The
way the police and media responded to the anarchists of Europe and the way they
respond to today’s racial conflicts are very similar. The anarchists and today’s
groups look for social justice and to vocalize their issues. The police interpret
it as a threat to a peaceful social order and feel the need to squash it
immediately and the media looks to sensationalize it for their own personal
gains.
During the time of the anarchist
movement the police, specifically in Europe, were not properly trained to
combat the anarchists, and often made the situation worst. The police used brutal
tactics but, this was counter productive, as it only helped spread the
anarchists influence. One of the last countries in Europe to understand how to
deal with such attacks was Spain. “…the Spanish government’s policy of brutally
and arbitrarily repressing dissent and strike activity and its failure to
develop an effective policing apparatus, explain the continued incidence in the
Iberian Peninsula of extreme forms of political violence,” (Jensen, 2009, p.
100).
This is very similar to the way modern day police tactics
are used. In the United States there is an increase in use of force. One of the
aspects of the force is the militarization of the police. This creates more of
an “us versus them” mentality. Maria Haberfeld, a professor at John Jay College
of Criminal Justice said, “[m]ilitary
equipment is used against an enemy. So if you give the same equipment to local
police, by default you create an environment in which the public is perceived
as an enemy,” (Doherty, 2017, pp. 39). This does not solve the issue of the
violence, and instead pushes the two groups further apart.
During the Anarchist movement, there were many isolated
attacks by people who may not have been directly affiliated with the anarchist
movement. The anarchists were a confusing organization due to their belief that
everyone was equal and there was no one person who was more powerful than
another. This made it difficult to keep track of all members and orchestrate well
planned attacks. The media also played a role in the terror by spreading the
news of attacks making it sound like the anarchists were much more powerful
than they actually were, “…misperceptions and sensationalism of the popular
media once again collaborated to reinforce the picture of a mighty
international conspiracy undermining the entire established order,” (Jensen,
2004, pp.125). This was not accurate and created more fear than was necessary.
The same is also true for the Black Lives Matter
movement. Although some see them as a violent group, as a whole, the group condemns
the use of violence. An instance of this was the shooting in Dallas, Texas,
where five police officers were killed during a Black Lives Matter rally. The
ambush was done by only one man, and was condemned by organizers of the rally.
Jeff Hood, a Black Lives matter organizer in Dallas, was at the rally during
the shooting. After the shooting he said, “This is
a devastating time for us as activists and organizers. We cannot bring about justice
through violence,” (Reeves & Whack, 2016). This shows that the violence
committed by one hurts the rest of the group because of the negative
connotations. The media spreads this false view and others start to view the
whole group as violent.
Although the ideology of the two
movements is very different, how they were dealt with by the police and how
they were portrayed by the media was very similar. This shows that although there
will always be opposing groups in society, the problem with how violence is
reduced still stands, as well as how the media causes problems by spreading aggregated
fear. This just increases violence and increases the misunderstanding and
miscommunication between different social groups.
Work Cited
DOHERTY, J. B.
(2016). US VS. THEM: THE MILITARIZATION OF AMERICAN LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND THE PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECT ON
POLICE OFFICERS & CIVILIANS. Southern California Interdisciplinary Law
Journal, 25(2), 1-51.
REEVES, J.,
& Whack, E. Black lives matter condemns Dallas shootings, plans
protests. Retrieved February 25, 2017, from http://bigstory.ap.org/article/dae6c38b396f400b93d0ccf0c4289b10/leaders-black-lives-matter-condemn-violence-dallas
Jensen, R. (2004): DAGGERS, RIFLES AND DYNAMITE:
ANARCHIST TERRORISM IN NINETEENTH
CENTURY EUROPE, Terrorism and
Political Violence, 16:1, 116-153
Jensen, R. (2004): DAGGERS, RIFLES AND DYNAMITE: ANARCHIST
TERRORISM
IN NINETEENTH CENTURY EUROPE, Terrorism and Political Violence, 16:1, 116-153
Hi Alex, you did a really good job discussing this similarity and I enjoyed reading your post. It got me wondering if you see similar parallels to our response to Islamic terrorism to that of anarchy? In many respects our "War on Terror" has been very counterproductive as in with the cases of anarchy and racial conflicts. Our media has catered this through its biased news coverage molding our perspectives to supporting our nation's approach. Do you feel as if our response to terrorism needs to be reformed as it was with anarchy? If so, what do you think needs to be changed?
ReplyDeleteHi Alex! Great post! I really liked the way that you addressed the militarization of the police force and how that is making the relationship between law enforcement and citizens so much worse as it is continuously separating us further and further apart. I think that the media's role in shaping our perspective is a tremendous issue. I notice it myself as I have become aware how subject I am to being gullible when it comes to the media and the government telling me who I should like and who I should dislike. I think the fact that we are not on an equal playing field with the police makes a huge difference. Furthermore, some people are biased towards certain groups, such as the police force, if they have family members in these groups. Do you have any ideas as to how we could lessen the biases and make the arguments more grounded on facts rather than emotion and rage? And is there any reasonable way we could do the same thing when it comes to terrorism and terrorists?
ReplyDelete