It can if you do it right and have a purpose. Martin Luther King Jr. Did peaceful protests and changed America for the better.
The problem is there is very little to protest. If you are protesting current issues chances are your political party is already trying to accomplish those things. They are then fighting the opposite party for control.
“riots are the language of the unheard” -MLK peaceful protests are the alternative you give, the other option is violence. MLK new this. Despite how incredibly watered down and whitewashed his message and words have become when they teach about him in school.
Protesting does not do anything because politians are not accountable to voters. People who they are accountable to don't give two fucks if pleb burn down parts of cities. They will get contracts to clean it up.
Hurt their profits is the only language they understand.
Or, start taking the protests and riots to their doorsteps.
They don't care when you burn the areas they don't live in. But when you take the protest to them... They scream and call for more cops. But in the time it takes for the cops to show up, you can do a lot of damage, especially if you have a thousand friends.
People expect way to much change from a single protest. You need to contact your representative and get enough people to join in order to get some attention.
Your protest also can’t be silly like a lot of recent protests are don’t go protest the 2016 election or 2020 election as you will accomplish nothing. Also make sure you have some sort of purpose or end goal. All of the protests I’ve heard about have no purpose.
So you’re going to ignore the decades of protests about climate action? That have all been ignored because the people in power will never give a shit about your protest if its easily ignored.
Small protests are easily ignored. DC climate action protest - 75k people in a nation of 300+ million - even if the muster 1m it’s still peanuts. It doesn’t even move the needle.
Take that same number, 1 million, and have the vast majority be from Georgia marching in Atlanta. Georgia is 10m with 7m available voters. Now we have enough numbers to push the needle.
Sure it’s not on a Federal level, but politics are local. Federal action is a quagmire unless enough localities begin to gel behind a single direction - then those seeking Federal office will have to pivot.
Not enough people care, and the will never care. Most people just want to know that tonight there is bread in the table and that at least this month they’ll be okay. Most people don’t really look beyond that, nor do they want yo, or they feel like their voice won’t matter anyeay.
I guess it’s sort of the same reason why so few people vote. If everyone that could vote would vote, the Republican party would cease to exist the next day. But alas, people don’t. Republicans relatively speaking, do vote a shit load and with that they get a lot of power, something that is nicely exploited by the assholes
I’m from the UK, the biggest protests in my countries history were the stop the war protest in 2003 where 1.5 million people attended and the protests for a second EU referendum where the largest had 1.2 million protest.
And because they were both peaceful protests, they were completely and easily ignored.
Then if you compare that to just about any protest in France where less popple protest, but they do so in a way that isn’t easily ignored, they get far more shit done.
There’s a couple hundred arguments as to why that’s horse shit, but give only a couple:
The brexit that was promised and voted for was not the one that was delivered, nor was it even possible.
By the time it actually happened and the protests were happening enough of the pro brexit population had died that if the same vote where to happen the exact same way, remain would have won.
Well we should really try a mass protest first. If we can actually get people together we can see if mass protest work. The only other attentive is to compost the rich!
One huge problem is that we’re too gatekeep-y to the political “other”. If a large chunk of the population is excluded because you don’t like who they voted for, you’ll never get enough people marching to see a change
and no one gives a shit ( anyhow his first book about the CIA was pretty cool, too! I heard an interview with him about the new book on the Intercept podcast, and his narrative is something I‘ve been thinking about for some time. It‘s actually insane how the right could take the initiative instead of the left and now there‘s only little room to manoeuvre.
The only actual wealth redistribution to the working class that has happened in recent years are the flash mobs looting from stores during the pandemic
My take is that if I went out in the public square tomorrow and they were setting up head removal devices and lining up landlords and student loan recovery agents and fossil fuel executives on the scaffold, I would shake my head and say “You know, I wanted to do this with progressive tax policy and UBI, but you broke democracy, so here we are…”
Democracy and peaceful protest aren’t just nice things that we do for fun. They’re what prevent the streets from running red when enough people get angry enough to do something. They’re MUCH BETTER than violent revolution, for all parties involved. Any member of a ruling class that thinks they can prevent change when the time for change has come will find themselves in very bad trouble, sooner or later.
