Quote:
Originally posted by Magness:
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
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.
|
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. [/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.