TIL No Kings Protests were the 3rd Largest in US History
-
Right there in the article it says that she's the heiress, and not on the board or involved with Walmart in any way besides her familial relation. If billionaires want to chip in for organizing and advertising protests, I'm not going to look a gift horse in the mouth. This is one of those moments in history where you take the support you can get and do your virtue testing bullshit after things are less dire.
You should absolutely look any horse in the mouth, if it’s a gift from a billionaire.
Not even one person can clearly state what the intended goal of this action was. That’s a huge red flag that should have you asking questions. Not asking why a billionaire is doing something is exactly how both Red & Blue MAGA have ended up on both sides of this fight, though no one on either side can clearly state what their side stands for.
-
You should absolutely look any horse in the mouth, if it’s a gift from a billionaire.
Not even one person can clearly state what the intended goal of this action was. That’s a huge red flag that should have you asking questions. Not asking why a billionaire is doing something is exactly how both Red & Blue MAGA have ended up on both sides of this fight, though no one on either side can clearly state what their side stands for.
The most common refrain I've seen from interviews with protestors is the desire for Trump to be impeached and face some semblance of the rule of law. If the billionaires want to help us make that happen, I'm happy to take their money and we can work on taxing the hell out of them when we're not fighting for the lives of every marginalized person in this country.
-
I searched and didnt find one. Maybe you can verify YOUR claim?
Wrong thread, I think.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Behead those who say No Kings is violent
-
I get being afraid of going to a protest considering we have police literally saying they’ll just kill people, but that doesn’t mean you can’t get involved with those organizing the protests. See if you can get involved with the organizers of your local protests and ask them what they need for the protests. After all, those signs you see people carrying didn’t make themselves. At the very least you can call your reps and make your voice heard. Even if your reps are dems, make it clear that you want real action, not just talk. You could also talk to the people around you: at work, at the store, family members, etc. Encourage them to call their reps. If your reps aren’t actively making things worse or letting things get worse by doing nothing but fundraise (so most reps) then see if there are efforts to primary any of them and encourage everyone you know to vote in the primaries too
Like I said, I understand being afraid to go to a protest. I am too. But you have to remember that if we don’t stop Trump and a full blown fascist takeover, then things will be much, much worse and much, much harder to change
Wtf, the police is literally saying they'll just kill people?? I missed that one, do you have a link?
-
This post did not contain any content.
Yeah!
Now knock off all that fascism - or we WILL go back out there and do another lap!
-
The most common refrain I've seen from interviews with protestors is the desire for Trump to be impeached and face some semblance of the rule of law. If the billionaires want to help us make that happen, I'm happy to take their money and we can work on taxing the hell out of them when we're not fighting for the lives of every marginalized person in this country.
The fact that you think the fight for our lives only was an issue under Trump is exactly why you’re a worthless ally.
-
Wtf, the police is literally saying they'll just kill people?? I missed that one, do you have a link?
Yup. Florida police
-
The point is that majority support is unnecessary for a thing to exist. In fact, it increasingly appears to be an irrelevant metric in general
yes, I agree entirely- but I'm not sure what further point you are making or how it is relevant
-
Are struggling with bipolar or some other personality disorder? It’s one thing to not understand something. It’s quite another to be aggressively confused. This is not healthy.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Deflection will not work.
You have been called out to BACK UP YOUR GODDAMN MOTHERFUCKING CLAIM.
Either do it or accept that you're a goddamn motherfucking lying sack of dog shit. Super easy, barely an inconvenience. -
Deflection will not work.
You have been called out to BACK UP YOUR GODDAMN MOTHERFUCKING CLAIM.
Either do it or accept that you're a goddamn motherfucking lying sack of dog shit. Super easy, barely an inconvenience.Christ. Maybe bpd.
-
Christ. Maybe bpd.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I will give you the benefit of a doubt and assume that you did not see my request for proof if your claim because it went into the wrong thread.
So:
Prove your goddamn claim. -
yes, I agree entirely- but I'm not sure what further point you are making or how it is relevant
wrote last edited by [email protected]Looting may be warranted or unwarranted. But, because majority support is not relevant, we shouldn't evaluate the propriety of looting based on this metric
-
It's not hard to be anti-electoral when elections don't seem to ever fucking work
You're not wrong but, that's really the trap that many of us on the Left hand fallen for. It takes a long time to build things and make positive changes in the face of resistance from moneyed interests. Leftists refusing to participate in every election, including primaries, is a good part of how we got here in the first place. Non-voters are the largest bloc and, with surveys consistently showing Left-of-Center policies to be popular with the populace overall, it's safe to assume that the Overton window could be dragged to a better place if they bothered to participate and participate consistently in a calculated manner.
