Some causes have wider acceptance than others, but I understand the principle at work.

People who would never consider a problem get pissed when people working for that problem inconvenience them.

Pissing off the blind uncaring mass of humanity that allows shit to happen is part of political dissent.

I'll see your inconvience and raise you hundreds of dead unarmed citizens per year plus thousands brutalized.
They said the same things when people were marching in the streets and sitting in at lunch counters.
It is getting to the point where we dare not allow people to sit complacent and go about their routines withou being inconvenienced. If we do that, we keep dying, but they make their way to work on time.

Do those inconvenienced folks give two shits that we are being systematicallly abused while they are allowed to live free? If not, fuck their convenience, if so, they can join the movement.

Or (gasp!) cook their own food. I get it, awareness should be raised of injustices. But it doesn't become raising awareness when the protests block traffic and risk people losing their jobs or cause damage to businesses (I know most protesters don't do that, but why is it that businesses get wrecked whenever there are protests against police violence?)

There are not businnesses damaged WHEREVER there are protests. Bullshit.

I guess if it's inconveniencing them we shoukd give up and suffer in silence so that they are more comfortable? Like usual?

Privilege. It's privileged to think we should find ways to not bother folks who give no fucks about how society treats us like second class citizens. Once they drive by their lives go back to normal, while we live this shitty existance, and you think we need to be nicer to the peopke who give no shits about our lives. Crazy.

But property is property. Lives are more important. I'd rather a whole city burn than to keep allowing black people to suffer from racism and police violence. Lives matter more than posessions or property. Would you save your house or your kids?

See what kind of response you get.

Was apart of many race riots back in the 50s and 60s. It was one of the bigger ones, a riot that accelerated white flight and took those jobs away from black neighborhoods. The neighbors left behind still had their lives, but their property was deemed worthless and thier resulting livelihood was deemed as so.

Anything? I was present at the riots in LA in 92. I know exactly why those happened too.
There are many reasons for the issues there, many are much more recent than riots back in the 50's. The black lives matters protests had nothing to do with causing the economic situation there. And these days are not those days. Protests will continue until change occurs. That's how it is. America was started in protest. We threw tea into the sea, and the royalists had a problem with the entire american liberation movement. Just as folks have a problem with protests today. Protests are the American way.

And i never denied protest bringing change, i just don't agree with this obnoxious and disruptive display of bigotry and stupidly on behalf of the so-called students nor would i call it a protest that'll lead to change. And honestly i really doubt these students even gave a damn about black lives or police brutality anyway. If they did why not protest at the Berkeley police department?

You're not making much sense.

All the yelling and hollering and stupid comments made by the protestors to the students trying to get to the class THAT THEY PAID FOR.

Getting in someone's way? And making stupid comments? Are they racist comments or just stupid? If just stupid, how is that bigotry? Bigotry is more than just irritating people.

the manhandling of the white student and the protestors yelling at him about his privilege (there's a photo of it on the Daily Californian). There was also a student account from a black student trying to get through and being told he was a "traitor to his race". That's not bigotry to you, putting your hands on somebody and calling someone a traitor to their race? Hell they were protesting against other students of color, does that not strike you as odd or bigoted either? Or do you think this is the right way to go about protesting police brutality?

Do you seriously imagine they're sweeping up the remains of their work and dreams thinking about police brutality? I'll wager they're hoping the police crack skulls on those who destroyed their businesses.

You don't sound like any anarchist I've ever heard. Usually the people out looting and doing property damage ARE the anarchists, who have glommed onto the peaceful protests.

There are lots of anarchists who are peaceful. There are even Christian anarchists. Some anarchists believe that rioting only gives the state the excuse to exercise yet more power and thus attempt to avoid providing the excuse. By focusing on personal discipline/enlightenment/morality the state becomes obviated and obsolete.

Just sayin'

The protests are not riots.

People were inconvenienced by 8ft & having to see to many brown faces in one place.

It's the same old tired speech everytime there's a protest.

Same ass shit.

White faces inconveincing minority students getting to their class with thier obnoxious and stupid protest. Typical Berkeley.

Experience documentary "1964" on Netflix.
There is a lot about the free speech protests at Berkeley and the civil rights protests in 1964.
The reason to make people uncomfortable is to call attention to the protest. Sure people react negatively to being made uncomfortable, but if they remained comfortable they would ignore the protest.

