http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...sts/index.html

1100 people arrested. wow! wondering if it will go to 2000.

full on....

It's pretty quite businesswise here. I know countless people in my industry who've gone away, or stayed home.

2000 arrests would be pretty wild.

I just don't see the effectiveness of protesting.

I mean, register to vote. Vote. Hand out pamphlets. what is the point of simply hounding a government? Everyone can and does do that. Get a policy and run if you want to. Get out there and get people to vote for a candidate you support?

It just seems to be an epidemic of powerlessness prevalent in America, despite this being a democracy.

Dollars and the vote make all the difference. Not protests.

And certainly not beating up a police officer doing his job, and beating him senseless. I spit on that kind of violence.

The point is you need to WIN people to your cause. That is a sucessful mode of operating in so many parts of life.

Win people to you.

Antagonisim, violence, anger. They usually have the opposite effect. Causing people to dig in. Resolve hardens.

Good points Yorick. I think people are just expressing their emotions on a very controversial (IMO) President. Just remember that not everyone are centered on expressing theirselves with JUST words. Some people have what I call moving centers, ie, respond with (e)motions first before anything else. I get to be that way sometimes. Leap first before I look. True, some protests are unfortunately too (e)motional, too physical.

I suppose too, that a protest is a way of voicing dissent in between elections with the hope that you can change government policy.

However, even so, aren't political lobby groups designed to influence lawmakers? Again, winning people through persuasion would seem to be more effective.

Some of these groups need to look at how someone like Rupert Murdoch operates. His use of lobbying. Money and influence.
If any of these guys had any eloquence, they should be getting on the airwaves and attempting to shift public opinion.

That's why Murdoch is so influencial. He can manipulate opinion due to his media ownership.

The arts is another method a shifting public opinion. See: Beatles. ;)

My point is, there are vehicles already in place whereby you can effectively get in and make a difference. Yet I see a pervasive sense of disempowerment within American society on so many levels.

I truly believe it has at it's root an avoidance of BLAME. If you are not to blame for a thing, you cannot change a thing. It's always someone elses fault. Hence, the blameless have no power.

I hear it from people all the time. "Them" making decisions. They. Never "us".

Let me use a church as an example - not to be religious, but because I live this each day, and will be speaking from firsthand experience.

Many join a church, and keep the attitude of "them" regarding the church. When they find the church does or says something they don't agree with, they leave, trying to find the perfec church which believes or says exactly what they want to hear.

I was a church hopper with this very attitude. Always on the fringes. Without a voice, an ability to effect change other than voicing dissent to leaders.

However, in this NYC church, right from the go, I decided that this was MY church. I took ownership of it. I decided, that if I felt that I was the only one with a particular bent, desire, opinion or gift, that that was a GOOD thing, as it meant someone in the church represented that section of the community.

Consequently I have been able to influence many aspects of the churches music and worship. The things I regard as important, musical quality, integrity, zero fakeness, honesty, interest, passion in the music, musical and lingusitic relevence, have all been aspects of what the church has produced.

Are you with me?

This is just one church. Imagine what you can do with a country. A nation. A political party.

Imagine if you, yes you reading this, ran for government with the things you hold dear, and DIDN'T attack the opposition! Just said: "This is me, and what I stand for, he's a good guy and will probably do well, but this is why you should vote for me."

That would mean there was ONE candidate focussing on what he/she can do, not what the other guys CAN'T do.

I could write more, but I'm stuffed.....

I just get sad when I see disempowerment in people. Even here, people will take a posters words as less authoritative than some unknown person on the net, simply because they know the poster. There's a constant snese of removal from effect.

Rulers, whether by force or popular vote, coercion or bribes, rule on the sufferage of the people. We, I, you, are society and we, I, you, can make a difference.

I've been on a lot of protests and in my experience they are an extremely effective method of disseminating your ideas and persuading people who were previously on the fence or procrastinating on the issue. They don't persuade people who're dead set against you, but then again reasonable debate rarely does either (as any regular of these boards should know...). Remember that not all protests are alike. Like any method of changing the world it only works if its done right and if you recognise it can never be the entirety of political activity. To badly misquote Lenin (the books upstairs and I can't be bothered to go get it) we have to use every weapon in our arsenal and that includes electoral campaign, sure, but it also includes grassroots protest action.

Mate, I'm sure some are persuaded, but how many more are turned away? I experienced the turnoff many times, despite being an EXISTING SYMPATHISER.

If there WAS debate, if there WAS an exchange of ideas, I could see it as an effective medium. At the moment they are just displays of anger, violence or whatever.

The exception being the protest of soldiers Mums that actually changed the government in the Phillipines four years ago. THAT was incredible.

But in the west, where we have democracy? Use it.

No crediblity. The "critical mass" demonstrations in New York, don't even convey their message. People just get angry and frustrated with them. Wondering "waht are they protesting? Cabs?"

When they block a siren wailing ambulence from getting to a victim (which they did) they lose all moral highground whatsoever. So someone dies so you make a point?

No good. Better and more effective ways to win people to you.

See, but Lenin was around in a very different time. Czarist Russia was not the "haven of Democracy" that America is.

Good post, Yorick.


Perhaps protests and protesting is seen differently in different countries. Political protests in the US just don't seem terribly effective in this day and age. Tens of thousands of people blocking the streets on a week day are more likely to PO working people just trying to get around the city than it is to convince people of anything.

Good post, Yorick.


Perhaps protests and protesting is seen differently in different countries. Political protests in the US just don't seem terribly effective in this day and age. Tens of thousands of people blocking the streets on a week day are more likely to PO working people just trying to get around the city than it is to convince people of anything. </font>[/QUOTE]Exactly. People who've read my opinions know that my opinions on transport actually co-align with what Critical Mass are trying to promote. Yet I was disgusted with what amounted to arsehole spite from two riders in particular, blocking one truck driver from doing his job. That's all. Other riders blocked ambulences. For what? To turn off a potential ally? If I am a sympathiser and get turned, what hope those ambivialent or anti? Way to go. Pointless and actually COUNTERproductive, achieving the opposite of the intent.

Unless they don't really give a crap about what they say they're standing for, and just enjoy being a faux "rebel" for the minute.