Protesters in Barcelona have sprayed visitors with water as part of a demonstration against mass tourism.

Demonstrators marching through areas popular with tourists on Saturday chanted “tourists go home” and squirted them with water pistols, while others carried signs with slogans including “Barcelona is not for sale.”

Thousands of protesters took to the streets of the city in the latest demonstration against mass tourism in Spain, which has seen similar actions in the Canary Islands and Mallorca recently, decrying the impact on living costs and quality of life for local people.

The demonstration was organised by a group of more than 100 local organizations, led by the Assemblea de Barris pel Decreixement Turístic (Neighborhood Assembly for Tourism Degrowth).

  • claudiop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    And what I asked you was what they should do instead given that Catalonia will always be a minority.

    The last minority in Spain that was veeeeery unhappy started a diplomat space program. Is that the way?

    I also pointed out that this pacific-ish way of manifestation (cmon, this is not hard assaulting; more like attention grabbing) has done wonders for some movements in the past. Modern Netherlands were reborn out of people roadblocking “innocent people trying to go to work or trying to enjoy their off days” with bicycle protests.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Roadblocking is not entrapping or touching (even with a toy). (Provided road users are given a chance to safely divert without being trapped)

      Edit it seems like you think I think public protest isn’t practical or safe. I don’t feel that way. Protest is good, and safe protest is possible.

      I’m specifically focusing on a behavior: that of surrounding/hounding/bothering individuals, as this can intimidate them, and reduce their personal freedom, and disrespect their consent/bodily autonomy.

      I conclude by saying I get this is a “light-hearted” version, but I fundamentally disagree with it because normalizing this stuff makes it easier for more hatful people to get away with it in the future, on other, more inflammatory topics

      • claudiop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Roadblocking is not entrapping or touching (even with a toy)

        Yes, they are not. One of them leads to annoyances, the other leads to people losing their jobs or missing their connections. Everything is a matter of cost-benefit. If a major annoyance once might do country-wide changes, then that’s maybe worth doing.

        I would, at best, classify this as a minor annoyance. I understand this to be a largely cultural thing. I personally don’t care much if people interact with me that way. I wouldn’t even call it a rare thing; it happens a lot outside of protests.

        that of surrounding/hounding/bothering individuals, as this can intimidate them

        That’s… the entire point? Those fellas want to create this idea that tourists are not welcome without actually harming them. That’s precisely the goal. If that’s the idea you got out of this then the protest just worked.

        and disrespect their consent/bodily autonomy

        Ehhh, big meh. There are waaaaay worse experiences in that regard in a “tourist’s life”. For example you have this “mandatory tourist thing” to do in Lisbon which is to ride the tram 28. You can hardly find an online picture of what it actually looks but it basically is equivalent to putting 15 clowns in a mini. The kind of crammed where people get troubles breathing. Barcelona has their equivalents as well.

        Tourists aren’t supposed to feel their bodily autonomy harmed from this; they are supposed to feel that they’re not welcome.

        normalizing this stuff makes it easier for more hatful people to get away with it in the future

        Of course that hate-twats will try to capitalize on every opportunity to erode freedoms, however, in my opinion, there are quuuuuuuuuuuuite a few steps between this particular event and that scenario.

        Quite some southern cities even have this without the protests. It is very common for people to attach water misters to buildings. Those spray people passing them without asking for any consent. Just so happens that they feel great during the hot days.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          We just fundamentally disagree on this.

          Your “minor annoyance” could be someone else’s trigger for past serious trauma.

          This is hypothetical, but calling an invasion of personal space and consent a minor annoyance is like saying “oh it’s just a little kiss, come on, give me a kiss”. Sure, a kiss never killed anybody, but we can agree it’s inappropriate to do so without consent right?

          To be clear I’m not suggesting you ever did that, or that a water gun is the same. I’m sharing a hypothetical to illuminate the core concept: the invasion of personal space is an issue.

          I conclude by saying political goals should be completed WITHOUT needing to do that.