I'm telling you, an army of vuvuzela-players and mimes to follow elected officials around in public, with a shift roster to get 24/7 coverage. No media interviews without the droning hum of a vuvuzela, no photo opportunities without a sneaky mime making an exaggerated lewd pose in the background, no pleasant meals with lobbyists without a distant but audible brrrrrrrrrrrr.
The media chooses not to report on peaceful protests all the time, but they always give coverage to Gaetz, Cruz and Graham talking absolute shit. Make them edit the videos to take out mimes and vuvuzelas.
Police can arrest someone for playing a vuvuzela and being in the background of a photo? Probably, but... what do they charge you with, a noise disturbance? Better than an assault charge. The police are going to defend the rulers no matter how peaceful the protest.
And that's how you get revenge killings and more death and suffering. Humanity has tried murder a few more times than peaceful protest already to "solve problems" and it hasn't created a safer world for innocent people or better lives for the poor or sustainable environmental practices.
First you are concerned police won't let people play vuvuzela, but you're not concerned that they'll torture and kill you for murder? Or is it because you are ok with letting others do the dirty work for you?
Because why add to the unnecessary suffering in the world if we don't want it for ourselves and we don't need to create it at all?
For example, I have a chronic pain medical condition. It blows chunks and I wouldn't wish its effects on anyone - even the people who would kill me for not being as able-bodied as most others. If the people who cause misery experiencing my pain wouldn't cure me, what would be the purpose? At best they would be more miserable and then inflict that additional misery on others who don't deserve the extra misery either.
It seems like a futile and painful self-perpetuating cycle.
Ultimately, the ideal (but incredibly unrealistic) solution would be a global, coordinated effort to immediately remove from power everyone who abuses their power along with a dedication to continuing to do so whenever another pops up, regardless of the personal cost. Bringing them down with us is only slightly less unrealistic.
I ultimately have no desire to see them suffer, I simply want them out of power, and I think that for the sake of the future, it's worth any cost that they might pay.
As John Brown said: “I, John Brown, am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away but with blood. I had, as I now think, vainly flattered myself that without very much bloodshed it might be done.” And he was right about that. If we cannot achieve a better future with little bloodshed, then we owe it to the future to achieve it with any amount of bloodshed necessary.
No amount of suffering that those in power experience could ever match the amount of suffering that forever failing to remedy the problem will cause to the quadrillions of humans that could exist in the future or even just the billions that exist now. If we humans unable to band together to eliminate threats, even those from within, then we will suffer like this forever. It's better to try and fail than to passively allow it to continue for the rest of history.
No amount of suffering that those in power experience could ever match the amount of suffering that forever failing to remedy the problem will cause to the quadrillions of humans that could exist in the future or even just the billions that exist now. If we humans unable to band together to eliminate threats, even those from within, then we will suffer like this forever. It's better to try and fail than to passively allow it to continue for the rest of history.
I think that this argument has merit, and I'm not ruling anything out. I just want to make sure we truly test the theory that less-damaging options are not effective enough before assuming John Brown's conclusion applies to more than his situation. Especially in a world that has changed a lot in nearly 200 years. We have new tools worth trying.
I'm not playing pacifist, I'm trying to determine the best course of action with the least suffering.
I know they’ll suppress any peaceful revolt, so the only logical step left is active revolt.
Which active revolts would you point to as successes to model your tactics on? What was it about those that made them succeed? Are you sure it was the violence, or was it other contributing factors?
but don’t complain when you get killed
And which target have you chosen to sacrifice your life for? Are you happy to have the hospital your family are in bombed when it's determined there are "enemy combatants" inside?
Maybe instead of adding fire to fire, we could try to stop selling oil to the people holding lighters and deciding fire extinguishers are useless when plain water doesn't work like we hoped.
The people who benefit from war are the tank makers and gun sellers. Everyone is aghast when industry is causing climate change and then... turning around to fuel the military industrial complex to solve problems war has also failed to solve. Brilliant. It will surely work this time!