What about those on wheelchairs who have no other walkways? Or those who could lose their jobs because of the held-up traffic?

What about being followed everyday and stopped and not allowed to get to work on time just because of your color?
If people are inconvenienced by it they need to join up to end the institutional racism or suffer right along with the rest of us. We matter just as much as those people you are so worried about and we are abused daily, not just inconvenienced by protests. I wish peopke cared as much about us as they do these 'inconvenienced' folks we need to not bother with our protests.

But here's the thing: America is a nation of mental juveniles, especially in the age of win-an-argument-in-5-seconds social media. Most people don't think as deeply as you or I (or a lot of DUers) do. Most people believe that if they respect authority (whether the law or their bosses) enough, they won't get in trouble, and they think that others should too (because things like "systematic racism" are ivory tower made-up BS in their minds). Never quite occurred they're being played by Big Business and the Powers That Be.

Marxist theory has this concept called false consciousness, "an attempt to explain why all workers do not do what Marxist theory says they are supposed to do, viz., support a communist revolution."

Another great saying I've read: "If a student is never made uncomfortable, that student is not getting an education." IOW, if you're feeling too good about yourself, you ain't using your brain enough.

To their credit, as much as I wish they didn't have as much political power as they do, the anti-tax and anti-choice protest movements know how to walk the line between making themselves visible vs. not being too disruptive of society (maybe that's right wing authoritarianism at play, I dunno).

becomes useful.

The costs (people remembering the protests more for violence) outweigh the benefits (raising awareness), in my view.

I don't know if you were around in 1964 but the chant was "up against the wall mother fucker" violence begets violence.
You don't know the anger and frustration of those times I think.
In Mississippi during Freedom Summer at least one Black person was murdered every week. Three civil rights workers were murdered and all summer they kept finding bodies but not the civil rights workers. ALL summer they kept finding bodies!

On what objective measure are you basing your cost-benefit analysis/guess?

where it inconveniences him, evidently.

Those protestors are millennials. There are 90 million of us coming of age right now. We WILL be changing the face of America and this is how it begins. Back in the day, the older generations felt the same way about boomers that the boomers are feeling about us. We must be accomodated.

Our socitey had gone on for far too long holding on to ways that are traditional. We are not traditional. We are not going to tell the least among us to shut up and be polite while getting the crap beat out of them.

I think the problem is generational. We make y'all (not necssarily YOU) uncomfortable and there are a hell of a lot of us. I think rather than trying to tell the youth how to protest properly, we need to address the reasons they are protesting and fix them. We want justice and we just don't care if it's inconvenient.

The boomers worked for equality too.

I've noticed some (what seem to be) age-related discriminatory remarks lately here on DU. Seems a shame.

Every new generation thinks they're better than the previous one. If millennial are not aware of that - they need to read more.

Back in the day - the saying was, "never trust anyone under 30" lol.

"Plus ca change, plus la meme chose" - that was written in 1849. The more things change, the more things stay the same.

(Lacking correct punctuation for French)

We are all on the same side here, no matter our age.

boomers when they protested that are being said now. The complaints against change sound identical. Boomers wanted change then, and we want change now. Period. They had to fight the generation begore them for change, and it seems we will be fighting with them, unfortunately. It wasn't about being 'comfortable' when they were protesting, why should it be about that now?

Sometimes I've seen more "older" folks than young ones.

We're all on the same side.

But the ones complaining about the protests are certinly not millenials. Some of the complainers were on the front lines back in the day. Some want to control how the youth do it today.
And btw, not everyone is on the same side. You might be on the same side as me, but many are not. And mostly I've seen people between the ages of barely grown and about 45 at the protests, mostly millenials and genxers.

Our local peace line....the average age is 62. Wish you and your friends were here to bring the average down. Many have stood where you are today. Thank you, but don't ever slam those who have stood before you! Not cool!

My best wishes for you and yours. Be safe!

... as much as you desperately cling to the belief that those folks who lost their jobs or didn't get health care paid the necessary price.

At least they paid and you feel better right?

What a load of manure...

what about the lives of the protestors who lived in Jim Crow south?

This is some sad shit. I expect better. Our lives matter too. Just as much as those poooor inconvenience folks who never have to deal with racism and shit. We should just make sure that nobody but ourselves are onconvenienced by racism and police brutality. Why make it everyones issue when it's mostly black folks who suffer? That's what I got from yr post, just letting you know.

