this post was submitted on 08 May 2024
393 points (98.3% liked)

politics

19229 readers
3130 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 145 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (75 children)

Proof that protest works.

Go ahead, downvote because you’re mad that I’m right.

[–] 3volver 41 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Upvoted because I'm happy you're right. Biden will lose to the orange criminal if he doesn't stand up and stop money and weapons to Israel. America is fucked if it keeps supporting Israel.

[–] recapitated 18 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I think you're overestimating how many voters are deeply against Israel's assault on Palestine, while also underestimating the ability of those virtuous people to understand the landslide of harmful outcomes that would come with another trump presidency.

[–] 3volver 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Trump won without the popular vote. He won Michigan by ~10,000 votes in 2016. I'm not the one who decided this system, but this system doesn't give a shit about the majority. It doesn't take much to sway the balance.

[–] captainlezbian 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah but the Dems will always lose without the majority

[–] 3volver 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Why is there a "but" in your statement? You're effectively agreeing with my sentiment. The Democrats will indeed always lose without the majority.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] zigmus64 29 points 7 months ago (7 children)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Delusional 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Well some protests. Did anything really happen at all after the BLM protests? Cops are still able to get away with murder and have very little oversight.

[–] dumpsterlid 13 points 7 months ago (2 children)

The BLM protests did work, they exposed that the US is a violent police state where voting doesn’t actually do anything to change whether we live in a violent police state because both the Republicans and centrist Democrats will collaborate as much as needed to betray their voters in order to sustain the system of policing and prisons.

The fact that in the wake of George Floyd a lot of cities and municipalities actually went more draconian with their policing laws in backlash is only an indicator of a failure of the BLM protests if you don’t look closer, step closer and you see the truth is far scarier, the BLM protests did massively change the psyche of America, it’s just that actually has no effect upon policy making because democracy is so broken in the US to the extreme point where many city governments chose to actively do their opposite of the will of the people as a show of force and a chilling warning to leftists.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

In particular, I witnessed ACAB go from something that when I would say it would be nearly impossible to defend to many people, to something almost everyone (with some lefty tendencies ofc) immediately understands and agrees with. The first shift was BLM, the second Uvalde.

[–] dumpsterlid 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Agreed, and the important thing to remember is that the shift in police to seeing the population they are policing as their enemy, and as universally dangerous in black and poor areas, has been accelerating for decades.

The other side (police, the prison industrial complex and the 1% who employs these thugs) is already very clear about this this being Us vs Them, but the general US population was still pretty heavily in denial about it up until BLM.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

Yup, and after BLM they would say "but who do you call if there is a shooter?", until Uvalde disproved that idea.

[–] Psychodelic 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I'm mostly with you, but if I tried to exercise and my legs broke, it'd be kinda wild to say the exercising "worked" because it exposed my shitty, unhealthy knees

That said, I'm all for changing up the narrative and using practical propaganda to expand support for protesters!

[–] dumpsterlid 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I’m mostly with you, but if I tried to exercise and my legs broke, it’d be kinda wild to say the exercising “worked” because it exposed my shitty, unhealthy knees

I mean I think where I disagree with this mapping of the metaphor is that it isn't a personal failing or problem, BLM was one of the biggest protest movements around police violence ever.

[–] Psychodelic 2 points 7 months ago

You're completely right.

I think framing the success in terms of awareness raised is likely the best way to demonstrate the impact of a protest/movement.

[–] retrospectology 10 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It depends on what kind of effect you're expecting. Did the US state and federal governments suddenly defund the police and start sending reparations to black Americans? No, not exactly. But Derek Chauvin was convicted and sent to prison for 20+ years. Different municipalities did reform their police departments and even implemented things like unarmed crisis response units. BLM has helped introduce policy discussions that would not otherwise be on the table.

The effects of a protest aren't always direct or immediate, their benefit is as much about changing the national narrative on any given issue than it is just achieving a primary goal by the time the protesrs end, and also it's a way to learn what's effective and what's not.

For example, part of why these recent protests were effective and why they illicited such a desperate response from authorities and the media is because the young people looked at the failed tactics from protests like the Occupy movement and adapted.

One if the weaknesses of Occupy was that there was no unified voice, instead the media would walk up and find some random individual, get them to make some unflattering soundbyte and then put that on blast on their networks. By contrast, the students anti-genocide protests designated a spokes person, and when the media approached random protestors they would just direct the media to that spokes person.

It's really smart and that kind of tactical refinement is arguably a result of the failures of Occupy. It made it difficult for the media to fool the public as to what these protests are really about, and you see that born out in people's growing awareness of how fucked up the situation in Gaza not only is right now, but has been for decades.

Protesting and social justice is iterative and experimental, it's about making it more difficult to just continue with business as usual going forward.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

we have to keep fighting back against this genocide

load more comments (71 replies)