93
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
93 points (96.0% liked)
News
23616 readers
3346 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Shit will straight up explode everywhere if so
I am not from the US, so I might be out of league here, but haven't recent US protest movements been somewhat ineffectual?
In a global context, successful protests movements tend to take active measures; blockading of transport and key commercial zones, organisation on a level that makes security forces ask themselves uncomfortable questions.
To be fair, such movements also tend to have very strange support (be it broad based or high approval amongst a very large minority).
It is not my intention to be defeatist or overly critical, just some thoughts. I could be wrong.
Sadly, yes. U.S. protest movements are generally not enough to make change. It takes a massive swing in public opinion before politicians consider doing something about it. Protesting helps, but it usually isn't enough. It took more than protesting to end the Vietnam War. Americans were majority in favour of it at the height of the protesting. And even when it started getting unpopular with the majority, Nixon didn't do anything about it until it benefitted him.
The only case I can think of where protesting (mostly) was enough- if you include the protests that did get violent and were deemed riots- is the civil rights movement. Even then, it took Kennedy getting assassinated for Johnson to put it through as a part of Kennedy's legacy. Was Kennedy ever going to push a civil rights act through? Was it all political hot air? We'll never know.
With the US civil rights movement it's worth considering the international context too. The cold war was was it's early phase of intensity and it was difficult for US to compete in terms of soft power with formal discrimination laws. The world was undergoing intense decolonisation during that period.
That being said, I don't support a defeatist view of the viability of protest. But you do need clear goals and a sufficiently large core group of people willing to take risks.
I wasn't trying to be defeatist. That's why I said they were not enough. More than protesting has to be done. In the American political system, that means a shitload of lobbying and networking to get to the ears of the people who need to hear it. Plus doing whatever you can to get the media on your side. The media turning on Nixon (and vice-versa) was a big help in turning people against Vietnam. There was a real "if the president says so, it's okay" attitude before that.
Oh god, yes, it will, and I guarantee this time people will be armed.