Was this faxed to lemmy?
Retvrn to tradition - The New Internet will be a vast network of fax machines, each whirring and grinding and printing all day, every day.
COME AT ME NOW AI SLOP!
Have the AIs fax-DoS the health insurance companies with nonsense Luigi memes
I love it we should start a trend
pigeoned
I didn't know that this is the perfect way to enjoy memes. Posted to Twitter, screenshotted, discussed further in Tumblr, printed out, faxed, scanned, and then posted to Lemmy.
Just use a fax to email service FFS
Bottomfeeder unite 🐟🐟🐟
I can understand that people don't like riots.
What really shits me is when people are opposed to completely non-violent disruptive protests. Street marches, die-ins, gluing yourself to statues, throwing non-destructive liquids onto monuments, etc. If you put your mild inconvenience or sense of propriety ahead of a cause, that's clearly not a cause you believe in, so stop blaming the protestors for your lack of support.
Why does this look like it's been photocopied more times than my geography teachers lesson plan?
Looks like someone's been praxising.
Some dorks in this thread are the perfect example of who potential protesters need to ignore.
I brought up "truckers blocking highways and important intersections" to my very good (but desperately clueless) friend. Violence free, requires few bodies, historically effective.
He said "but what about the people they inconvenience?"
I'm like dude. Inconvenience to power is. the. point.
I love him but he's a fool, guy thinks protests are people smiling and holding clever signs.
Sad thing is he's representative of a lot of people.
They'll be happy when things are better but idgaf about asking their advice. They don't read history, the closest theyll get to a protest is the news coverage, and they'll never be satisfied with less than some impossible dream of a "immaculate
conceptionprotestation"So like, fuck em
Not to sound elitist, but most people are ill-informed from what I observed. They mean well, but they form their views and opinions from sources that aren't great. It doesn't help either that we are inundated by pleasures from all sorts of media, which distracts us from paying attention to what matters more.
During the lifetime of great revolutionaries, the oppressing classes constantly hounded them, received their theories with the most savage malice, the most furious hatred and the most unscrupulous campaigns of lies and slander. After their death, attempts are made to convert them into harmless icons, to canonize them, so to say, and to hallow their names to a certain extent for the “consolation” of the oppressed classes and with the object of duping the latter, while at the same time robbing the revolutionary theory of its substance, blunting its revolutionary edge and vulgarizing it.
Well Yeah, have you seen the Bob Marley Biopic? Whitewashing is precisely why his music is seen as stoner-feel-good-vibes and not the fiery protest music it was. He's closer to the Black Panthers then he ever was to Cheech and Chong. But that's not the reality they want you to accept.
I have not but I may look into it
Whitewashing is precisely why his music is seen as stoner-feel-good-vibes and not the fiery protest music it was.
Well, I'd say that has more to do with music sensibility. His music used slow tempo, heavy and steady beats, was bass-driven, and melodic vocals. That isn't angry music for a western audience. Going back centuries, angry western music is fast paced, unsteady rhythms, big changes in volume, discordant sounds and lots of high frequencies.
It's not whitewashing. It would be very hard to make an angry protest song set to a waltz beat too. The medium is the message, and the medium of steady droning beats is calmness not anger.
Yes. A quite recent example from Germany:
Letzte Generation (Last Generation) a group of climate activists which glued themselves onto streets, usually carefully planned, organized and communicated with emergency services (such that ambulances can pass). They just got all of the hate and achieved not really much.
Then there were some farmers who were unhappy about governmental advances to reduce or remove the "agricultural diesel" subsidies. They've blocked highway entrace ramps with burning car tyres and dung, went really hardcore compared to the Letzte Generation, and finally got what they wanted.
The issue with peaceful protests is that they usually don't go far enough.
In your example, the farmers went two steps further and it made the difference.
Maybe the farmers just had an "easier" goal. Just remove the taxes again but the last generation wanted to stop climate change which isn't just done with one small step..
It’s not civil disobedience when the other side isn’t being civil.
People are dying from treatable or preventable illness, suffering from homelessness, and suffering from food insecurity. These are all forms of violence.
This is the same as any major conflict. People want to try to work thing out without violence. The times that does happen are unremarkable. The times it doesn't happen, we can judge later weather it was the right thing to do.
When was there a time where people were fighting for basic human rights and in retrospect, it wasn’t considered the right thing to do?
I mean, saying that it's a fight for "basic human rights" is a positional statement within the context of the time when the fight is needed. There are white supremacists (as individuals, not as a rule) out there who genuinely feel as though their rights are being "infringed" upon by anyone who's skin lacks a perfectly porcelain pallor. In America at present, it's being (disingenuously) claimed that squashing trans people is in the interest of the rights of women and children. Those pushing that agenda don't believe that, but many of the followers do. If trans people are eradicated, it would be framed as a win for basic rights in the future.
More than that though, you've applied context to the poster above your that isn't present in their original post, nor in the OP. Limiting the point to "basic human rights" has sort of set up the claim "all historical fights involving justified topics were justified."
On the one hand, I suppose that depends on who is defining "basic human rights." I'm pretty sure the Trump Convoys would claim that's what they were doing.
On the other hand, the question was on riots, not on rights. Not all riots are justified.
Until now, whenever I point out that any and all societies are fundamentals based on the capacity of violence, people got uncomfortable and/or denied it.
Sweeties, people got murdered so that you could have a democracy* because that gives the power to the people** as they have the most capacity of violence, so they need to be appeased.
Sidenote: the eu, the UN and so on are also existing to appease enough of us to reduce violence as it is a shared interest.
Yeah, this takes some time to settle in for me
"Why Civil Resistance Works" is a good book about why civil disobedience is the most effective means of resisting a regime. It's not an easy read, but it's still great info.
It's only a rebellion if you lose.
"Rebellion" used to be a positive term (think Star Wars but in real life).
also the tankies who made them happen.
That's a feature not a contradiction
The ends justify the means. Not a moral statement on 'doing whatever it takes' - it is meaningless to win when the victors are no different from the victims.
Rather, an observation on the nature of what it is to be justified or vilified.
The ones at the end decide. When it is happening, it is never justified. It is never tolerated. It is vilified. It is criminal. The means are always painted as extremes.
Something new can only ever be justified when you reach the end. Until then, it - literally - is radical.
To the present, you're just a person stirring up trouble. Could be good, could be bad, but either way, it's trouble.
You can only ever be a hero to history.
Well that can't be right because I read on here that liberals are the worst.
riots are not a valid form of protest unless all peaceful means have failed, and then they are far less effective than other non-peaceful methods. riots are what you do when you are too stupid to find a solution.
Right, and protests will make trump think twice? You realise that trump is not the mastermind right
riots dont do anything. calling a riot a protest is just a way to rationalize mindless looting and destruction of innocent people's property. if you think we are in a situation where peaceful means no longer work then organize a real attack that directly hits the people you're mad at. if the situation isn't bad enough for coordinated violence with a real goal then it's not bad enough for violence at all. I don't care about trump specifically and I never mentioned him, what I care about is people ruining good causes to justify mindless destruction and theft. protest if peaceful means are still there, fight if they aren't. riots are neither of these things, they're just idiots breaking things for fun.
Did you see what they did to the pool, Mr. B? They flipped the bitch!
Marx and his permanent revolution.
So you're saying someone should do it?
Protests, marches, and riots are so over-used that their messages go unnoticed. Demonizing them might help give them attention if anything.