What frustrates me about DU is that there are often complaints about "what I perceive from your post" instead of "what the poster said".

Second, it's my genuine feeling that too many protesters don't get the line between inconvenience and ruining lives.

Inconvenience is the presence of protesters. Ruining lives is putting the disabled at risk by making them take longer routes (like was the case regarding Sather Gate).

They can find anothet route, wait until the next day, call work and tell them there is a protest and they will be late. Life not ruined.
Our lives are at risk too, that's what you seem to not be getting. We are dying. We are imprisoned. 1/4 of black men spend much of their lives in prison. This is a catastrophe.
We are not going back to not saying anything or not crossing lines. Lines must be crossed in order to bring change. Nothing with change unless the majority IS inconvenienced.

Oh, and I have heard of NO lives RUINED by the protest. The protesters are not killing people.

I've participated in my fair amount of campus protests in recent years. However, I'd draw the line in blocking traffic or walkways, as I feel that the means of a protest should be visibility & awareness.

And my opinion is that people don't respond well to opinions if they hear those opinions from someone they perceive as "militant" (see backfire effect). Whose fault is it, the speaker or the listener? Think about the "social justice warrior" slur often applied to someone who dares simply express opinions (instead of being a sealioning asshole about it).

Ports, airposrts, roads, bridges, ect. Only way to get attention to the problem sometimes is to hold the things that people care about hostage. Nothing else has worked.
The people who are pro social justice are on the rise. The youth is joining social justice movements in magnificent ways.
I plan on going back to school this fall and corrupting the youth some more.

Im well paid, and on salary. If you block the road and I dont make it in, Ill enjoy a day off

The single mother who can not make it in might not have rent money because she missed work due to protest

Often you hurt those who can least afford it

I remember that guy in San Diego i believe it was who was late for work due a highway protest. He confronted the protesters and got national support because he was just an average Joe working to feed his kids. In the end the guy got support and the protest got zilch - and in turn thier message got snuffed and social justice wasn't helped any.

Are you saying that there weren't any people of color and/or victims of racism who were inconvenienced?

If so, what are you basing that on?

At least that's how it appears from the quote I cited.

Maybe I misunderstood.

The people who deal with the racism are usually in favor of protests, those who are not are not. Either way, work it out. Nobody cares if the police inconvenience us, so we gon do what we gotta do regardless.

I would respectfully argue, however, that there are a good number of white folks at these protests and that a good number of black folks are being inconvenienced by them for what that is worth.

It bee's like that sometimes. I am not free until my people are free. I'm living safe as fuck. Female, no criminal record, reasonably well educated, planning on returing to school this fall - no issues getting accepted into another degree program; might do joirnalism this time. My life is not harsh.
If I get inconvenienced by a protest, I can get out of my car, join it for a while, get in my car and drive away. But I might get pulled over and get a cop's gun in my face again, last time I pissed myself. Why would a cop pull a gun on a person like me just for having a brake light out? Black.
So, I don't really care who get's inconvenienced, so long as that kinda shit stops for everyone. Nobody should be scared to live their daily life just because they got born in color.

But to bring it back to the OP, I personally don't think it is as effective a means of protest. But that's just my opinion and people ought to do what they want and I support anyone who wants to protest in whatever way they see fit (short of physically assaulting people). But if the goal is to actually change people's minds, the effectiveness of the protest should at least be examined in my opinion.

Do you think the civil rights movement changed minds? No, it changed behaviors. It changed laws.
I don't think we can see into people's minds. I want to change how we are treated, nothing more.
I don't care if somebody hates me, I care how they treat me. I want fair treatment not love or whatever.

I'll talk of a movement I am more personally connected to which is the gay rights movement. I have seen many minds changed on this subject just in the past two decades thanks, in part, to a variety of different protests. I think changing minds has led to changes in laws and changes in behaviors. I feel like they can and should go hand in hand.

Many people have gay family and NO black sons. That is changing as we speak. So today, we need to work on policy, the racial mixing will be taking care of the minds changing stuff as my gereration starts and continues to procreate. My husbands granfather was a Sheriff, white dude, folks that came out of germany. He is way less racist than he was when he was a cop because his daughter purposely married a black man and had children. His racism ate at her so much that she gravitated towards black people. He wears a black lives matters shirt now. He has grandkids and great grandkids that he worrys about becoming victims of cops like him. See? People have to change their own lives? Sometimes it has to be forced on them. I want fair treatment, the mind changing will come or not.

