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).

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

    I propose not targeting individuals with a mob.

    I propose turning that group back from a mob, into a protest, and getting in the government’s face.

    Like, the tourists walked into a door marked: “free candy, please come in. Yes, you!”, then once through, are told “how dare you, we have so little candy for ourselves”. They can’t undo that they walked through the door. They were invited through. The folks inside should instead take the issue up with whoever put the sign on the door, and work to take that down.

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

      I propose turning that group back from a mob, into a protest, and getting in the government’s face.

      Has happened, hundreds of times. Zero effect. Governments couldn’t love anything more but free money that comes independently of the well being of their citizens. Dutch disease 2.0. Plus, the Madrid government isn’t exactly known for attending Catalonia’s needs. For some reason they tried to declare independence 9999 times in these last decades.

      The folks inside should instead take the issue up with whoever put the sign on the door, and work to take that down.

      Well, having a reputation for being annoying towards tourists is a sign by itself. And put yourself in the shoes of those fellas. What can they realistically do if the democratic process doesn’t cut? Should they just abandon their land?

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

        What they can’t (shouldn’t ) do is popularize mob justice by harassing (legally) innocent people.

        • 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.