• Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Whoever told you that, stop listening to them. An effective protest is one that expresses your views, and ideally changes people’s minds and builds support for your cause. Disrupting people’s lives is typically counterproductive to actually gaining support.

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      The only way to be heard is to burn down your neighbor’s businesses and rob Target! And if you do anything to protect your livelihood you’re just a right wing nut job!

      • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are genuinely people who think like that. To be fair, the George Floyd protests/riots changed things in a way that peaceful protest had so far failed to do.

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Some minor progress was made because of the millions of people who turned out to peacefully protest. Those who rioted and destroyed shit only contributed ammunition to the opposition.

          • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I disagree, I think having an entire block burnt down made a lot of people decide they don’t want to see this happen again, in a way a regular protest wouldn’t have.

            • helenslunch@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Really? You think people had their businesses burned down and their town destroyed and thought to themselves “boy I hope these people get what they wanted!” or do you think they thought “These people are human garbage and I hope they rot in prison”? Which one of these thought processes makes more sense to you?

              • Madison420@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Correct. English sufferage was only gained after a group of women took on learning jujitsu, wearing badass capes and paper body armor and went out burning government buildings and breaking all the windows in anti sufferagette buildings/homes and when police showed up they’d kick the shit out of them with jujitsu and then they’d make a speech the police couldn’t break up because their faces were meeting their asses for the first time and in a most uncomfortable way.

                Ed: because it’s interesting and I’m sure people won’t take my word.

                https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffrajitsu

              • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                The protests started because the police murdered a man in full view of a group of witnesses, a lot of people had a vested interest in making sure that didn’t happen again, in a way that non violent protest would not have achieved.

                • helenslunch@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Quite the opposite. A non-violent protest would have achieved much more. The rioters and looters only obstructed the cause.