No doubt, the first world convenience of many people was disrupted on August 28, 1963-- and most certainly forced the irrational and the self-absorbed to become less sympathetic. It was indeed, an annoyance.

effort. Clearly there are also indulgent/counterproductive protests as well, such as the SDS Days of Rage. To treat all protests as equal is an insult to the protests that are well thought out and the result of a tremendous amount of effort by numerous activists.

Then objectively measure the righteousness of the two protests for us, and let us know on what that measure is predicated.

effective? I don't. There's a good reason you referenced the latter and not the former.

causing problems for others draws resentment. All I heard was negative from people over the blocked traffic. Most of them couldn't even tell you what the cause was.

The Occupy movement quite successfully put the language of the idea of the "1%" straight into our politics. That as much as anything was worth everything they did. We can go back through many protests and resistance activities that were immediately unpopular, but ultimate force the nation to revisit long held positions. The more unaware a population is of an issue, the more confrontive the adherents have to be.

Does not something seem a little off there?

Wondering why you do this on black lives matters threads. Hmmm.

I would think it would be a little weird to have a white person writing it. For example, snarky though I can sometimes be, I would not be presumptuous enough to attempt to lecture people on behalf of Black Lives Matter not being a Black person myself. I would think that the Huffington Post must have a qualified person of color who could've written an article on that subject. Do you disagree?

For real. I love the hell out of Tim Wise, nearly as much as I love Ta Nehisi Coates.

Always glad to have a spirited discussion with you on here.

If it's not, it shouldn't be done.

VOTE!

...it's the best protest tactic!

and the faces of utter surprise, like who allowed those people take to the streets, from mostly white middle class folks is always the best part. You know why? They are not saying it, not why they are around, but they are thinking it.

Chew on that one for a second.

And plenty of working class black people who aren't because they have to, you know, go to work.

most if the protesters are working class, black and brown, with some white allies. Most of the folks with mouths agape are white. That might not be happening up the road from me but your mileage will vary on that.

Hell. Some of the inside discussion among activists includes things like it is quite privileged to ask workers ( who are coming out) to protest minimum wage. Same shit, different cause for black lives matter.

Now locally both are now connected at the hip. And the latest of mouths agape was actually at SDSU. Hell, a couple of the very white and male members of the business school (students) were so aghast at this...who let them occupy our campus and interrupt our dinner, that they gave anybody who cared to listen an earful.

I guess a lot depends on the location.

I just am wondering if the situation was that many people of color were being inconvenienced while many of the protesters were white if that would make a difference in your perspective on this.

In NYC, for instance, there was an Occupy Movement action that seemed to break along those lines (i.e. protesters mostly white, inconvenienced mostly people of color).

here in San Diego when they took the I-15, we were sick as puppies, woof, so we got to listen to radio traffic, drivers were not that annoyed. Next morning on I-5 it was working class ( father of 5 was late, AA) vs the African Student Coalition at UCSD and add the annoyed mostly medical personnel.

Of course, seeing how local media looks for those complainers, which you will find everywhere, close up...I got my doubts either the applause or complaints are that deep. But at least locally that whole thing got people talking at the supermarket and other places.

This is my observation, but as the days went on and large media came out, the divisions and perceptions somewhat deepened, but never along clear racial lines, but rather along class lines.

Things you learn when you watch major media work close and personal. A lot of this is perception management. Why I tend to go old school and just describe what we see...and keep my feeling to myself.

It is always fascinating to read first hand account like that one!

Protest, by definition, inconveniences people. That's why it's not called letter writing, making an appointment with a decisionmaker, petition signing, putting up posters, posting a video on YouTube, direct mailing, etc. It's what people do when those activities aren't effective.

Politeness has become the new lash to whip anyone who speaks up. I don't buy it one bit.

Protest does not by definition inconvenience people. It is, to quote one online dictionary, an expression or declaration of objection, disapproval, or dissent.

Protest is the Anerican Way. Started when we threw some Tea into the Sea!!!

And stuff like that isn't remembered for very long. They should have been more polite.




