4 ms·
Compare the current situation with how the Occupy Wall Street protestors were treated. What you are describing is the state siding with the supporters. They'r
by dsfyu404ed 7y ago
Compare the current situation with how the Occupy Wall Street protestors were treated.
What you are describing is the state siding with the supporters. They're doing the nominal minimum to enforce the law and they know that's not enough. If the state wanted to side with the TMT people then the protestors would be arrested whether there's facilities for them or not. You're right it won't be built in Hawaii. The state has sided with the opposition.
- Fej 7y agoThis is a great explanation. If the state sided with the scientists then I would have expected flashbang grenades and tear gas.
- cglee 7y agoThis is a disgusting comment. I have family members at the protest site. They are non-violent Americans protesting what they believe in.
- aeorgnoieang 7y agoThat's not a charitable interpretation of the comment to which you're replying. They didn't state that they wished or wanted or preferred that that happen, merely that it not happening effectively reveals the limits of the state's 'desires'.
- PopePompus 7y agoBut I think it's worse than that. The state is still claiming (as of yesterday) that they will ensure that the TMT equipment can get to the summit. The Governor declared a state of emergency yesterday, to give the police more power. He has activated the National Guard. Additional police have been brought in from Oahu. But in reality, the state is not doing anything effective. So you might be right that the state has effectively sided with the protestors, but it makes no sense for the state to behave as it is. The state is just looking impotent and ridiculous.
- DanielBMarkham 7y agoTake the issue off the table. I'm a huge TMT supporter, but I don't know where it should go. Instead look at the drivers from the political level. Remember that political systems exist for political reasons. Group X wants something done. Group Y doesn't want it done. There is a political street-level fight. Group X continues to support you as long as you say the right thing. Group Y not only supports you, it draws in major national and international news coverage. As the fight drags on, then, you get more and more support. So why should it be any other way than the way it is? From a political marketing standpoint, this is a buzz generator. If you play your cards right, you can actually appear to be on both sides of this issue at the same time. The longer it drags on the more support you get, the more you energize the base. I don't see this resolving any time soon, and I completely agree that it's unconscionable what's going on here. But whatever is going on, it's going on for logical reasons for those allowing it to be this way. There may be corruption in the way decisions are made, but there's no incompetence here that I can see.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago>but it makes no sense for the state to behave as it is. The state is just looking impotent and ridiculous. It makes perfect sense if you think looking incompetent is better than looking like you're supporting something that will lose you votes.