If you want the least suffering, you must end long-term suffering.
The best course of action is for governments to acknowledge the problems caused by our current way of being and bring about abrupt change for the betterment of the people, but they will willfully never choose the best course of action.
Are you happy to see millions suffering and dying every day for easily solvable problems?
We have tried some non-violent methods. It may not be the non-violent part that is causing them to be ineffective. It is possible to modify the tactics before abandoning peace.
We have also tried the violent option for instigating social change thousands of years. I am not convinced that the good to come from those historical examples outweighs the bad, or is even close. I am convinced that people who feel wronged often want equal or greater revenge and it is often targetted really poorly.
No, which is why I would like to at least try some other ideas before violence. Because violence doesn't seem to be doing a lot of anyone any good, historically or presently.
That’s literally what this entire post is talking about, though… I’m not saying violence is necessarily the answer, but we’ve been trying nonviolent methods, and they aren’t working
To be more accurate, they posited that the more chaotic the action, the more effective the protest has historically been, not that non-violent protest is not effective at all. I think that's an important distinction.
They also say this:
People are willing to stand up and ask for it, but all you have to do is just tinker with the tactics, tinker with the approach
I believe it is possible to create chaos without requiring violence. I agree we need to tinker with the approach. I do not think escalating straight to violence is necessary and that we possess the creativity to modify tactics instead of abandoning principles. We should leave the most damaging options for the last resort.
No, not them either. I would much prefer billionaires are tasked with cleaning up the mess they have made. It can be picking out recyclables from trash, it can be pulling out blockages from sewers, it can be scrubbing individual seashells of spilled crude oil. 8 hours a day, 40 hours a week, in a jail. There are many more ethical and productive methods than slow painful deaths, and a lot of unpleasant work that needs to be done by somebody.
ZING got me real good. You’re right! I’ve not a single neuron with which to type even, sadly. I’m concerned you may not even get this message before logic catches up with us, since i am unsure of the speed of causality due to the conflicting limits of the universe between the prevalent “Einsteinian principles” and apparent quantum principles, :( :( :(
No one gave two fucks about Hamas until they came through with gun fire and violence. Now everyone suddenly cares and a significant change will come to them.
If you believe we are above chimps and do not respond to violence, you are in denial. We are chimps with nukes.
It's not my job to change your mind, but if you really want, PM me your address and I can come by with promises and prove you will respond to threats. Just like politicians.
P.S. I just proved your point and I am just as bad as them. But the point was that this is the only way for rapid change within our lifetime.
Climate Action, housing crisis, massive debts, pollution, minimum wage increases, racism, police brutality, rich people not getting punished, politicians not keeping their word, corruption, …
As they should. Are you actually “protesting my rights” in a meaningful way if you make me late to an urgent medical appointment? No. You’re just being a selfish cunt at that point.
Protesting isn’t “causing as much social disorder as possible with a gathering of like minded people”. That’s just anarchy with extra steps.
Fuck every single person (in the ass) who has ever blockaded a public way without permit to do so.
Fuck every single person (in the ass) who has ever blockaded a public way without permit to do so.
aw poor baby got his feelings hurt.
IT’S FUCKING NOTHING COMPARED TO THE ENTIRE ECOSYSTEM.
Get a sense of actual perspective you over-entitled twat.
The ecosystem is on the red line. Planet’s burning and you don’t even want to slow your shitmobile down, surprised you’re not one of the ‘run the protesters over’ fuckwits.
WE ONLY HAVE ONE BIOSPHERE YOU FUCKING BELLEND. I really hope your children hate you, they should, fucks like you so concerned about your own pitiful pointless lives getting hemorrhoids over being late to an appointment because someone’s protesting THE RAPIDLY ONCOMING DEATH OF OUR SPECIES DUE TO SELFISH PRICKS SPEWING CO2 FOR PROFIT.
That’s ok bud, I understand you lack the critical thinking skills to continue our discourse; good luck with your future in paste consumption and fume huffing.
