A coalition of civil rights groups expects the turnout on Oct. 18 will be even bigger than the first nationwide protest held in June, which by some counts was the largest in U.S. history.
As the other comment says, it is an effective tool. However, you’ve been told that protest creates change on its own, which it has never done. Our media and education fills us with stories of, for example, the civil rights and that protests worked.
However, that was backed with direct action. There were people stopping businesses from functioning, breaking laws, and some targeted violence. Without this it’s likely nothing would have changed.
We’re told the “right way” to protest is peacefully. However, that’s only the starting point. You get people to peaceful protests and then you organize them into groups who are willing to commit to more action. A lot of people won’t be willing to go that far, and they’re still useful in these peaceful protests, but these are a way to identify people who may want to take the next step.
That is stupid and absolutely not true at all. You’re nieve. Most people won’t take that next step until they have to. It means risking everything you’ve worked for, knowing that not doing so is risking something worse. Every person will have a different point, and that point hasn’t come for many.
You got me good. English is a fucking menace of a language and I used the wrong spelling of two words that sound the same. That definitely disproves my point. It’s not like you needed to make an argument to say that when you can just correct someone’s spelling, because surely that proves your intellect and makes you correct, without reason.
We disagree, but I can support my points. You can only attack my spelling. You should re-evaluate your stance if you don’t actually have a reason for it. You shouldn’t cut off potential allies because they weren’t first in line. Even after the Nazis took over there were new resistance fighters joining in. If your reasoning were true that wouldn’t happen.
I don’t have respect for your opinion and therefore I’m not engaging in a conversation with something I know is not correct. You can only support your points with opinion, and I disagree with your opinion. There are no resistance fighters in the United States. There is no resistance. No one is fighting. No one will ever fight.Goodbye.
As the other comment says, it is an effective tool. However, you’ve been told that protest creates change on its own, which it has never done. Our media and education fills us with stories of, for example, the civil rights and that protests worked.
However, that was backed with direct action. There were people stopping businesses from functioning, breaking laws, and some targeted violence. Without this it’s likely nothing would have changed.
We’re told the “right way” to protest is peacefully. However, that’s only the starting point. You get people to peaceful protests and then you organize them into groups who are willing to commit to more action. A lot of people won’t be willing to go that far, and they’re still useful in these peaceful protests, but these are a way to identify people who may want to take the next step.
If they haven’t taken the next step so far, they aren’t going to take it
That is stupid and absolutely not true at all. You’re nieve. Most people won’t take that next step until they have to. It means risking everything you’ve worked for, knowing that not doing so is risking something worse. Every person will have a different point, and that point hasn’t come for many.
You can’t even spell naive, don’t accuse people of being it.
You got me good. English is a fucking menace of a language and I used the wrong spelling of two words that sound the same. That definitely disproves my point. It’s not like you needed to make an argument to say that when you can just correct someone’s spelling, because surely that proves your intellect and makes you correct, without reason.
Just because you say something, doesn’t make it true. We disagree. Goodbye.
We disagree, but I can support my points. You can only attack my spelling. You should re-evaluate your stance if you don’t actually have a reason for it. You shouldn’t cut off potential allies because they weren’t first in line. Even after the Nazis took over there were new resistance fighters joining in. If your reasoning were true that wouldn’t happen.
I don’t have respect for your opinion and therefore I’m not engaging in a conversation with something I know is not correct. You can only support your points with opinion, and I disagree with your opinion. There are no resistance fighters in the United States. There is no resistance. No one is fighting. No one will ever fight.Goodbye.