this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2024
1294 points (97.7% liked)
196
16714 readers
3651 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It kinda makes sense, protests are supposed to be peaceful, why bring a mask if your intent is a peaceful protest?
Protest is never peaceful, if it is you're doing it wrong. It should be non-violent and as respectful as possible but it needs to be disruptive and you can't be peacefully disruptive
Peaceful and non-violent are synonyms….
You also contradict yourself as well. You say to be non-violent, then you say you can’t be peacefully disruptive… those contradict each other.
If me and my fellow protestors block a road, we are being non-violent, but we are being disruptive.
And that is peaceful as well, until it isn’t.
...and in 99% of the cases where it stops being "peaceful" it's because cops come in and violently assault everyone to try to break up the protest.
I'm really not sure of the point you're trying to make. Protest can be peaceful, non-violent and disruptive.
You’re the one arguing with me after I said protests are peaceful. What the fucking hell is going on here?
Sorry, my bad, I confused you with the guy above you. That ones on me.
No, they aren't. You must be disruptive, which isn't peaceful.
How can you be non-violent and not peaceful at the same time…? lmfao. They mean the exact same thing.
Hmm I see what the dictionaries are saying but (using an example from above) I think argument exists that:
If me and my fellow protestors block a road, we are being non-violent, but we are not being peaceful.
But it's Friday and no time for argument!
What’s not peaceful about blocking a road?
The argument falls apart when you ask for the difference lol.
Peaceful: freedom from disturbance; tranquility.
It is a disturbance to the system, and it isn't tranquil. They are not synonyms. Non-violent means you aren't hurting anyone, peaceful means you aren't disturbing anything. You can't be violent and peaceful but you can be non-violent and non-peaceful. Peace is sufficient but not necessary for non-violence.
Literally the next definition after that one….
SYNONYMS…
Peaceful literally means non-violent…. Literally defines the bloody term lmfao.
So, overlapping meanings, not synonyms
They are both, one is defined by other, AND they are synonyms.
Isn’t language fucked up?
One definition of peaceful is synonymous, and one isn't. This is exactly why language has so many synonyms, each one is sliiiightly different. Choosing one intentionally instead of another is important.
In this instance, "peace" is being defined (not directly, but through context) as status quo, going about your day unhindered. "Violence" is being defined as causing direct physical harm to a person, and possibly property depending on who you ask.
With these definitions laid out, it's easy enough to see a situation that is not violent (no one got hurt at all) and also not peaceful (some people's days were interrupted) - one person mentioned blocking a road. This is a FANTASTIC example of non-peaceful non-violent protest. No one likes a pedant.
Goes on a bloviated pedantic rant…
Yep, just like the people trying to say blocking a road isn’t peaceful. They are trying to pedantically choose a definition to make a point. Blocking a road is absolutely peaceful, trying to explain it any other way would be to be pendantic. Lmfao.
I see a lot of other people have responded with examples and argument.
So I'll disagree and say the argument falls apart when I don't argue. (Cause it's Friday. You ain't got no job. You ain't got shit to do. I'm gonna get you high today.)
Disruptive doesn't mean violent, but it isn't peaceful.
Peaceful and non-violent mean the exact same thing…
They do not.
Skydiving isn't peaceful, but it certainly isn't violent.
What’s not peaceful about skydiving…?
I'd go with the wind, noise, speed, and imminent possiblity of death.
So going for a drive wouldn’t be peaceful either…?
So… driving again? Or riding a motor bike? Not peaceful…? Strange perspective to have…
Strange example to try and use lol.
Go ahead, take a nice bath, read a book, or do some origami while skydiving, or driving at 200mph with the top down.
You know what is peaceful? Take a hike.
Getting chased by bears is peaceful..? Getting attacked by wasps is peaceful…?
Anything can be twisted one way or the other dude lol.
You're making petty, empty, semantic "arguments" and you know it.
Also, whoosh.
And I knew that, lmfao hence why I gave you the same stupid bull shit.
This is what my argument is.
You can’t be non-violent without also being peaceful…
So yeah skydiving is actually peaceful by definition, no matter which pedantic argument EITHER of us use.
Ah, so if someone catches a charge for disturbing the peace, then they must have been violent?
1st definition of peaceful. adjective
You are factually wrong on this statement.
The term is “causing a disturbance” they avoid that term for a very good reason.
You understand a word can mean multiple things… yeah…?
There is no first definition, just multiple, they aren’t ranked, other dictionaries have the one I put first. So what point do you think that was making?
I thought your point was that neither definition fit my usage of peaceful? Is that not what you meant by...
Does skydiving involve war or violence…? It fits both and neither depending on how you twist it… yeesh.
Peaceful means not being disturbed, nonviolent means no violence.
Peaceful literally means non-violent.
If you are being non-violent by definition you are also being peaceful….
Peaceful and non-violent mean the exact same thing…
They do not.
Non-violent in the context of political action does not exclude property damage and looting. A non violent protest is still disruptive, it's the entire point
In the USA its because they use facial recognition and then decide to harass you for the next decade over every small infraction they can.
Because nobody in a position of power would ever abuse that power! /s
There have been events where nazis show up to counter protest and film/photograph you to then share among themselves so they can attack you later.
Thats happening a lot lately in Germany. At every fucking Antifa protest at least one suspicious looking guy films with his handy. I honestly doubt, that they have the necessary skill and contact with other fascists in other cities to identify everybody, but I still don‘t want them to know my face
Masks are no indicator of criminality. The idea that bad protesters wear masks is complete horseshit. It serves to divide movements and prevent momentum from being gained. It seeks to dissolve solidarity that couls have been gained at the protests.
Masks allow peaceful protests to remain peaceful if they prevent the violence of the justice system. Sometimes protesters and organizers are simply arrested and thrown in jail for a bit, sometimes even given nonsense charges, which is something that happens to organizers and some protesters in my area.
As well as that, masks can simply be good secops in some counter-protests such as protesting against fascist marches, gatherings, etc. If I’m showing up to show nazis or boogaloos or proud boys that they are unwelcome, the last thing I want is a violent right wing extremist group to try and doxx me. If I’m escorting people to a drag-queen story hour, I don’t want fascists to doxx me.
It’s also smart in some areas, such as Harvard’s campus where organizers are constantly doxxed and accused of antisemitism even though they are not.
Finally, what if the government makes your particular movement illegal? What if they start throwing the book people, accusing everyone involved(or at least the ones they can catch) of domestic terrorism? Wearing a mask will make it a lot easier for you to maintain your freedom when faced with the tyrrany of the state.
Also, masks look cool, and that’s a pretty good reason imo.
Because a nasty disease spread mostly by sneezing and coughing is going around.
"Peaceful protest" is the ideal they push because it doesn't work. If it worked it wouldn't be praised. They don't want change.
Who is "they"?
In this specific instance, anyone who stands to benefit from the status quo
Protests only work because they carry an unstated show of force.