Current Events > People against protesting really believe nothing is important

(+) Yeah! (+)

voldothegr8 posted...

Americans would burn the country down too if the government was somehow able to fuck up most people's retirement, at least directly like how France operates. Again, completely different scenarios.

You'll find that the US government has done significantly worse than mess up people's retirement, although that is also on the chopping block. In addition, congress consistently refuses to pass policies that have overwhelming support among the people in favour of assisting the elites instead. This was literally the sort of thing that lead to the American Revolution in the first place.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

...the goal is more than just getting people talking.

I feel like the topic is just spinning in circles at this point

reincarnator07 posted...

...the goal is more than just getting people talking.

do you have any examples of it working though? Or even what it is?

like even seen change from the fallout of protests, and weve seen change come from plenty of strikes and target protests.

But when it comes to general public protesting whats the value added for the cause? Not saying its wrong just trying to work through the concept myself as it seems to usually hurt more than help.

Zeeak4444 posted...

I mean thats really just your opinion. One could argue thats reason to believe protesting works against your cause instead.

and get off your high horse, people can ask if its ever worked without being against it. I was at the protests that ended up burning down my hometown of La Mesa, so get the fuck out of here with your bullshit, probably havent even protested yourself as you sit here talking.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/gallery/photos-looting-rioting-hit-la-mesa-after-protest-turns-violent

It's really not my opinion but I fully expect the anti-protest people around here to take the stance that it should, makes it really easy to object to the protests they don't like.

Anyways, be as annoyed with me as you want, I'm not taking some moral high ground, I'm just pointing out really stupidly obvious shit about how protest works and a bunch of you don't want to hear it because you apparently hate being inconvenienced.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Non-disruptive protest rarely gets any real discussion going, it rarely sticks around. The more disruptive the protest the more likely the message is to spread and get national or international attention. I'm so tired of repeating myself but seriously, just read up about the civil rights movement, woman's sufferage, workers rights from like the 1800s.

I get it, nobody likes their lives being disrupted but that's completely irrelevant to the fact that disruptive protest works at spreading word of the cause far better than quiet protest off in some corner where we can all ignore it so we can all ignore it thank you very much.

And again, if you make peaceful protest impossible you'll get violent protest in time and that's a hell of a lot more disruptive.

Enclave posted...

It's really not my opinion but I fully expect the anti-protest people around here to take the stance that it should, makes it really easy to object to the protests they don't like.

Anyways, be as annoyed with me as you want, I'm not taking some moral high ground, I'm just pointing out really stupidly obvious shit about how protest works and a bunch of you don't want to hear it because you apparently hate being inconvenienced.

Non-disruptive protest rarely gets any real discussion going, it rarely sticks around. The more disruptive the protest the more likely the message is to spread and get national or international attention. I'm so tired of repeating myself but seriously, just read up about the civil rights movement, woman's sufferage, workers rights from like the 1800s.

I get it, nobody likes their lives being disrupted but that's completely irrelevant to the fact that disruptive protest works at spreading word of the cause far better than quiet protest off in some corner where we can all ignore it so we can all ignore it thank you very much.

And again, if you make peaceful protest impossible you'll get violent protest in time and that's a hell of a lot more disruptive.

you keep saying this bunch of you shit.

bro I posted one thing which was a general question if anyone had examples of it working. Sorry that seems to mean against any forms of protest to you for some reason.

hockeybub89 posted...

Anyone who feels less supportive of LGBTQ people because a few of them blocked their commute one day is a piece of shit.

Good thing I didnt say that and your response is simply looking for a way to say I'm a piece of shit because we disagree about what methods of protest work to achieve goals.

Goddamn. You're a piece of work.

hockeybub89 posted...

If they're that big of bastards, then it sounds like no protest will ever be effective to motivate them and I guess things are just fucked.

Don't be defeatist.

Just because one tactic isn't working means that none of them will.

If you lot still insist on underhanded tactics, try getting a CEO's e-mail and try to set them up for something.

Given this day and age, a greyhat is a more better example of a way to make people reconsider their actions.

The line is drawn when protestors block high traffic areas. Notably freeways. No one can listen and respect you when they need to travel to get to work, family, emergencies, etc. People's jobs and lives are on the line.

Arcanine2009 posted...

The line is drawn when protestors block high traffic areas. Notably freeways. No one can listen and respect you when they need to travel to get to work, family, emergencies, etc. People's jobs and lives are on the line.

there is no line when it comes to protesting! although what is justice...

Nothing says "I support the cause" like "unless you inconvenience me"

hockeybub89 posted...

Nothing says "I support the cause" like "unless you inconvenience me"

Hard to believe I know, but you can support a cause and still be against jackasses who drag it into a negative light.

DementedDurian posted...

Don't be defeatist.

Just because one tactic isn't working means that none of them will.