Groups that block public roads are funded by large fossil fuel companies to undermine the efforts of legitimate environmentalists and turn public perception against their cause. It only HELPS further the climate crisis to block the average person from going about their day, and genuine activist groups also know that - many have spoken out against such tactics in the past. Look into it and you'll see that you're playing right into their game by defending methods that only serve to piss off potential support.
Groups that block public roads are funded by large fossil fuel companies
citation required for this hilarious assertion.
. It only HELPS further the climate crisis to block the average person from going about their day,
bootlickers think like this. they want you to feel bad for speaking out against their crimes. abusers assert that their victims bear responsibility. this is right out of the beat-your-wife playbook.
Look into it and you’ll see that you’re playing right into their game by defending methods that only serve to piss off potential support.
sure thing bud; protest never changed anything, that’s why we don’t have civil rights laws, women can’t vote, etc. brilliant conversation, it’s almost like I can hear the twang in your voice, or smell the wifebeater you’re wearing. Let’s not do it again! Gonna block ya shortly and then go on to live a good life where I never think about you again.
I guess that depends on who 'we' means? The September climate protests were pretty big globally, with 50 countries participating.
As someone who has been to protests in the past for various topics, my experience is that the media isn't interested in reporting on them unless they get dramatic eye-catching footage. Which unfortunately usually means just the ones that have a physical fight break out make the front page anywhere.
Then I have to disagree. They've been most effective on smaller jurisdiction governments, but there have been a good amount of significant protests the past few years. The Carnegie endowment tracker has a pretty good list.
Physical protests have limitations though like transport to a central point. I suspect the support is greater than attendees.
So your claim is that mass protests have brought social change, and we don’t need new strategies, in direct opposition to the headline?
Or are you being argumentative for the win? Because last time I checked our society is Thoroughly fucked right now and there’s been no real change of any measurable meaning on a global scale.
Standing in the way of the rest of society and screaming stupid ryhming chants isn’t changing the government’s mind about anything anywhere at scale, at least not for the better. I’m sure it’s influenced surveillance technology however.
and we don’t need new strategies, in direct opposition to the headline?
No. In direct support of the article body, I agree we need to modify mass protest tactics to create more chaos. Chaos and violence are not necessarily the same thing. It is possible to escalate to something before violence, and escalation from 0 to 100 may not be necessary at all.
The more innocent people who are killed, the more the survivors understandably want their pound of flesh. It fuels the cycle of abuse and atrocities, and we have thousands of years of evidence that murder has had limited effectiveness at creating a better world too.
Oh I apologize, but you aren’t nearly close enough to the retirement age of 86. You’ll have to wait for 2050 for it to be raised to 93. But by then it will actually be 102.
Thank fuck the machines will keep our organs alive when we all get converted to a matrix. Not THE matrix, no, that would be kinda cool. Just A matrix.
Hi I’m Bob, I help run neural processing Matrix 1286G-54, which coprocesses possible adjective combinations in context for our local Google Hivemind consciousness simulator, which McDonald’s uses to serve up more enticing advertisements at stoplight projection advertisement venues.
Edit: serious question, who thinks I should shut the fuck up and go write a cyberpunk story instead
Are they going to stand there with a gun pointed at me making me work? Will they bring you home at the end of the day? Hell, I’m thinking I could cut my commute costs and probably get more done!
And once your there, will they grab your hands and use them to make sandwiches or type code or whatever you do for a living? It’s much easier to deny living space than compel action.
Historically it has been sustained, smaller, local action that has produced results far more frequently than attempted general strikes. Everybody wants to do this the quick way and they aren’t willing to roll up their sleeves and put in the time to do it locally. They think that everybody’s just going to nod and stop working and it’s all going to be glorious, but that’s just not how it goes down. You can count the number of truly successful general strikes that were clear victories on one hand.
Consumption strike. Just stop buying nonessentials. Rent strike, mortgage strike. Protests are worthless if you’re still buying crap from amazon and eating at chain restaurants.
Add comment