Protests: A Bridge Too Far?

Quote by Magical_felix

I'm literally suggesting terrorism... and you think it wouldn't make the news... Obviously the Just Stop Oil way has only succeeded in making them an annoyance at best and a laughing stock at worst. I mean what has Just Stop Oil inspired you to do besides whine in the forum about nobody listening.

Go to their website. Read some of their speeches. Donate some money to their campaigns. Just like lots of other have. Helped me connect with some people on the European front.

You can learn a lot if you visit their website, as many have as a direct result of these protests. The fact that they have gotten a lot more volunteers and donations as a direct result from these protests. For instance, none of y’all would be talking about this without these protests.

For protests to be effective they have to disrupt the status quo pretty much by definition. If talking things out worked in politics we wouldn’t have a lot of powerful countries with atomic bombs designed for mass murder.

I’ve been arrested, shot at and had gas canisters used on me while protesting, what was I protesting for? A lower university education fee so that academia doesn’t become an exclusionary place. We blocked off streets and it was effective. I’d say protesting is pretty harmless when you consider what states do to their own people for personal benefit.

Also, protesting earned a lot of marginalised people a lot of rights and if you believe in freedom of speech you have to believe in the right for people to demonstrate their discontent as part of an active constituency.

Finally, what I’d argue about the violence and looting is that a lot of times it’s not protestors but opportunistic criminals who take advantage of the movements. This feeds into the narrative that protesting is antisocial behaviour which benefits the lawmakers by keeping people who would benefit from active participation away. The media runs with this narrative because it drives sales to the middle class who clutches at their pearls and goes on about how ‘subversive’ people are.

Block some streets, if your government isn’t afraid of your agency you’re doing it wrong.

Quote by PrincessC

For protests to be effective they have to disrupt the status quo pretty much by definition. If talking things out worked in politics we wouldn’t have a lot of powerful countries with atomic bombs designed for mass murder.

I’ve been arrested, shot at and had gas canisters used on me while protesting, what was I protesting for? A lower university education fee so that academia doesn’t become an exclusionary place. We blocked off streets and it was effective. I’d say protesting is pretty harmless when you consider what states do to their own people for personal benefit.

Also, protesting earned a lot of marginalised people a lot of rights and if you believe in freedom of speech you have to believe in the right for people to demonstrate their discontent as part of an active constituency.

Finally, what I’d argue about the violence and looting is that a lot of times it’s not protestors but opportunistic criminals who take advantage of the movements. This feeds into the narrative that protesting is antisocial behaviour which benefits the lawmakers by keeping people who would benefit from active participation away. The media runs with this narrative because it drives sales to the middle class who clutches at their pearls and goes on about how ‘subversive’ people are.

Block some streets, if your government isn’t afraid of your agency you’re doing it wrong.

Sometimes the police have been caught red handed starting the violence or looting as an excuse to attack protesters. This happened multiple times during the BLM protests.

The US also ignores UN rules against collective punishment. If one brick is thrown the police will start mass arrests. The false riot tactic has been used by the police since the 30’s when they were going after unions and finding excuses to arrest their members.

Quote by noll

For all the complainers here: they're protesting for your future, and perhaps that of your kids, as well.

Then they should find a way to do it that actually boosts their cause rather than destroys it. The immense unpopularity of their protest choice is lousy, and creates more antagonism to them, while doing not one damn positive thing to stop oil use. And their hypocrisy by wearing vests made of OIL!!!!

They are a great example of how to make your cause so unpopular that it is easily defeated.

WHY NOT PUT THEIR ENERGIES INTO CREATING A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE INSTEAD? Does that at all make sense to you, Noll?

*******

PS. Have any of you been reading how operating Bitcoin is a huge ecological disaster? Look it up. If you have a brain, don't ask for stupid links.

Hey Buzz, have you ever seen those pictures (and there a literally thousands of pictures) of people from the Democratic or Republican point of view who are trying to protest the appearances or speeches from American Presidents since Dwight Eisenhower?

Protests only work when they attract the attentions of people who are upwardly successful yet inconvenienced by the activities of the protesting faction.

Should people protesting petroleum production and usages - picket homeless enclaves under our nation's bridges?