It is absolutely infuriating, indeed, to see all efforts being for nought, though. In less than a year, almost a century of progress has been undone and that would not have been possible if people had been voting stategically. At this point, I'm certain that things will not get appreciably better in my lifetime.
-
You're not wrong but, that's really the trap that many of us on the Left hand fallen for. It takes a long time to build things and make positive changes in the face of resistance from moneyed interests. Leftists refusing to participate in every election, including primaries, is a good part of how we got here in the first place. Non-voters are the largest bloc and, with surveys consistently showing Left-of-Center policies to be popular with the populace overall, it's safe to assume that the Overton window could be dragged to a better place if they bothered to participate and participate consistently in a calculated manner.
It is absolutely infuriating, indeed, to see all efforts being for nought, though. In less than a year, almost a century of progress has been undone and that would not have been possible if people had been voting stategically. At this point, I'm certain that things will not get appreciably better in my lifetime.
wrote last edited by [email protected]And if things won’t get better, why bother?
I’ve been voting as much as possible and doing the other things for a quarter century and we’ve always gotten further from what I’m hoping for.
I wasted all that time and money and stress and have nothing to show for it.
Politics is dumb and people are terrible. I want to leave the planet.
-
Good... now repeat it but as a General Strike
A general strike would be devastating. But we ain't there yet.
Not that I don't love the idea. It requires a robust support network. Start building a small local community that can be self sufficient. Grow food. Make tools. Sell things to neighboring communities.
The owners will still expect rent during a general strike. We have the numbers, they have the funds to we wait us out. They'll do everything they can to make it hurt us more than them.
-
Notice the merelly starting the very sentence sentence you quote from me about the George Floyd protests. The pigs are still often holding people down by putting their knee on that person's neck, so how exactly has the largest demonstration in America changed anything?!
Assuming you meant merelly as merely I saw it but your claim that no change occurred is wrong. The change that did occur was unsustained because people in the US got complacent. They protested and cared for a while but then they stopped paying attention and things started back the way the were, now worse in some areas.
Notice how I said sustained effort? The thing that didn't happen after George Floyd.
If all that people do is walk and shout with lots of other people and then at the end of it go home with a feeling of achievement and do nothing further
"Do nothing further"? You mean further than the protests 2 days ago that set record numbers? Or the ones that have been ongoing every weekend for months? That have been building and increasing to the No Kings day protest? Is that the do nothing further you're referring to?
People here are way over-celebrating something which means very little unless we see that it has led to many following it with getting involved in politics and/or grassroots movements
Are you in regular contact with the majority of the US population that you can say that hasn't been happening? I'm pretty sure the growing numbers of protesters is people getting "involved in politics and/or grassroots movements".
it's premature and it makes me suspect that for many who participated this one demonstration was it and they aren't following it through with next steps.
Oh, you're predicting the future 48 hours post protest. This is just the same bullshit "your protesting isn't good enough" sentiment everywhere else on Lemmy repackaged and with more words.
I think we're talking past each other here and we agree on objectives, just not on methods.
In response to public opinion outcry, Politicians will first make empty promises, then superficial changes which are easily reversible, and only beyond that actual structural changes which are hard to reverse hence are more permanent.
The latter ones is what I meant before with "permanent". What politicians did in response to the George Floyd demonstrations was all the way up to superficial changes, but not structural changes, hence it didn't take long for things to go back to roughly the way they were, and the underlying problem of police violence in the US of which the George Floyd killing was a symptom, is now the same or even worse.
The only peaceful march kind of demonstrations (so, not things like strikes) which I know of were politicians went all the way to structural changes are the kind which lasted months (and at times they weren't actually peaceful), and it's very hard for people to sustain that without organizing.
This demonstration, on the other hand, lasted a single day. I have never heard of any demonstration that lasted a single day and changed anything in a sustained way ever anywhere in the World. I'll be happy if you find me an example to prove me wrong (as that means there's hope).
I think we both agree on the need for sustained pressure and for people not to grow complacent, and as I see it that means that people have to get involved in grassroots efforts and civil society groups to force that change and keep up the pressure until the change is structural and hence deep and near-irreversible. Merely going to a one-day demonstration won't achieve sustained change, but if it acts as a step to joining said grassroots efforts and civil-society groups that keep working well beyond that demonstration then it's a means to an end.
My point is that loudly celebrating a single day peaceful demonstration without the caveat that "it must be a start not and end", risk making many if not most feel "mission accomplished", become complacent and not do anything further, exactly the opposite of your objective of "sustained push for change were people do not grow complacent".
As I see it, if you want the people to keep on pushing there should be a "what next" after the "good job everybody" in the celebrating of this demonstration, but that's not what I see in the countless threads here in Lemmy: all I see is people celebrating it as if "showing Trump he's not liked" was the whole objective of the thing and it was achieved by this demonstration, as if "showing Trump he's not liked" is anywhere close to enough to achieve a structural change of American politics.
