How do you feel about "inconvenient" protesting

[tippy2k2]

He didn't say that those statutes don't exist, just that he wasn't going to list all the specifics.

I know. I asked him to prove it's illegal, and he said, "No, I won't, so take my word for it." I make it a personal policy not to take the word of someone who refuses to prove what he says.

There were no arrests at my states highway protest but I Googled around and found this:

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/news/local/2014/12/08/protesters-slow-traffic-on-i-95-nb-in-jacksonville/20088207/

20 people were arrested and charged with "criminal obstruction of a roadway, a misdemeanor offense. One protester, though, was charged with battery on a law enforcement officer, a felony charge." (this protest had a few fists fly when the cops moved to break it up; hence the battery charge for one individual).

 

[Erttheking]

The problem with society is that plenty of people condemn the doing of things like inconvenient protesting, yet doing stuff like that is how our ancestors won the rights we enjoy daily.

I mean last summer there was a massive protest at a local grocery chain that I work at when a CEO who was going to raise prices and cut employee benefits took charge. The warehouse workers went on strike and a ton of customers boycotted the shelves. Plenty of people had to buy their groceries at a more expensive store and plenty of workers lost hours. But we got our old CEO back.

Sometimes you gotta get your hands dirty if you want to do anything.

Our ancestors refined the art of protesting, people today can't protest for shit. I'd love to see a major protest today that was as elegant, refined, thought out, purposeful, and organized as those of our ancestors.

Google Market Basket. The store I worked at. It's actually a pretty big store, it's spread all throughout New England. We protested there for a solid month, even when people like me (Part timers) almost lost our jobs. The entire community rallied around us...god damn it it was awesome.

 

[Erttheking]

The problem with society is that plenty of people condemn the doing of things like inconvenient protesting, yet doing stuff like that is how our ancestors won the rights we enjoy daily.

I mean last summer there was a massive protest at a local grocery chain that I work at when a CEO who was going to raise prices and cut employee benefits took charge. The warehouse workers went on strike and a ton of customers boycotted the shelves. Plenty of people had to buy their groceries at a more expensive store and plenty of workers lost hours. But we got our old CEO back.

Sometimes you gotta get your hands dirty if you want to do anything.

Our ancestors refined the art of protesting, people today can't protest for shit. I'd love to see a major protest today that was as elegant, refined, thought out, purposeful, and organized as those of our ancestors.

Google Market Basket. The store I worked at. It's actually a pretty big store, it's spread all throughout New England. We protested there for a solid month, even when people like me (Part timers) almost lost our jobs. The entire community rallied around us...god damn it it was awesome.

Nice! What were you protesting for? You followed the 4 rules right?

Getting our old CEO back, who kept the prices low and was big on employee benefits.

Yup, we did.

 

[Baresark]

Part of me is really annoyed by it. But if it's for a good cause I will be inconvenienced.

I lose a lot more patience when a protest or movement is not cohesive or gets co opted by people with their own agenda. You lose me right away with that one. Like in the occupy Wallstreet movement. I would have a lot more respect for you if you had cohesive ideas. Way back in the day, during war protests about Vietnam, they movement was cohesive. Others attached themselves to it for their own reasons, but when words were said, it was in service to what the protest was about.

Hell, in 2004 I attended some anti-war protests myself, and that is what they were about.

 

[Uncle Comrade]

Sensible advice snip

What is this 'be civil' nonsense? Everyone knows that the only real way to get people on your side is to harass them until they give in. Nobody pays attention to organised protests with well-defined goals and sensible solutions, only an angry, disruptive rabble can make them sit up and take note.

No movement has ever brought anyone round to their way of thinking by being reasonable, you need to bully them into agreeing with you. (Pro Tip: Make sure to tell them that if they don't completely support you, they must therefore be in favour of black people getting shot/minimum wage workers not earning enough to live on/whatever. Because nobody can argue with that logic, they'll have no choice but to join you. Throw in that MLK quote for good measure, it really gets people on your side, and doesn't sound condescending at all.)

Logic, reason and courtesy never changed anything. Only by massively inconveniencing people and shouting down all opposition can you really get something done. That's what I've learned reading this thread, anyway.

 

[Strazdas]

The whole purpose of protest is to make others inconvieninet enough that they may think a solution needs to be found. Without that portests are useless. And since we live in democracy, the larger group it inconvieniences the faster it can get noticed.

 

[carnex]

On one hand I hate when my moving through my city is obstructed by people in places masses of people have no business of being. On the other hand, it's basically the only way for some groups to cause inconvenience that would force someone in power to deal with the problem.

But, even if i do hate such inconveniences in general i still do support them since many are about issues that are important and everyone ignores them.

What I find unforgivable is that my city gets under siege when foreign diplomats come. That's something I find no excuses for (of, more truthfully said, i refuse them).

But civil protests, no matter how inconvenient, are a tool of plebs fight back at the powers that be, and are, therefor, here to stay for without them we would be one big step closer to cattle.

