their success, social media did not constitute the revolution itself, nor did it instigate it. Focusing solely on social media diminishes the personal risks that Egyptians took when heading into the streets to face rubber bullets and tear gas, as well as more lethal weapons. Social media was neither the cause nor the catalyst of the revolution; rather it was a tool of coordination and communication.


2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 895-897 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip N. Howard

Since early 2011 there have been significant changes in North Africa and the Middle East. Zine El Abidine Ben Ali had ruled Tunisia for 20 years, and Hosni Mubarak reigned in Egypt for 30 years. Yet their bravest challengers were 20- and 30-year-olds without ideological baggage, violent intentions, or clear leaders. Political change in these countries inspired activists across the region. Some tough authoritarian governments responded with tear gas and rubber bullets, others with policy concessions, welfare spending, and cabinet shuffles. The groups that initiated and sustained protests had few meaningful experiences with public deliberation or voting, and little experience with successful protesting. These young citizens were politically disciplined, pragmatic, and collaborative. Where did they come from? How do young people growing up in modern, entrenched, authoritarian regimes find political inspirations and aspirations? Are digital media important parts of the contemporary recipe for democratization?


2000 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Bayne

THE THIRD MINISTERIAL MEETING OF THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION (WTO), held in Seattle from 30 November to 3 December 1999, was a resounding failure. It was intended to launch a new round of multilateral trade negotiations, in succession to the Uruguay Round which had ended seven years before. But even before it could begin, the proceedings were disrupted by massive demonstrations. Central Seattle became a war zone, with tear gas and rubber bullets, and then a ghost town, with empty streets and boarded-up windows. Inside the conference hall the atmosphere was little better. The conference chair (Charlene Barshefsky, US Special Trade Representative) and the WTO Director-General (Mike Moore, new in office) were booed in open session. In the end, the ministerial meeting was suspended with nothing agreed, only an exhortation from the chair ‘to take time out’ in the hope of resolving disagreements and reconvening later.This article looks at what went wrong and why and what will be needed in future. It contrasts the failure at Seattle with the undoubted achievements of the international trade system in the 1990s. It examines three possible causes of failure: disruption by NGOs; organizational weakness in the WTO; and errors of government. Of these three, it finds governments most to blame. Governments generally, but especially the United States and the European Union, have not grasped the full extent of the demands placed on them by the advance of globalization. Seattle was a setback but need not be a disaster – provided governments correct the errors that allowed it to happen.


2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Erdem Aytaç ◽  
Luis Schiumerini ◽  
Susan Stokes

Elected governments sometimes deal with protests by authorizing the police to use less-lethal tools of repression: water cannons, tear gas, rubber bullets, and the like. When these tactics fail to end protests and instead spark larger, backlash movements, some governments reduce the level of violence but others increase it, causing widespread injuries and loss of life. We study three recent cases of governments in new democracies facing backlash movements. Their decision to scale up or scale back police repression reflected the governments’ levels of electoral security. Secure governments with relatively unmovable majorities behind them feel freer to apply harsh measures. Less secure governments, those with volatile electoral support, contemplate that their hold on power might weaken should they inflict very harsh treatment on protesters; they have strong incentives to back down. Our original survey research and interviews with civilian authorities, police officials, and protest organizers in Turkey, Brazil, and Ukraine allow us to evaluate this explanation as well as a number of rival accounts. Our findings imply that elected governments that rest on very stable bases of support may be tempted to deploy tactics more commonly associated with authoritarian politics.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsty Robertson
Keyword(s):  

2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 672-679 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arne Midtbø
Keyword(s):  

1942 ◽  
Vol 54 (12) ◽  
pp. 319-321 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOHN T. INGRAM
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document