• @afraid_of_zombies
    link
    57 months ago

    Eventually every mishandled conflict becomes about the response to the conflict instead of the issue that started it. I still remember the end of OWS when no one was talking about the bailouts anymore instead talking about the difference between camping and protesting I also remember the daily reminders that some anti-war protestor in 2003 threw acid at a cop.

    People have the right to make their voice heard. Governments should understand that, establish areas where they can make it heard, and do nothing to make it turn violent. Likewise protestors should make sure that they focus on the issue they care about an expel ones that start shit.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      97 months ago

      some anti-war protestor in 2003

      It’s weird how now the protests are labeled “pro-Palestinian” instead of “anti-war” as they always have before. In 2003 people were anti-war, not pro-Iraqi. In the '60s people were anti-war, not pro-South-Vietnamese. Some propaganda outlets are even calling today’s anti-war protesters “pro-Hamas”.

      • Cethin
        link
        fedilink
        English
        57 months ago

        My guess would be because we aren’t at war. It could equally just be because the media has an agenda that is furthered by that, or both of these. Anyone saying pro-Hamas shouldn’t be trusted at all though.

    • @Buddahriffic
      link
      37 months ago

      Disruption is an essential part of protest, otherwise it can just be entirely ignored. It’s meant to force results. If there’s enough support for it, it grows as the government cracks down on it (like BLM did in 2020) and becomes a conflict of attrition. If there isn’t, then the protesters get punished and the people celebrate it (like the truckers protesting covid restrictions in Canada).

    • @Gabu
      link
      07 months ago

      If your protest inconveniences nobody, it’ll also result in no change.