(/sarcasm)

Last edited Tue Apr 21, 2015, 06:43 PM - Edit history (1)

Because that is a little more significant than not being able to drink tea for a while. And that is what the OP is actually talking about. A person in a wheelchair literally being unable to get into a building where they need to go for their job because the only accessible entrance is inaccessible.

people on wheelchairs, and crutches at protests.

Hell, Joe Riley is a local vet of D-Day... paratrooper, of the 501, not quite Easy company. And he is a regular at these things.

And I am not quite sure what point you are trying to make there. Yeah, some people ARE INDEED inconvenienced, but every social protest movement in the US has gotten somewhere when some people ARE indeed inconvenienced.

From what I read in national media and some recent reactions by DAs who are starting to charge officers (now let's see if a Jury convicts), these activists are starting to get some results.

Again, this is my observation from following this social justice matter closely.

Is there a way to run an effective social protest while also allowing for special consideration to be made for persons who require those accommodations? That is to say, inconvenience some people but not those with extenuating circumstances (such as allowing someone to get through if it would be dangerous for them to go around the other way, an elderly person let's say.)

People do move out of the way for ambulances running code. People open the way for handicapped folks. You are actually going, returning to what I told you about media and image management, to what you have seen published by large media.

It is like Occupy camps that were full of druggies, getting high, and rapes. except they were not. They were raucous places, at times not that clean, because keeping the plaza clean when you have 1000 people living on it can be a challenge. But they were not full of violence, or drugs, or anything like that. Of all the things media told you, the "my god they are attracting the homeless" is true. But when you feed homeless, it tends to attract homeless.

The media plays this role as well, their job is to slam on the social justice movement, until it is cool and profitable, to tell you another story of the movement, insert movement here. This is not Cronkyte's CBS. A lot of this false reporting is first posted in places like Breitbart.com, again I have seen that. Then it is picked up by a middling local network, and off to the races we go, since it is removed from Breitbart by at least one degree.

This happens regularly. Of course, my local activists these days KNOW who the breitbart guy\gal are and not just not talk to them, they have been asked to leave.

You are all for LGBT righs... please think back to how a certain group of riots were presented by media in the 1980s, or AIDS for that matter, the gay disease. It is the last 10 years when media switched how they are presenting this, because in spite of their best dang efforts, people are starting to get it. And they are starting to get it after we had more than just some nice coffee discussions in the upper East Side of NYC.

Before that, you had a lot of work, and quite a bit involved inconveniencing people.

I am just going on what was posted in the OP here. Maybe it's BS, I don't know.

The same shit was done during the civil rights movement, until the national media got involved.

The same happened with Cesar Chavez, again until he (and his folks) could get larege regional and national media. Once they did that, off to the races we go with the grape boycott. It happened to gays and women as well, it continues to by the way.

A lot of it is also how people feel personally threatened by the changes that are demanded by each civil rights movement. (or rather each stage, I personally see them as a continuum).

Frederick Douglas, who people locally keep quoting, put it best. And this is the full quote, by the way.


“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.”

You have a lot of conflicting narratives, because of very well known, NOW issues of explicit and implicit bias. Hey, I know that if I take the implicit bias test, in spite of the fact that I try to be conscious of it, I will come out as somebody who has issues with race. Why? You, I, the OP, everybody, absorbs those racists messages every day.

Right now the PoC are asking nothing short than the end of the prison industrial system, the war on drugs, the criminalization of rap, and to be treated equally by the legal system. Mind you, some of these issues affect outlier groups among whites (like drug users,), but what they are asking is also for good schools, good jobs, the end of deindustrialization, and the end of being told they are worth less by society.

Some young people are extremely alienated from the majority culture and are currently forming into New Panther Party patrols. Now that could really be inconvenient, if you happen to be middle class and white and male. And that is already becoming a stressor both within the movements and especially with police officers. For some odd reason having patrols of young black men, and it is mostly men, is not playing well with them.

I hear this language and I am now increasingly agreeing with them, what we have is a system of white supremacy and they are asking for nothing short than the end of it. This is a full on challenge to the system that we all live under. So I do not expect every "progressive" or "liberal" to be in favor of it. This has none to do with the dem-republican narrative either. Or progressives, versus conservatives. This has all to do with a demand for change to a system that we all participate in.

So why do you think the media is creating these false narratives? And I expect people to swallow them. Fear is powerful, You hit the streets for long enough, and do extensive reading and you get truly over the narratives at places like DU\ Free Republic, et al. They are, from the point of view of the oppressed, as false as a three dollar bill.

