Support NeoGAF

[The Technomancer]

Protests have to be inconvenient to be effective. There has to be a practical reason to want them to stop. This is why NoDAPL was effective and Occupy Wall Street was...not

 

[GoldenEye 007]

I show a little concern about that style of protesting and I'm woefully ignorant?

The US is a country that uses violence that moves forward. This is fact. Whites also do not care to entertain any other peaceful method of moving forward.

 

[Siegcram]

I'm for right to protest, but I think that kind of protest that completely shuts down major avenues, traps thousands of people in traffic, and potentially causes them to lose their jobs over being late to work, etc is going too far. At the least, I don't think that's going to endear those people to the protesters' causes.

Can't be for something you don't understand.

 

[Derwind]

Okay a question here in regards to streets/highway protests. Are we talking about protesting at the sides of freeways or on the sidewalks, or are we talking like completely occupying a freeway or busy avenue and shutting it down completely, stranding thousands of people trying to get to work or home at rush hour?

I'm for right to protest, but I think that kind of protest that completely shuts down major avenues, traps thousands of people in traffic, and potentially causes them to lose their jobs over being late to work, etc is going too far. At the least, I don't think that's going to endear those people to the protesters' causes.

That is the price you pay for a functioning healthy democracy.

Protesting is not meant to be convenient or manageable, it's working if it ruffles feathers and is pushed to the forefront of people's mind.

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

Since I'm already seeing people Nana Ruthing because of protesters on the street:

Seriously, the "I don't agree with these purposed laws, but protesters on the street are..." talk isn't helping and it's only going to make people feel okay to actually start removing the right to protest.

 

[Palette Swap]

These kinds of efforts compounded with the promised militarization of police really send bad vibes.

But hey, political correctness is a terrible thing. Except when you're the one enforcing it.

(Nevermind that these are the same people who will hold their whitewashed version of MLK as an example of how people should behave)

 

[Incarmine]

That's not the point of protests. Protesters care to have allies, yes, but for the most part it is design to hurt the government in someway until they listen. Republican listen to the protests and want to make these disgusting laws. Democrats listen to the protests and they want to actually take the time to discuss what needs to be done.

There's a reason why these types of protests succeed while other more non intrusive ones fails, they get the most attention.

Okay, that makes sense. And I supposed getting a bunch of people fired from their jobs for being late to work might work up enough collective anger that the government starts to take notice. You have to be disruptive to be noticed.

But do you really have to ruin the days (or lives) of those people stuck in traffic in the process?

I suppose if you subscribe to the notion that you have to make a few sacrifices for the bigger cause, then it's okay.

But it still feels over the line to me.

Protesting is not meant to be convenient or manageable, it's working if it ruffles feathers and is pushed to the forefront of people's mind.

Okay, but here's the thing. What's going to be on the forefront of all these people's minds is that they lost their jobs over a protest that blocked their freeway. Do you think they're going to vote in favor of those protesters?

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

Okay, that makes sense. And I supposed getting a bunch of people fired from their jobs for being late to work might work up enough collective anger that the government starts to take notice. You have to be disruptive to be noticed.

But do you really have to ruin the days (or lives) of those people stuck in traffic in the process?

I suppose if you subscribe to the notion that you have to make a few sacrifices for the bigger cause, then it's okay.

But it still feels over the line to me.

As I said months ago, I'm okay with you losing your job if the alternative is that these people lose their lives. Also, even if the government approve these laws, it's not going to stop protesters, it's only going to mobilize them more and anyone of them that dies protesting is going to be seen as martyrs. Then things are going to get even more violent.

 

[akira28]

So many fictional lives saved, yay.

Nana Ruth coming back with a vengeance. just gonna run your ass over next time.

 

[RedHill]

On the flip side, maybe robbing the left of its ability to protest will redirect our collective focus to the actual, most effective form of showing disdain for Government: voting.

Trust me, the people protesting in the streets aren't the ones not voting.

 

[His Majesty]

Okay, that makes sense. And I supposed getting a bunch of people fired from their jobs for being late to work might work up enough collective anger that the government starts to take notice. You have to be disruptive to be noticed.

But do you really have to ruin the days (or lives) of those people stuck in traffic in the process?

I suppose if you subscribe to the notion that you have to make a few sacrifices for the bigger cause, then it's okay.

But it still feels over the line to me.

There should be a balance between protesting and being disruptive. When protests erupt in Belgium the unions usually block people from going to work, all public transport goes in shutdown mode and they put up road blockades. Last time this lead to a person dying because the ambulance couldn't reach the hospital in time.