If you lot still insist on underhanded tactics, try getting a CEO's e-mail and try to set them up for something.

Given this day and age, a greyhat is a more better example of a way to make people reconsider their actions.

Society probably just needs to be disrupted even harder. No one ever got rights or changed the world by screwing with someone's email.

Things are going to get worse and that will just mean more unrest and more people crossing the line into underhanded tactics.

voldothegr8 posted...

Hard to believe I know, but you can support a cause and still be against jackasses who drag it into a negative light.

The people who view it in a negative light were never going to be on your side. No one stops believing in something because some individual jackass did something bad in the name of it. If that was the typical case, no one would believe in anything at this point because everything would be tainted.

ITT: Lots of posters with "I am the main character" syndrome.

ooger posted...

ITT: Lots of posters with "I am the main character" syndrome.

good

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

No, they said the outcome of these individual protests is that it gets people talking. I believe you have misunderstood the point here. I agree that there are often more effective ways to just get people talking, but merely talking often doesn't lead to action.

Zeeak4444 posted...

do you have any examples of it working though? Or even what it is?

like even seen change from the fallout of protests, and weve seen change come from plenty of strikes and target protests.

But when it comes to general public protesting whats the value added for the cause? Not saying its wrong just trying to work through the concept myself as it seems to usually hurt more than help.

The American Revolution. The French Revolution. Civil rights movement. Fall of the Berlin Wall, which also contributed to the fall of the Soviet Union.

I could probably think of countless more examples if I was less sleepy.

hockeybub89 posted...

Society probably just needs to be disrupted even harder. No one ever got rights or changed the world by screwing with someone's email.

Things are going to get worse and that will just mean more unrest and more people crossing the line into underhanded tactics.

Then fuck off. Trying get people on your side shouldn't be forced. It's as if nuance is dead to you lot.

MedeaLysistrata posted...

good

good?

DementedDurian posted...

Then fuck off. Trying get people on your side shouldn't be forced. It's as if nuance is dead to you lot.

So you disagree with the American Civil War?

DementedDurian posted...

Then fuck off. Trying get people on your side shouldn't be forced. It's as if nuance is dead to you lot.

"If you can't get the system to give you basic human rights without resorting to means I don't like, then maybe you just don't deserve basic human rights."

Gremlynn posted...

"If you can't get the system to give you basic human rights without resorting to means I don't like, then maybe you just don't deserve basic human rights."

I'm not convinced you're not a goddamn maggat trying to undermine the cause by trying to say its inexorably tied to shitty methods. That anything youd do would be fine because it's for a good cause and any criticism is a sign of bigotry and should be silenced immediately by accusations of racism or transphobia.

You dont represent anyone.

DementedDurian posted...

Then fuck off. Trying get people on your side shouldn't be forced. It's as if nuance is dead to you lot.

So the Civil Rights Movement and Stonewall riots were unacceptable to you?

Force is the only reason you or I have any rights and we'll lose those again if the GOP has their way in America.

hockeybub89 posted...

So the Civil Rights Movement and Stonewall riots were unacceptable to you?

Force is the only reason you or I have any rights and we'll lose those again if the GOP has their way in America.

A few years ago, my family and I were getting pizza and a group of anti-abortionists blocked the road with posters saying "abortion kills". If I hadn't been holding the food, I would have gotten out of the car and yelled at them.

I didn't care for that, and I don't want what should be an ally falling into the same trap of harassing people until "they get their way".

As for rights, well the only places I have to live right now are my grandparents' and my brother's. Both of which said they will kick me out if I pursue gender reassignment.

Try living in the Bible Belt for all your life and then tell me about rights.

reincarnator07 posted...

If you only support protesters when they don't inconvenience you, you do not support protesters.

I can live with that. \_()_/

hockeybub89 posted...

Nothing says "I support the cause" like "unless you inconvenience me"

When maybe six people show up to block the road, that cause wasn't very supported anyway.

hockeybub89 posted...

What's legal and what's moral are not always the same. Rosa Parks broke the law. Women broke the law in Iran by taking off their head coverings and resisting arrest. LGBTQ are going to start breaking the law by just being in public in parts of America. Protest itself can be made illegal.

And the difference is, those examples are directly defying the oppressive law; not creating an unrelated inconvenience (or worse) for people with no power over the law.

hockeybub89 posted...

So the Civil Rights Movement and Stonewall riots

Nope nope nope, you dont get to try this. Maybe do a little research on the things you wanna pretend to care about next time, brainchild. That's a demeaning comparison.

this whole topic smells like a neoliberal protest

Jerry_Hellyeah posted...

I'm not convinced you're not a goddamn maggat trying to undermine the cause by trying to say its inexorably tied to shitty methods. That anything youd do would be fine because it's for a good cause and any criticism is a sign of bigotry and should be silenced immediately by accusations of racism or transphobia.

