>>>
>>>That's the thing, people like to protest to feel good about
>>>themselves and feel like they're doing something when
>>they're
>>>not. Those 1960's tactics don't work in 2017.
>>
>>They don't? Where is the proof? And what does work? And what
>>would happen if no one protested in the streets anymore?
>
>Post #74

LOL

Okay, I'll give it a go. After all the hubbub, the killers of Emmett Till walked free. The Vietnam War didn't stop in the 60s. Martin Luther King still got shot dead in his head. So clearly, nothing was solved and it was a waste of time.

>
>>>And then there are people that support protesting from afar
>>as
>>>long is doesn't affect them directly. During the Ferguson
>>shit
>>>there were people on here in GD talking about "burn that mf
>>>down!" Why? Would you say that if it was your community
>that
>>>you have to live in?
>>
>>Those people are reactionary idiots who didn't even leave
>>their houses. None of that has anything to do with these
>>protests, where no one is burning anything and it's not in
>>anyone's community, for that matter.
>
>Every protest are different and include different people with
>different agendas.

Okay. Not sure what this means but it's too banal a statement to disagree with.


>
>
>>The shut down of LAX caused a lot people
>>>to miss flights which can cost them money, money that they
>>may
>>>not have.
>>
>>Every protest ever cost people money. That's the point.
>
>I usually doesn't cost money to the people that are the real
>target of the protest, they're usually not affected.

When Rosa Parks wouldn't get off the bus did George Wallace net worth instantly dip? Did he lose his home?

After all those Vietnam War protests did the military industrial complex shut down? Did arms markers go broke?

Okay, so it was a waste of time.

>
>>And at LAX I'm sure a lot of those folks were
>>>immigrants that their supposed to be protesting for. They
>>>prevented a lot regular folk that earn a hourly wage from
>>>getting to work.
>>
>>They are all union and still get paid, so this is a red
>>herring
>
>Everyone that works at an airport isn't union and the ones
>that are don't automatically get paid in situations like this
>I don't know where you got that from lol

Show me proof that people didn't get paid. Then show me that their need to be paid is paramount to all other needs. Then show me further proof of your concern for low wage employees being inconvenienced or losing pay outside of the context of people expressing their constitutionally guaranteed rights.

>
>
>>All these people trying to go in on Sage
>>>wouldn't be so happy if their they life was affected and
>>>protesting was costing them money and disrupting their
>>lives.
>>
>>I live in New York City and lived in DC before that. My life
>>has been disrupted by protests many times. Put your big girl
>>skirt on, you'll be aiite.
>
>Would you like a cookie?


You are the one suggesting these absurd canards. I am merely responding to them. And your response is, of course, without any substance.

But yeah, send me a cookie please. I deserve it for reading your drivel.


>>>
>>>Meanwhile the people that are supposed to be the target of
>>the
>>>protests are rarely affected and don't care.
>>
>>Oh? Cause it seems like the protests actually have greatly
>>affected this administrations first ten days. For better or
>>worse, we will see but I guarantee you they have been
>affected
>>and FORCED to care.
>
>Please tell me how the protests affected this administration?

Pick up a newspaper. It could prove to be an enlightening experience.


>
>>Basically, I disagree with 90% of what you said and it seems
>>demonstrably irresponsible to suggest that public protests
>>should be abandoned because they inconvenience people,
>whether
>>airport employees or millionaires.
>
>Can you tell me what protests have accomplished in this
>decade?

Sure…although this decade is not even over so that's weird. If you asked someone in 1967 if protests had succeeded in stopping the war or ending Jim Crow the answer would be no. What would that prove.

Protests and town hall meetings against Obamacare galvanized the Tea Party Movement, and helped lay the groundwork for them to force a more radical republican agenda to the forefront, which altered the Obama presidency.

Protests about police shootings have inspired much discussion and some action regarding police and community relations, the use of body cameras, and a search for more solutions to conflict resolution by police.

The protests in Tunisia, for better or worse, upended the prevailing order in much of the middle east and certainly in Tunisia.

And that is off the top of my head, because the premise you are working with is too flimsy to warrant real research. Especially since you make no suggestion as to what people SHOULD do instead of protesting in this brave new world you imagine we live in.

Also, please pinpoint exactly when protesting became ineffective in this modern context. A date would be nice.

Either way, this is all a red herring. People have the right to protest and SHOULD if they feel compelled to do so. This country is not the property of the government, it is of the citizens. Boston Tea Party to the Women's March last week, it matters. Even if it just means people coming together and forming links that allow them to better organize AFTER the protest is over. Or just to be heartened that there are like minded people and that we all don't live in the world you imagine we do.

There will never be a time when coming together in solidarity in the streets can be said to be completely ineffective. It's literally been a crucial mechanism for change- for better or worse- since the beginning of modern society and will be until we don't have streets or people.

Have a good day