7 ms·

The strike was nonsense anyway. Why were drivers striking -- punishing the innocent residents and visitors (and protestors/allies!) of New York (a sanctuary cit

The strike was nonsense anyway. Why were drivers striking -- punishing the innocent residents and visitors (and protestors/allies!) of New York (a sanctuary city!), in an attempt to punish Donald Trump?

the-dude 10y ago
Virtue signalling
- Consultant32452 10y ago
  All of the people involved in the protests from top to bottom are just virtue signaling. The CIA went into Syria in 2006 and started funding and training opposition forces leading to the current civil war. The Obama administration is responsible for a quarter million deaths in Syria alone. And that doesn't include the use of cluster bombs, an act considered a war crime in most of the civilized world, on several of the countries listed in this "ban." And yet now that a relative hand full of people can't travel here... that's the real monstrous act. Don't get me wrong, I think the "ban" is pants on head stupid, but the people protesting don't give two shits about Syrians or the citizens of any of the other 6 countries we're bombing.
  - untog 10y ago
    Many of those protesting are objecting to green card holders being blocked entry into the country they are permanent residents of. People will always protest against things that are more immediately visible to them than things they read about in infrequent news articles. That's just human nature.
    - Consultant32452 10y ago
      No, people protest against things that the media manipulates them into protesting for. The inflammatory language has been scandalous at best. The media didn't encourage people to protest when Obama and Clinton proudly funded a wall between the US and Mexico in 2006. But now we've had "No Wall" protests in quite a few places and traditional leftists making right-wing supply side economics arguments against renegotiating NAFTA... yet another thing both Clinton and Obama campaigned for in 2008. Make no mistake, this is the butt-hurt media's doing.
      - ctack 10y ago
        I'm glad something is finally happening over there. After watching the second Iraq war happen with the media doing pretty much nothing, I can tell you that I could not agree more with what you said. But it will blow over and then it will be back to business as usual.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
        jakeogh 10y ago
        Me too. What's happened over the last year (more really, starting with the RP revolution) should be viewed as evidence that it's really not business as usual.
    - ctack 10y ago
      This makes sense, they can see their friends or friends of friends not being able to travel freely as they can.
  - rosser 10y ago
    Some of them, sure. Maybe even most, though I don't think so; all of the people I know who are involved in this stuff are very well aware of Obama's militarism. But all of them? That's just lazy. And wrong. You don't have to protest every cause to protest any cause. You can even protest things that, taken together, demonstrate you hold ideologically inconsistent views, if you want. That's on you.
    - Consultant32452 10y ago
      >all of the people I know who are involved in this stuff are very well aware of Obama's militarism. That doesn't help your argument. They were aware Obama killed a quarter of a million people and did nothing. Meanwhile Trump inconveniences some travelers and somehow he's the monster worth protesting. Get real.
      - rosser 10y ago
        You have no idea what my friends may or may not have protested, or otherwise done, in the past. I'll thank you to reconsider your projections of people you've never met.
        Consultant32452 10y ago
        That's a laugh. Statistically speaking your friends who behave the way you're implying simply don't exist. That you might literally find a few is irrelevant. How about you consider the fact that no one but the most obtuse observer would take a phrase like, "All of the people involved" to literally mean every single one without any exceptions whatsoever. If you think that's normal, and I don't mean this in a pejorative way, there's a significant chance you're autistic.
  - cinquemb 10y ago
    >Don't get me wrong, I think the "ban" is pants on head stupid, but the people protesting don't give two shits about Syrians or the citizens of any of the other 6 countries we're bombing. This in a nutshell is why things will get worse stateside. There will be those who write off the circumstances behind where we find ourselves today as human nature (an absolution of sorts, a moral line item to be paid when the circumstances are brought to their attention, not too dissimilar from the likes of HSBC et al when they pay penance in the form of monetary notes for aiding and abetting criminals as defined by a given state) and join the protest, and there will be those who apply the tools refined during war agaisnt their "own" at such protests. Either way, only those who come out ahead outside of any virtue signaling will probably be the suppliers of such tools.
- untog 10y ago
  What a lazy criticism. What form of public protest is not virtue signalling by this standard? The drivers sacrificed their income to make a public statement.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
untog 10y ago
To make a statement and show solidarity. If you live and work in NYC it's very difficult to protest in a place that is not New York.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
wpietri 10y ago
You don't understand protest. Sure, one thing you can do is disrupt the specific people doing something bad. But that's pretty rare. As MLK explains, the point is to create a more general disruption so that everyone has to take notice of an issue they might otherwise ignore: "Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored." From his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail": https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.... The whole thing is worth reading. In particular, this bit always wakes me up: "I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: 'I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action'; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a'"more convenient season.' Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will."
- WarmToaster 10y ago
  And now blacks are ed because "shallow understanding from people of good will" led to the situation where more blacks kill other blacks in a year than the entire history of lynchings from the Ku Klux Klan. A significant number of AA males grow up in fatherless homes. The entire situation is an atrocity exhibition.
  - temp-07567-56 10y ago
    Stop distracting. Blacks don't kill other blacks for being black -- but KKK did and hate groups do. MLK's quote about protest was relevant not for race reasons, but to illustrate that the insistence of order and the vehement resentment of unrest is not a passive stance, but a conscious ideological, statist one.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