Should they hold their protests in Timbuktu or Katmandu or Shangri La?

One day, Buz - I hope something preturbs you enough that you will join an active protest and see what it really feels like to jump into the minority and scream truth to power.

Native Americans vs oil pipelines (and all the shit that entails) would be a good one for you to dive into.

If you're going to protest, I think that step one is getting clarity on what your objectives are. What do you actually hope to achieve? Look at your plan realistically - how is it moving you towards your goals? Disruption should be a means to an end, not an end in itself, as many protestors seem to believe. What actual, realistic solutions are being proposed by protestors to address the problems they're protesting? If all you're about is only venting frustration (both directly related to your cause or about every other shitty thing that's happened in your life) on innocent bystanders, you're not being an effective protestor, you're being an asshole.

Secondly, protestors need to be aware that the medium is the message. Look at the (let's be charitable) protests after Trump lost the election. Their message was supposedly to challenge the fairness of the election. What everyone remembers, though, is a group of rowdy hooligans storming the capital, threatening the political process, and being violent. The protestors worked against their own cause and delegitimized themselves through their disruptive tactics. In the end, they looked like a bunch of delusional violent clowns rather than a serious attempt at gaining political justice. Assuming that they did have some core belief they were trying to communicate through their protest, whatever sympathy they might have garnered from anyone not already sold on their cause was squandered by the way they went about it and it's ultimately worked against them.

Effective protesting is about image-management, and the image many demonstrators project is whiny, entitled, disgruntled, self-centered, manipulative, and willing to make everyone else suffer to get what they want. It's not enough to have a righteous cause (everyone thinks their own cause is righteous), but you have to convince others to believe in the righteousness of your cause. That's where most protests fail, because they substitute oppositionality and animosity for persuasion.

"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" - Isaac Asimov.

[For those of you who are illiterate between the lines, you might consider this same advice in what you choose to post and how you engage in the Think Tank].

Quote by Just_A_Guy_You_Know

That's where most protests fail, because they substitute oppositionality and animosity for persuasion.

Protests fail because the people who make the decisions have no need for the causes people protest.

There is not one single way to achieve a goal, not one manner of communicating that will convince everyone. These protests don't happen in vacuum. Some folks are convinced by arguments, others need action to even hear about a subject in the first place.

Just Stop Oil uses action that sometimes involves some minor vandalism (minor compared to the media attention it gets). Folks scream: "people would listen if not for their vandalism". So, this is where Extinction Rebellion and other groups enter the scene.

Quote by noll

There is not one single way to achieve a goal, not one manner of communicating that will convince everyone. These protests don't happen in vacuum. Some folks are convinced by arguments, others need action to even hear about a subject in the first place.

Just Stop The Oil uses action that sometimes involves some minor vandalism (minor compared to the media attention it gets). Folks scream: "people would listen if not for their vandalism". So, this is where Extinction Rebellion and other groups enter the scene.

So what is the goal? To just stop all oil use? It's not clear what the message is when they are sitting in traffic.

Quote by Magical_felix

So what is the goal? To just stop all oil use? It's not clear what the message is when they are sitting in traffic.

Look up their website, I'm not a member, nor their representative.

Quote by Magical_felix

So what is the goal? To just stop all oil use? It's not clear what the message is when they are sitting in traffic.

Maybe I should have double-underlined the word 'realistic' in my post. Stopping all oil use is not a realistic goal, nor is it to the benefit of most of the world, and that makes it a non-starter in any kind of negotiations with power. Aiming for sustainability and common sense changes that would limit the detrimental impacts of production would be better (but that's hard to write on a picket sign, and less likely to gain attention).

Quote by noll

Look up their website, I'm not a member, nor their representative.

Their sitting in traffic or gluing their hands to artwork protests has not inspired me to do so.

Quote by Magical_felix

Their sitting in traffic or gluing their hands to artwork protests has not inspired me to do so.

They didn't glue themselves to artwork AFAIK, only to their protective glass. Like I said: minor vandalism that creates a lot of media attention. And apparently it inspired you to wanna know more about them. Perhaps not by visiting their website, but at least by asking me.

Btw, stopping all oil is not their stated goal.