If people were indeed getting into the kind of organizations that can deliver the sustained effort both of us think is required, we would be seeing "this is just the start" kind of statements, but I haven't seen any yet and this together with the historical track record of peaceful demonstrations in US leads me to believe this one isn't a beginning of something more, just a one-off.
-
A general strike would be devastating. But we ain't there yet.
Not that I don't love the idea. It requires a robust support network. Start building a small local community that can be self sufficient. Grow food. Make tools. Sell things to neighboring communities.
The owners will still expect rent during a general strike. We have the numbers, they have the funds to we wait us out. They'll do everything they can to make it hurt us more than them.
But we ain't there yet.
Sorry but this line is how the USA fell off the wagon in the first place
nd not only that, you got there on Jan 6
-
I think we're talking past each other here and we agree on objectives, just not on methods.
In response to public opinion outcry, Politicians will first make empty promises, then superficial changes which are easily reversible, and only beyond that actual structural changes which are hard to reverse hence are more permanent.
The latter ones is what I meant before with "permanent". What politicians did in response to the George Floyd demonstrations was all the way up to superficial changes, but not structural changes, hence it didn't take long for things to go back to roughly the way they were, and the underlying problem of police violence in the US of which the George Floyd killing was a symptom, is now the same or even worse.
The only peaceful march kind of demonstrations (so, not things like strikes) which I know of were politicians went all the way to structural changes are the kind which lasted months (and at times they weren't actually peaceful), and it's very hard for people to sustain that without organizing.
This demonstration, on the other hand, lasted a single day. I have never heard of any demonstration that lasted a single day and changed anything in a sustained way ever anywhere in the World. I'll be happy if you find me an example to prove me wrong (as that means there's hope).
I think we both agree on the need for sustained pressure and for people not to grow complacent, and as I see it that means that people have to get involved in grassroots efforts and civil society groups to force that change and keep up the pressure until the change is structural and hence deep and near-irreversible. Merely going to a one-day demonstration won't achieve sustained change, but if it acts as a step to joining said grassroots efforts and civil-society groups that keep working well beyond that demonstration then it's a means to an end.
My point is that loudly celebrating a single day peaceful demonstration without the caveat that "it must be a start not and end", risk making many if not most feel "mission accomplished", become complacent and not do anything further, exactly the opposite of your objective of "sustained push for change were people do not grow complacent".
As I see it, if you want the people to keep on pushing there should be a "what next" after the "good job everybody" in the celebrating of this demonstration, but that's not what I see in the countless threads here in Lemmy: all I see is people celebrating it as if "showing Trump he's not liked" was the whole objective of the thing and it was achieved by this demonstration, as if "showing Trump he's not liked" is anywhere close to enough to achieve a structural change of American politics.
If people were indeed getting into the kind of organizations that can deliver the sustained effort both of us think is required, we would be seeing "this is just the start" kind of statements, but I haven't seen any yet and this together with the historical track record of peaceful demonstrations in US leads me to believe this one isn't a beginning of something more, just a one-off.
that's not what I see in the countless threads here in Lemmy
Your sample size is Lemmy. No issue there, definitely representative of the US and its population as a whole.
Your premise is flawed and the Occupy movement demonstrates it. 5 years of sustained protesting to not achieve the kind of change you seem to expect to see.
Your under the misconception the sustained non-stop protesting is equivalent to sustained action and activism. I've already covered this and I'm not going to go over it again, I'll just copy and paste what I already wrote:
The problems in the US have been building and evolving for decades, if not longer, and they’ll take at least that long to get a handle on.
Non-stop protesting has the same hurdle as a nationwide general strike and is just as unrealistic, especially considering how long it would have to last.
Again, you're just repackaging the same bullshit sentiment as OP and all over everywhere else on Lemmy.
I'm not going to engage you any further as your agenda seems to be to argue in opposition of the movement occurring in the US.
-
Looting may be warranted or unwarranted. But, because majority support is not relevant, we shouldn't evaluate the propriety of looting based on this metric
wrote last edited by [email protected]ah, maybe I should clarify when I said looting wouldn't have majority support, I was assuming a context where a populist movement (i.e. made up of the majority) was trying to find strategies to gain some economic independence such that they can afford a general strike- mutual aid might be a popular option (as well as how unions use their funds from dues to pay work on strike), but my point is only that looting is likely to be an unpopular option, and thus one that would harm the movement's reputation and ability to remain supported by the majority on which it depends.
I did not mean that in absolute terms anything must justify its existence through majority support, as you pointed out that's not how the world works.
