"That principle can apply to protests as well. The purpose of a protest is what it does.
And what the protest in Honolulu doesn’t do is influence our rulers.
What it does do is create the illusion that ‘we the people’ matter, that ‘we’ still have power over the powerful.
It’s collective copium.
I am not saying all protests are illusions. The impact of a general strike would be very real. But the impact of holding signs for a couple of hours? Not so much."
I do agree that the purpose of going to a protest is to feel better about a situation you can’t control and maybe create the illusion of control.
It can also sometimes create a wave effect that gives people permission to also show strongly that they feel the same way. You are right that in the west I don’t think this has ever changed anything. One possible exception is the anti cruise/Pershing missile protests in the 80s. Maybe some of the European domestic protests on pensions or whatever. But the nuclear protests may have been resolved by realpolitik and the more recent gilets jaunes protests and farmer protests in Europe have been ineffective. Looking at BLM can we say it was effective? Depends what you consider the goal to be. If the goal was intimidating government at all levels to kiss the ass of CRT that did seem to work. But that was rioting not (just) protesting. And it appears to have been massively astroturfed.
I went to an anti-war protest during W Bush. War still happened. I witnessed J6 on tv…. Biden was still president. I am looking at this protest, and whatever it is supposed to be against, which appears to just be a protest against Donald Trump’s existence (we had one hear locally where I am). I am pretty sure he will continue to exist.
I believe to a certain degree that if you truly figured a way to make your protest effective, it would suddenly be called “terrorism” or a “riot”
"That principle can apply to protests as well. The purpose of a protest is what it does.
And what the protest in Honolulu doesn’t do is influence our rulers.
What it does do is create the illusion that ‘we the people’ matter, that ‘we’ still have power over the powerful.
It’s collective copium.
I am not saying all protests are illusions. The impact of a general strike would be very real. But the impact of holding signs for a couple of hours? Not so much."
BRAVO!
I do agree that the purpose of going to a protest is to feel better about a situation you can’t control and maybe create the illusion of control.
It can also sometimes create a wave effect that gives people permission to also show strongly that they feel the same way. You are right that in the west I don’t think this has ever changed anything. One possible exception is the anti cruise/Pershing missile protests in the 80s. Maybe some of the European domestic protests on pensions or whatever. But the nuclear protests may have been resolved by realpolitik and the more recent gilets jaunes protests and farmer protests in Europe have been ineffective. Looking at BLM can we say it was effective? Depends what you consider the goal to be. If the goal was intimidating government at all levels to kiss the ass of CRT that did seem to work. But that was rioting not (just) protesting. And it appears to have been massively astroturfed.
I went to an anti-war protest during W Bush. War still happened. I witnessed J6 on tv…. Biden was still president. I am looking at this protest, and whatever it is supposed to be against, which appears to just be a protest against Donald Trump’s existence (we had one hear locally where I am). I am pretty sure he will continue to exist.
I believe to a certain degree that if you truly figured a way to make your protest effective, it would suddenly be called “terrorism” or a “riot”