 

[Isaac Otherworld]

Wow, not allowed to protest? Wtf country is USA turning into?

The Fourth Reich.

I honestly think the EU and the rest of the world need to prepare for the possibility of the U.S. becoming a full on rogue nation.

 

[GoldenEye 007]

On the flip side, maybe robbing the left of its ability to protest will redirect our collective focus to the actual, most effective form of showing disdain for Government: voting.

Maybe it'll also be effective in removing your head from your sphincter.

 

[FantasticMrFoxdie]

wow

 

[Incarmine]

As I said months ago, I'm okay with you losing your job if the alternative is that these people lose their lives. Also, even if the government approve these laws, it's not going to stop protesters, it's only going to mobilize them more and anyone of them that dies protesting is going to be seen as martyrs. Then things are going to get even more violent.

I think the real question we need to ask is are YOU willing to sacrifice your career for your cause?

Because asking other people to sacrifice their wellbeing for the better cause is selfish if you yourself aren't willing to pay the same price.

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

I think the real question we need to ask is are YOU willing to sacrifice your career for your cause?

Because asking other people to sacrifice their wellbeing for the better cause is selfish if you yourself aren't willing to pay the same price.

Yes, yes I am.

 

[How About No]

I like to think most employers are going to be understanding if you call in and say "shit's crazy out here, I'm not going to be able to get off the roads in time, I'm stuck out here with a lot of other people"

 

[Rentahamster]

If these get passed it'll surely bite them in the ass when Tea Party 2.0 springs up.

 

[Maximus.]

My goodness...stand up for yourselves.

 

[Derwind]

Okay, but here's the thing. What's going to be on the forefront of all these people's minds is that they lost their jobs over a protest that blocked their freeway. Do you think they're going to vote in favor of those protesters?

They may not vote in favour of the protestors but at the very least they will call upon their elected officials to get involved.

No matter how much you want to feel uninvolved, if you are a member of a nations Democracy and reap the benefits, you are not just a bystander, if someone has to remind you of that by inconveniencing you then so be it.

 

[Roberto Larcos]

What about the emergency services argument against the blocking of major roads? Peaceful protesting is absolutely something I support, but if that means that an ambulance can't get through to a hospital, or a fire engine can't make it to the scene of a fire fast enough, then I lose all sympathy for protestors.

There are examples of this happening. This is not a hypothetical. I'd suggest that it's such an obvious concern that any protestors must have considered it, and chosen to overlook it. I cannot support that. Would you support the picketing of a hospital?

 

[Keasar]

Wow, not allowed to protest? Wtf country is USA turning into?

Spoiler

Great show, highly recommended.

 

[Rentahamster]

(I know some of you hate The Intercept but you can just click the links through to the news sources they're citing...)

It also surprises me that this is a thing. Especially among progressives.

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

What about the emergency services argument against the blocking of major roads? Peaceful protesting is absolutely something I support, but if that means that an ambulance can't get through to a hospital, or a fire engine can't make it to the scene of a fire fast enough, then I lose all sympathy for protestors.

There are examples of this happening. This is not a hypothetical. I'd suggest that it's such an obvious concern that any protestors must have considered it, and chosen to overlook it. I cannot support that. Would you support the picketing of a hospital?

Yes. It is their right to do so.

I never saw it happen, but if it does then so be it. Better be a worthy cause to do that, like the hospital refusing to care for or harming certain people because of artificial reasons.

See, it's not so point blank, is it.

 

[Ethelwulf]

"Economic terrorism?"... Sounds fascist.

 

[Siegcram]

If these get passed it'll surely bite them in the ass when Tea Party 2.0 springs up.

That would require the law to be enforced equally. Which won't be the case.

 

[nelsonroyale]

I have got a more accurate definition of 'economic terrorism'...it is called vulture capitalism.

Either way, this is the sort of shit that is on the slippery slope to totalitarianism. It should insight mass protest...The 'lazy asses' are those that would sit and take this kind of act.

Roberto Larcos: Well they can let the ambulance through or the ambulance can re-route. Simple. I mean, what about traffic jams? They limit ambulance movement. Why don't we also ban traffic jams and limit cars in certain areas? You example is fair, but life is complex and what you say in no way counters holding protest on serious issues.

 

[TheFierceGentleman]

I think the real question we need to ask is are YOU willing to sacrifice your career for your cause?

Because asking other people to sacrifice their wellbeing for the better cause is selfish if you yourself aren't willing to pay the same price.

I know this woman personally, and I know she would.

Also, she was talking about people losing their lives for a cause, if you lost your job cause of traffic caused by protesters, your boss shouldn't fire you. Maybe we should have a law against that instead of running people over just to get to work.