          • claudiop@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            I think it is fair to let the local populations set what they consider to be fair or minor. In other comment thread (https://lemmy.world/comment/11138636) I actually bothered looking up the law and, I don’t think that this even considered in criminal law. At least in Portugal there’s no “assault” and the equivalent doesn’t cover this ; Spain is probably the same.

            In Japan it is minor to have a station officer force push you into a train. That could be someone’s trigger for past serious trauma.

            This is hypothetical, but calling an invasion of personal space and consent a minor annoyance is like saying “oh it’s just a little kiss, come on, give me a kiss”. Sure, a kiss never killed anybody, but we can agree it’s inappropriate to do so without consent right?

            One of those is a sexual offense, the other is mostly speech. 5ml of water in the summer heat do not physically affect most people any more than a megaphone would, and this is where law gets muddy. Law doesn’t penalize sound waves (below 120db), farts or whatever things that happen without solid-to-solid contact, but the moment there’s some physical contact, no matter how light, some people in some jurisdictions go crazy.

            If I touch you to grab your attention like “hey buddy, you lost this”, I’m technically touching you and that could evoke some weird past trauma, but since the intent is not to cause harm I could never get hooked over that.

            I conclude by saying political goals should be completed WITHOUT needing to do that.

            Ideally, however neither your thread nor the other thread where I’m talking presented any example on how to solve this without causing bigger troubles. The “people in Barcelona are mean” stereotype is one of the least damaging things they can do to themselves. Quotas & such are terrible for several reasons and ofc that everyone argues that the individual is never responsible for anything they chose to do with their money.

            • GBU_28@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              I don’t think we will come to alignment.

              I just don’t think it’s ok to point a gun (I know a toy) at someone and put something (water) on them. That can trigger people.

              What if it’s not water? What if someone thinks it’s a real gun (even for a second)?

              And if they make an attempt to leave from some risk/fear (real or perceived), they can’t, because they are surrounded.

              • claudiop@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                That can trigger people.

                I don’t consider ok to cause real panic to people. I also don’t quite imagine that to be a common thing and I imagine that the crowd to stop if anyone starts looking not ok. That crowd is not trying to harm people at all, they’re trying to get mediatic attention to spread a message that they need to take less tourists. That’s what the first image in the article is saying (in Catalan). It is not saying “no tourists”, it is asking for “reduction of tourism”.

                With this said, literally anything can be a trigger. A guy with a megaphone can very well be a trigger.

                What if it’s not water?

                The other fella I was arguing with said that acid attacks are a common thing in other parts of the world. I had zero clue. I also imagine that it would float this from “totally not a crime, just an annoyance” to “you’re going to be locked behind bars”. That’s what I’d wish if someone did that; it is obviously not ok to give pain and lifelong consequences to someone who’s maybe lacks consideration.

                What if someone thinks it’s a real gun (even for a second)?

                Have you looked at the pictures in the article? I don’t quite think that people would confuse a crowd with those to be a crowd with guns. Nothing in the context matches out. Not the looks of people. Not the place because Iberia barely has guns.

                If they come from a place where everything can be seen as a gun, they can vote for that not to be the case. We don’t need to stack up the considerations to appease literally every possible culture and cultural problem in the world. Zero people who in here are afraid of guns (except for the colonial fighters).

                If you’re afraid of clowns, don’t visit the circus.

                And if they make an attempt to leave from some risk/fear (real or perceived), they can’t, because they are surrounded.

                That would be the case for any other protest. Is independent of the water thing.

                Mobs can be scary. They also tend to be very predictable. If your senses tell you that you have been hearing “fuck tourists” for the last 5 minutes and that there’s a huge crowd coming in you direction, well, balance that our with your fear of crowds.

                  • claudiop@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    5 months ago
                    1. From a legal standpoint, this was a protest. I can pretty much assure you that the authorities knew that this was going to take place and were close by. Illegal protests get done pretty quickly. Just the fact that they are walking banners in the middle of a road is a clear giveaway.
                    2. The generality of what you said applies to both mobs and protests. You don’t seem to have a problem with it happening in protests. Don’t people get surrounded by protests? Don’t people in protests carry objects that can be perceived to be guns?