Protesting is a valid form of active citizenship. A protest should be pressuring the government to do its job, or else it’s just a gathering. So yes, most of us especially Americans should agree that protesting is good regardless of if you agree with the people protesting or not.
But government isn’t able to do every single thing in its remit, so effective protest also sets government priorities amongst multiple valid things it could be doing. That means that a protest for something that is a job of government could be encouraging the government to do something less important. It could be encouraging the government to adopt measures that are harmful to the country even though they achieve something.
I consider it part of the government’s job to secure the country’s borders and prevent illegal immigration… but I think it’s pretty far down the list of priorities compared to other stuff. So protests against immigration, aimed at getting the government to reduce it, are dumb in my opinion. Yet it seems to me that your rule gives it the thumbs up because it’s “pressuring the government to do its job” and “a valid from of active citizenship.”
I suspect you don’t really want to see more anti-immigrant protests, so I think it’s more complicated than that.
Well I’m actually someone who doesn’t agree with stringent border control. We have enough law enforcement inside our country to manage crimes. But yes I would still respect your protest to get more immigration enforcement because it’s your civil right and your political voices. It’s very easy for me to fundamentally disagree with your cause, while agreeing to your right to support your cause.
That’s fair enough. I think though we are probably talking about slightly different things - while I also agree that anti-immigrant protesters have the right to protest, what I’m getting at is that I nevertheless would rather they weren’t protesting about something I don’t agree with. There are lots of things people have the right to do that I don’t want them to actually do. But with overseas protests, I only know that people have that right to protest; I don’t know whether I support them exercising it in that particular situation.
The point is when you have a real protest, or something you really disagree with, you want the support of other people, to get that you have to constantly support people’s right to protest. You can protest their protest! That’s the point. You can go out and debate them in the streets. The point is people are openly discussing and bringing attention to problems. It’s a core feature of a free society. I don’t have strong feelings on immigration either way. I do have strong feelings on a bunch of Nazis killing people in my community under the guise of immigration enforcement.
Protesting is a valid form of active citizenship. A protest should be pressuring the government to do its job, or else it’s just a gathering. So yes, most of us especially Americans should agree that protesting is good regardless of if you agree with the people protesting or not.
But government isn’t able to do every single thing in its remit, so effective protest also sets government priorities amongst multiple valid things it could be doing. That means that a protest for something that is a job of government could be encouraging the government to do something less important. It could be encouraging the government to adopt measures that are harmful to the country even though they achieve something.
I consider it part of the government’s job to secure the country’s borders and prevent illegal immigration… but I think it’s pretty far down the list of priorities compared to other stuff. So protests against immigration, aimed at getting the government to reduce it, are dumb in my opinion. Yet it seems to me that your rule gives it the thumbs up because it’s “pressuring the government to do its job” and “a valid from of active citizenship.”
I suspect you don’t really want to see more anti-immigrant protests, so I think it’s more complicated than that.
Well I’m actually someone who doesn’t agree with stringent border control. We have enough law enforcement inside our country to manage crimes. But yes I would still respect your protest to get more immigration enforcement because it’s your civil right and your political voices. It’s very easy for me to fundamentally disagree with your cause, while agreeing to your right to support your cause.
That’s fair enough. I think though we are probably talking about slightly different things - while I also agree that anti-immigrant protesters have the right to protest, what I’m getting at is that I nevertheless would rather they weren’t protesting about something I don’t agree with. There are lots of things people have the right to do that I don’t want them to actually do. But with overseas protests, I only know that people have that right to protest; I don’t know whether I support them exercising it in that particular situation.
The point is when you have a real protest, or something you really disagree with, you want the support of other people, to get that you have to constantly support people’s right to protest. You can protest their protest! That’s the point. You can go out and debate them in the streets. The point is people are openly discussing and bringing attention to problems. It’s a core feature of a free society. I don’t have strong feelings on immigration either way. I do have strong feelings on a bunch of Nazis killing people in my community under the guise of immigration enforcement.
I understand that’s the point you wanted to make, and to an extent I agree with it. But it’s not really about the point I was trying to make…