 

[LetalisK]

I've never had my opinion about a political issue changed by a group of jack offs deciding to block a major highway. I don't believe there is anyone so weak minded that they had their mind changed not by a good argument, but by the completely irrelevant act of standing in the middle of a major road to obstruct traffic. All that kind of protesting creates is a resentment against the protesters, rightfully, and a resentment against their cause, unfortunately.

 

[Patathatapon]

Protest all you like, hand out pamphlets to passerby's, yell at me for what I'm doing, I don't care, but don't stop me from going where I need to be. I'd rather not be fired from my job because of a protest.

It's effective because if it shuts something down the government needs to do something about it, quickly. Which will usually either end in violence, or a lot of arresting.

 

[Belaam]

N Every protester who does should be arrested.

This.

It's selfish, childish, and an asshole way to protest.

But not this.

" shut down for hours as police arrest 10,000 peaceful protesters" is a good headline to show support for your cause and maybe even get some traction with city government, just from the financial costs of arresting and charging that many people, plus all the bad press. It's certainly far more effective than waving signs no one will read or committing other crimes (looting, vandalism) that will just hurt the face of your cause.

Just tell them ahead of time, "Hey, we're shutting down this place, we expect you'll have to arrest X numbers of us, and we will happily let through any ambulance or fire vehicles."

 

[V4Viewtiful]

I understand the reasoning behind the question but by it's definition (or execution) all protests are in convenient .

I guess as long as they aren't talking to me i'm fine with it.

 

[Adaephon]

My wife almost died because protestors were blocking off the only road that leads to the hospital and she was going into labour, so frankly I think the so-called inconvenient protestors all deserve to be run over and die gasping on the side of the road. And the dumb part was that I did 9and do) actually agree with that protest's goals, but I wanted anyone involved with those methods to be killed as slowly and painfully as possible for what they did.

When I was forced a few months ago to picket as part of the BC teachers strike (which I voted against but hey, why let the wants and needs of the students get in the way of giving me a marginally higher salary?) I saw several of my colleagues go out of their way to block traffic and inconvenience people (which was illegal and also violated not only union policy but also the deal signed with the city hall about how the protests would be done)and it just infuriated me. Maybe that slight 10-15 minute delay just cost that person their job, or miss an important appointment, or be late to getting a check-up, or leave their small children in a dangerous position, or anything else.

Okay obviously sometimes you need to inconvenience some people in some places, I get that. But there are lines that should not be crossed. Your employer is oppressing you (whether really or just perceived) then by all means create a picket line or what have you around the entrance to your store or factory or school, that makes sense. But don't attack people who cross your line (a fellow, now thankfully retired, teacher once threw a brick at a parent's head for trying to walk across the line and pick up his daughter's textbooks. She was not punished in any way for this). And don't block off major lines of transport and communication, you never know who your going to be killing as a result. Also, since a whole bunch of people are trying to equate any protest to Ghandi and Martin Luther King by saying that since THEY did it to great effect then anyone else doing it is equally valid, why not bring up the fact that a lot of historical bad guys did it too? Fascists, Communists, Anarchists, Cultists, Religious Extremists, the list goes on. C'mon people, you're better than being so intellectually dishonest as to try and use Ghandi as a human shield.

 

[TallanKhan]

I am 100% in favor of protesting. I am 100% not in favor of protests getting in the way of people's lives. Protest on the side of the highway, do not block the highway. People need to get to work/school/whathaveyou and by impeding a major highway they could have caused actual loss of life. What if emergency services couldn't respond to a critical situation in time because it was stuck on that highway?

This discussion reminds me of the Warren Farrel protestors at University of Toronto a while back. They were there to protest hateful speech and oppression all the while they were shouting hateful things like "Fuck Warren Farrel" and calling anybody that wanted to listen to him "scum" and all manner of other hateful things. Not to mention they were actually impeding people access to his lecture by blocking all entrances and exits into the complex. The fear of violence was so high that local police had to be called in and the protestors were eventually removed by force because the protestors were beginning to taunt and assault people that wanted to get in, including police.

Everybody has the right for their voice to be heard but you cross a line when you cause others actual trouble or take away the freedoms of another.

I would broadly agree with this although I do understand the perspective that a protest that doesn't inconvenience anyone is likely to have less impact.

Overall I think it is a matter of sensible degrees. If fast food workers want to go on strike so the restraunt closes and then protest outside? Fine, I'll go and get my hamburger someonwhere else or will just not bother, depending on just how much I wanted one anyway. If people block a highway stopping people getting to work and potentially endagering lives (preventing emergency services responding to incidents etc.) then that is 100% not OK and shouldn't be permitted.

Also, something I just want to throw in here, a riot is not a protest, it's a riot. Torching cars and smashing windows is not a legitimate expression of unhappiness, its vandalism and wanton destruction. Criminal behaviour is not absolved because you were trying to make a point, regardless of how valid you think your point is.