You dont represent anyone.

It's funny because the post of mine you quoted still works as a response to this "enlightened centrist" drivel.

But no i'm not accusing anybody of racism or transphobia. I'm accusing them of having zero grasp of history and zero understanding of where their rights actually come from and what has historically been a "successful" form of protest.

reincarnator07 posted...

No, they said the outcome of these individual protests is that it gets people talking. I believe you have misunderstood the point here. I agree that there are often more effective ways to just get people talking, but merely talking often doesn't lead to action.

The American Revolution. The French Revolution. Civil rights movement. Fall of the Berlin Wall, which also contributed to the fall of the Soviet Union.

I could probably think of countless more examples if I was less sleepy.

ignoring all the other examples if you think peaceful marches and blocking traffic are what worked for the civil rights movement then youve got a lot of reading ahead of you.

Questionmarktarius posted...

When maybe six people show up to block the road, that cause wasn't very supported anyway.

Those are the only 6 people in history to demonstrate over climate change?

hockeybub89 posted...

Those are the only 6 people in history to demonstrate over climate change?

At that specific time and place, yes.

People who don't believe in protesting are either comfortable or submissive.

flussence posted...

this whole topic smells like a neoliberal protest

oh 150%

Gremlynn posted...

It's funny because the post of mine you quoted still works as a response to this "enlightened centrist" drivel.

Oh lord, the classic "enlightened centrist" argument/insult aimed at a Democrat who hasnt 100% synchronized his thoughts to your own. Classic CEman using politics as recreation.

DementedDurian posted...

A few years ago, my family and I were getting pizza and a group of anti-abortionists blocked the road with posters saying "abortion kills". If I hadn't been holding the food, I would have gotten out of the car and yelled at them.

I didn't care for that, and I don't want what should be an ally falling into the same trap of harassing people until "they get their way".

As for rights, well the only places I have to live right now are my grandparents' and my brother's. Both of which said they will kick me out if I pursue gender reassignment.

Try living in the Bible Belt for all your life and then tell me about rights.

Methods of protest aren't bad because some people use them for bad causes. By that logic, nothing is the proper way because bad people can use the same avenues. Voting and laws are also force, and used by bad actors for nefarious purposes. Should we abolish democracy and then society lest we use the same tactics as the people we oppose?

And I didn't say America was some utopia for minorities, but racism, homophobia and transphobia existing doesn't mean there hasn't been an overall increase in rights over the years, and only because of force.

I am very sorry you live in that situation and my own home life is less than supportive, but we unfortunately cannot force individual minds to change. But that doesn't mean rights are just postponed until we achieve world peace organically. No one has that kind of time.

There wouldn't be even rights at risk of being taken away if no one had ever fought and forced those rights into existence in the first place.

You called me defeatist and then turned around and basically said there are no rights because bigots are still resisting and hurting people.

Jerry_Hellyeah posted...

Oh lord, the classic "enlightened centrist" argument/insult aimed at a Democrat who hasnt 100% synchronized his thoughts to your own. Classic CEman using politics as recreation.

"I'm not a centrist, i'm a democrat!"

Ain't really the rebuttal you think it is.

IShall_Run_Amok posted...

People who don't believe in protesting are either comfortable or submissive.

+1

Questionmarktarius posted...

At that specific time and place, yes.

There was 1 person who refused to sit at the back of the bus.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

I guess you could read it as "Of the goals intended for the protest, the only one that is actually achieved is getting people to talk about the reason for the protest." At the least, that is how I read it. I think the issue is it's hard to talk about the goal of a protest without defining what protest(s) we're discussing. I accept that this wording is ambiguous and open to interpretation.

Zeeak4444 posted...

ignoring all the other examples if you think peaceful marches and blocking traffic are what worked for the civil rights movement then youve got a lot of reading ahead of you.

No, I do not think that "convenient" protests have achieved much of anything. That was my point.

Nothing is more important than getting to/from my main source of income to house and feed my family

reincarnator07 posted...

I guess you could read it as "Of the goals intended for the protest, the only one that is actually achieved is getting people to talk about the reason for the protest." At the least, that is how I read it. I think the issue is it's hard to talk about the goal of a protest without defining what protest(s) we're discussing. I accept that this wording is ambiguous and open to interpretation.

It's hard to be specific when talking about protests in the abstract, this should be obvious I would think but when you are dealing with people who are anti-being inconvenienced it's easy for them to interpret anything not completely precise in exactly the way they want to in order to push the narrative they want to push.

It's a big part of why I left this thread, it's not worth the aggravation of repeating myself over and over in different ways just because people can't stand being potentially personally inconvenienced. This thread has been giving me strong "If something isn't going to completely solve a problem on its own then it's not worth doing at all" energy and my time on 261 taught me it's typically not worth interacting with people like that, their minds are set.