What the OP is doing is repeating many of those false narratives, Some have a grain of truth somewhere... in one or two demonstrations out of thousands that have occurred so far in the last six months. Perhaps we are up to tens of thousands nationwide by now. Most have ten people or less... just being visible with signs.

One thing that many of the leaders, young and all, are extremely aware off... since they grew up online, is how their actions can be taken out of context or used against them. The level of media sophistication from this group is much higher than even the occupiers, The average age is also lower, and we are talking four years later. So every one of these movements will be more sophisticated regarding media. That is a prediction of mine, but that has to do with the fact they are growing with it.

I will say this though, some of the leaders are making serious mistakes... but that is a whole different story.

It was a very informative read!

1) Sit at home and scream at the television? or
2) Write a polite letter to the editor about an issue? or
3) Send a letter/email to your congressperson? or
4) Get in the street and make noise? or
5) all of the above?

I belong to a social justice group that does all of the above, depending on the situation. Civil rights were won by marching, and boycotting buses, and sitting in at lunch counters, and preaching in churches, and organizing at schools.

Union rights were won by marching, and shutting down factories, and blocking buildings, and lobbying politicians, and writing articles. The point is to use whatever tactics work. I have blocked streets, and disrupted traffic. Yes, some people are inconvenienced, but as Bravenak said, people are being killed while all of this is going on. Sometimes inconvenience is the way to get the issue in front of people and make them think.

Yes, people are inconvenienced. But if nice ways to resolve these things worked, we'd use them.

Not every protest or strike uses awesome tactics, but the best way to change what you don't think is working is to get involved, yes?

How supportive of the right to protest is DU when it is about topics we don't like?

This feels like a weird argument because I see more anti-abortion protests than any other kind, by a large margin. They're out there protesting, and I've never seen much complaining (except a small amount here) or any media attention. People protest the frequent killings by police officers and I hear tons of complaining and see it all over the TV.

I'm not seeing a problem here.

People NEED to be "inconvenienced" in order to WAKE THE FUCK to what's really going on around them.

citizen?

I have a probelm when people ruin the entire lives of people.

The whole point is to inconvenience people and make them recognize there is a problem -- a big, big, problem.

If civil disobedience is called for, the whole point is to be really truly disruptive, and knowingly take the risk of being beaten and/or jailed. Make sure the cameras are there, so the whole world is your witness. What do you think Martin Luther King was doing? He took this technique from Mahatma Gandhi himself.

How far do you think either of those men would have gotten by inviting their opponents in for tea and crumpets?

Risks to people with disabilities? A well-planned protest action will have contingency plans for the injured, and by extension, the disabled.

Blocking traffic? See first two paragraphs above.

Looting? I beg your pardon. Have you ever heard of COINTELPRO? A well-planned protest action will have contingency plans for trolls and disruptors too, and will give them the boot as soon as they are identified. No violence against property or people in civil disobedience: somebody starts advocating that, they aren't with you they are against you.

...watch who throws the first brick, fires the first shot and you may see the boots of a cop. How many times have infiltrators stoked the violence of an otherwise peaceful demonstration?

can't comprehend the fact that such obnoxious protests like these draw ire from moderates and potential allies to the cause. Read all of the NEGATIVE responses from the public and the students. Most didn't even know what the cause was, how in good golly fuck is this getting the message out to people!?

And if ya didn't notice, several minority students were accosted by the protesters trying to get to classes THEY FUCKING PAID FOR!? You think those students will want to join those morons? Hell no.

Nobody on here is saying protesting against police brutality is a bad thing. It should be encouraged to march the streets in an organized matter where the message is Clear and the media HAS to listen. These so-called inconvenience tactics don't fucking work in this day and age. Blocking highways didn't win allies, yelling at brunch didn't work, screaming at college reagents was a fail, etc. To say"well you must not care about black lives" when criticizing these types of protests is straight bullshit and such a shitty response to blowback. Its so easy to put words in other people's mouths instead of reflecting on your position and see that "yeah, maybe he/she has a point".

A powerful protest is one of organization, numbers, and civility. This small potatoes protest was just a fucking joke and a laughing stock for the right to justify thier biased and the general public to ignore the message and get mad at the "crazy millennial brats".