 

[Roberto Larcos]

Yes. It is their right to do so.

I never saw it happen, but if it does then so be it. Better be a worthy cause to do that, like the hospital refusing to care for or harming certain people because of artificial reasons.

See, it's not so point blank, is it.

In such a case, the doctors themselves would be criminally liable for violating the law, so there would be courses of action other than ending hundreds (if not thousands of lives) as collateral damage.

So no, I would still not accept blocking access to any basic necessity - healthcare, food, water, electricity.

 

[Jmanunknown]

I can't believe people are in here actually going on about the right type of protesting. Some people need to learn that their is no type of happy medium in protesting your not gonna get your safe spaces when people are angry and frustrated. People have been arrested, beaten, and even given their lives for these types of freedoms to exist and i find it to be a slap in the face to those people and America as a whole. America would not exist today without these forms of protest so anyone thinking about getting on their high horse and talking about right forms of protest needs to take a few history lessons.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

They're villains who think they're heroes.

Do they really tho? I think they know what they are

 

[TheFierceGentleman]

In such a case, the doctors themselves would be criminally liable for violating the law, so there would be courses of action other than ending hundreds (if not thousands of lives) as collateral damage.

So no, I would still not accept blocking access to any basic necessity - healthcare, food, water, electricity.

In some cases, they are not. For example, if the FADA Act is passed and a doctor decides against treating a transgender, bisexual, or homosexual patient for "religious reasons", they are in the legal clear.

Edit: Oh right, and they do it regardless of the FADA Act with no legal consequences in some states, how 'bout that?

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

In such a case, the doctors themselves would be criminally liable for violating the law, so there would be courses of action other than ending hundreds (if not thousands of lives) as collateral damage.

So no, I would still not accept blocking access to any basic necessity - healthcare, food, water, electricity.

Except, you know, they're not. There's been plenty of hospitals, religious ones, that have actively refused to performed abortions to save the mother's life and some of those women die. Or how about doctors that have actively refused to treat their LGBTQ patients, some even harming them. Those doctors and hospitals rarely if ever suffer the consequences.

Again, it's not so black and white as you think it is.

 

[Siegcram]

In such a case, the doctors themselves would be criminally liable for violating the law, so there would be courses of action other than ending hundreds (if not thousands of lives) as collateral damage.

So no, I would still not accept blocking access to any basic necessity - healthcare, food, water, electricity.

Misread.

But you're still incorrect as this already happens without major legal repercussions.

 

[EGM1966]

You have the right to arm yourselves.

But not to protest.

Maybe I'm cynical but from outside it looks like they're just using fine detail concerns (which are broadly valid) as a backdoor to restrict liberties.

 

[Paz]

Ah yes, just roll over and accept your rights being stripped away because obviously they aren't after YOU and it inconvenienced you at some point, and I'm sure if and when they do come for you, there'll still be someone left to cry out.

Some of the arguments in this thread yeesh.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

In such a case, the doctors themselves would be criminally liable for violating the law, so there would be courses of action other than ending hundreds (if not thousands of lives) as collateral damage.

So no, I would still not accept blocking access to any basic necessity - healthcare, food, water, electricity.

I feel like we are now making up complete fantasy scenarios.

 

[Silav101]

Yes, yes I am.

My mother and I were on EDSA avenue in Manila, the Philippines on February 23, 1986. I wasn't even 6 years old at the time, now that I reflect, and I only really remember it being terribly damn hot and goddamn, there were a shitload of people.

30 years later, my mother is still proud she was part of it, though apologises for the incredibly rough time we had leading up to that day, and a few years afterward. I do like to think hardship builds character, but I am lucky in many ways for my family being there.

I do not foresee this happening any time soon in the United States. Things simply aren't as bad as they can get. This means the moderates are not fussed enough to choose a side, yet, since the status quo means everything runs more-or-less as it did yesterday.

I also doubt whether any such event in the US being non-violent, or staying that way for long, considering the proliferation of guns.

The better question is, and you have to be very honest with yourself here - are you willing to risk, and if need be, sacrifice your life (and by extension, your family's, as well) and wellbeing? This is the end-result, after all. Especially if your protests do not work. It is NOT an easy road to travel along. I ask this because the lives you affect are not just yours, but those you love, as well - and they may not agree.

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

I feel like we are now making up complete fantasy scenarios.

Nana Ruthing, but hey, he said these weren't hypothetical.

 

[PopeReal]

Nana Ruthers should be ecstatic.

 

[UberTag]

What happened to their fetishization of the constitution? You know, their main argument for shutting down any progress in gun safety.