Im sorry for long post but FUCK, some people on here need to get real and stop being so delusional when it comes to the real world.

Your version of the real world may not always match others. As far as delusion goes....it is pretty much the butter topping of our society.

"Fuck your job, school, kids, elderly parents, and whatever other adult commitments you have" protests do more harm than good, but that would imply that they are somehow doing good.

The idea that you have to get people angry to side with you is sometimes true, but anyone with half a brain in their head will know that the anger should probably be directed at the issue, not the ones protesting it.

How about inconveniencing some cops? Nah, let's hold up Joe citizen and yell at white peole. They'll be along momentarily to join in solidarity. Yep. Aaaaaaaaaaany minute now.

The people bothered by it probably don't care anyway, and it's a mild inconvenience, they might even be put off by it even more. But if they go on to talk about it, they are inadvertently spreading the message.

"Damn protesters made me late for class!"

"What did they do?"

"They blocked my route!"

"Wow, really, no way around?"

"Well... I could go around but it would've taken 5 minutes."

"Oh, that's a shame... what were they protesting?"

"Oh, I don't know, police violence."

"Huh, what did the police to this time?"

"I was late for class!"

Or will those same people talking about it forget the message when the next current event pops up?

I used to participate in the black bloc in my youth. I since stopped doing it though I felt it did serve a purpose (a lot of kettling goes on in mass protest and people get hurt, if you distract the police, it can be a good thing in the long run; I know that is extremely odious to say, and I am not advocating violence, but I won't condemn it when it happens because I know why it happens).

It's pretty low on a scale of achieving change that exists. I mean, you want change, run for office, elect people, vote, that's how you get things done. It's slow, but that's the only way to really have a powerful effect. Colorado legalized marijuana. That wasn't done by mass protests. It was done at the polls and getting out the vote.

If you want to get your point across, get your ass to the polls on election day.

Sadly voting is only slightly effective and then so only on a paper ballot. But oddly enough, it would take a demonstration to get back to paper ballots!

The rest went for the money to get hackable electronic machines. In NYS, where I am an Election Inspector and have been for a decade or so, we have recountable paper ballots. Before the polls are opened, each electronic reader is checked for voting accuracy in the individual polling places, not the country headquarters. You are asked your name and address, which must match what we have on the books. You then sign in the book and your signature must match the one on file. If you are not listed, then the county office is called, you may well be in the wrong polling place and will be directed to the correct one. Happens a lot. If you have voted before and have dropped off the active list, you are given an affidavit ballot and allowed to vote. The registration is then verified by the county and the ballot counted in the proper precinct. I think NYS has the best system going.

In Ohio we have Diebold machines that the SOS deemed 'easily hackable'! When they were first put into play you could request a paper ballot at the poll. Now the only paper at the poll is a provisional ballot and that is another story! Unfortunately Ohio plays a huge roll in Federal elections.

Thanks for sharing. I had no idea paper was still used anywhere in th US!

...are being made uncomfortable in their own daily lives? Good. This isn't tiddlywinks. It's protest.

As you said, they have daily lives to attend to. That doesn't mean student "protestors" can make the public uncomfortable or disrupt their business. If they want to get the message out there, making someone uncomfortable just because is a poor excuse and fails togain allies to a cause.

Also, I wanted to say hi! I've been out of the loop and it's good to hear your voice! Peace, Kim

Maybe a dark closet where it won't be seen by precious eyes that may take offense! But sadly the closet dust would complain of the disruption. Your comment is spoken like someone who has never stood on a line.

...demonstrators were ordered to stay on the sidewalk or face arrest.

There's a serious disconnect in the op and some of the responses from the purpose and aim of protesters. It should be remembered that these demonstrations normally occur when the normal process of law or administrative process has broken down through neglect or deliberate obstruction of due process or redress. Much of protest is an expression of frustration. Other motivations can be to make enough of a row to attract attention where there has been indifference or apathy from the public, as well as from officials. "We shall not be moved" is a powerful expression of civil disobedience which has roots in many of our nation's civil rights protests. In many nations, work stoppages or mass rallies which last for days and disrupt commerce and regular order have been effective in forcing government action. These important acts of resistance, throughout history, betray a timidity and acquiescence to tyranny in the complaints in the op.


We shall not, we shall not be moved
We shall not, we shall not be moved
Just like a tree that's standing by the water
We shall not be moved

...peace