This is unconstitutional.

That relic of a garbage outdated document only has relevance in their minds when it comes to their precious gun lobby.
Otherwise, they could give a rat's ass about any other personal freedom mentioned within it.

The first one legalizes manslaughter. Like... how can these even be proposed?

That's the "Grand Theft Auto in real-life" bill.
Who hasn't dreamed of taking a motor vehicle and accidentally hitting the gas through a giant crowd of pedestrians?
If they're Democrats/Liberals/protesters, you're just doing them the favor of sending them to God a little early. They should be grateful.
Better yet, if you're a white cop, you'll get a commendation for it.

 

[Blue Ninja]

Jesus H. Christ. Good luck, America, you'll need it.

 

[More_Badass]

So I guess it's only okay when Republicans/Tea Party/etc are protesting. But god forbid minorities and other groups dare protest...

 

[neorej]

"Let's not jump to conclusions. I'm sure it'll be fine."

"Maybe it won't be so bad, let's wait and see."



This is how Trump will build the wall, Mexicans will build it to keep Americans trying to escape the fascist regime out.

 

[Dehnus]

The first one legalizes manslaughter. Like... how can these even be proposed?

BEcause straight, white, old man with car is allowed to do anything he wants... DUH! Haven't you learned that yet?

 

[Roberto Larcos]

I feel like we are now making up complete fantasy scenarios.

Yeah, that wasn't my original intention, but was required for the rebuttal of a fantasy scenario.

As for omissions by Doctors not being illegal in the US, that's fucked up, but I would still suggest that not blocking access (perhaps protesting outside instead) would be far better, even in the fucked up circumstances that exist.

 

[Ms.Galaxy]

My mother and I were on EDSA avenue in Manila, the Philippines on February 23, 1986. I wasn't even 6 years old at the time, now that I reflect, and I only really remember it being terribly damn hot and goddamn, there were a shitload of people.

30 years later, my mother is still proud she was part of it, though apologises for the incredibly rough time we had leading up to that day, and a few years afterward. I do like to think hardship builds character, but I am lucky in many ways for my family being there.

I do not foresee this happening any time soon in the United States. Things simply aren't as bad as they can get. This means the moderates are not fussed enough to choose a side, yet, since the status quo means everything runs more-or-less as it did yesterday.

I also doubt whether any such event in the US being non-violent, or staying that way for long, considering the proliferation of guns.

The better question is, and you have to be very honest with yourself here - are you willing to risk, and if need be, sacrifice your life (and by extension, your family's, as well) and wellbeing? This is the end-result, after all. Especially if your protests do not work. It is NOT an easy road to travel along. I ask this because the lives you affect are not just yours, but those you love, as well - and they may not agree.

Yes, and my family would agree with these choice I make considering our family's history. My grandfather fought against the Portuguese government's colonialism and mistreatment of the natives in Mozambique, he sacrificed his entire family fortune to help those natives, and took his wife and children down with him, and they were on his side regardless.

During the 70s, my mother was banned from entering the United States because she aided women and children who suffered from abuse of an authoritarian government by flying them from Portugal to the U.S. illegally. My family supported that desision and was proud of her to do it. You know, she lost access to her first born son. She given up my brother to her ex husband, who was recently granted citizenship in the U.S. at the time, to make sure he has a better life here than in Portugal when she got caught.

I have fought for the rights of the LGBTQ, I've attended marches, protests, and volunteer in various organization to further the cause of equality, including the Trevor Project. I know that maybe one day, I might get hurt or die for my cause, especially when dealing with hate and bigorty, and I don't care because my cause is worth it. My family, although we don't see eye to eye on LGBTQ rights (That's now changing, thank god), would agree to it. My mother definitely does.

You're talking to someone who's family has a history of fighting against fascist government for the people. I understand the risks involved in fighting these causes and the sacrifices that come with it.

 

[Siegcram]

Yeah, that wasn't my original intention, but was required for the rebuttal of a fantasy scenario.

As for omissions by Doctors not being illegal in the US, that's fucked up, but I would still suggest that not blocking access (perhaps protesting outside instead) would be far better, even in the fucked up circumstances that exist.

You know streets are "outside", right? And a big enough crowd will always block the access to something.

So instead of taking away people's rights to protect precious hypotheticals, maybe take to the streets to protests things like the repeal of the ACA, which will kill more Nana Ruths than all historical protests put together.

 

[A Link to the Past]

"We'll stop those protesters" - Republicans, circa 1960's

 

[Dreams-Visions]

People voted for R's because economic anxiety eh? I'm sure reducing workers rights will help reduce economic anxiety in R supporters.