the-dude 10y ago

Virtue signalling

Consultant32452 10y ago
All of the people involved in the protests from top to bottom are just virtue signaling. The CIA went into Syria in 2006 and started funding and training opposition forces leading to the current civil war. The Obama administration is responsible for a quarter million deaths in Syria alone. And that doesn't include the use of cluster bombs, an act considered a war crime in most of the civilized world, on several of the countries listed in this "ban." And yet now that a relative hand full of people can't travel here... that's the real monstrous act. Don't get me wrong, I think the "ban" is pants on head stupid, but the people protesting don't give two shits about Syrians or the citizens of any of the other 6 countries we're bombing.
- untog 10y ago
  Many of those protesting are objecting to green card holders being blocked entry into the country they are permanent residents of. People will always protest against things that are more immediately visible to them than things they read about in infrequent news articles. That's just human nature.
  - Consultant32452 10y ago
    No, people protest against things that the media manipulates them into protesting for. The inflammatory language has been scandalous at best. The media didn't encourage people to protest when Obama and Clinton proudly funded a wall between the US and Mexico in 2006. But now we've had "No Wall" protests in quite a few places and traditional leftists making right-wing supply side economics arguments against renegotiating NAFTA... yet another thing both Clinton and Obama campaigned for in 2008. Make no mistake, this is the butt-hurt media's doing.
    - ctack 10y ago
      I'm glad something is finally happening over there. After watching the second Iraq war happen with the media doing pretty much nothing, I can tell you that I could not agree more with what you said. But it will blow over and then it will be back to business as usual.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - jakeogh 10y ago
        Me too. What's happened over the last year (more really, starting with the RP revolution) should be viewed as evidence that it's really not business as usual.
  - ctack 10y ago
    This makes sense, they can see their friends or friends of friends not being able to travel freely as they can.
- rosser 10y ago
  Some of them, sure. Maybe even most, though I don't think so; all of the people I know who are involved in this stuff are very well aware of Obama's militarism. But all of them? That's just lazy. And wrong. You don't have to protest every cause to protest any cause. You can even protest things that, taken together, demonstrate you hold ideologically inconsistent views, if you want. That's on you.
  - Consultant32452 10y ago
    >all of the people I know who are involved in this stuff are very well aware of Obama's militarism. That doesn't help your argument. They were aware Obama killed a quarter of a million people and did nothing. Meanwhile Trump inconveniences some travelers and somehow he's the monster worth protesting. Get real.
    - rosser 10y ago
      You have no idea what my friends may or may not have protested, or otherwise done, in the past. I'll thank you to reconsider your projections of people you've never met.
      - Consultant32452 10y ago
        That's a laugh. Statistically speaking your friends who behave the way you're implying simply don't exist. That you might literally find a few is irrelevant. How about you consider the fact that no one but the most obtuse observer would take a phrase like, "All of the people involved" to literally mean every single one without any exceptions whatsoever. If you think that's normal, and I don't mean this in a pejorative way, there's a significant chance you're autistic.
- cinquemb 10y ago
  >Don't get me wrong, I think the "ban" is pants on head stupid, but the people protesting don't give two shits about Syrians or the citizens of any of the other 6 countries we're bombing. This in a nutshell is why things will get worse stateside. There will be those who write off the circumstances behind where we find ourselves today as human nature (an absolution of sorts, a moral line item to be paid when the circumstances are brought to their attention, not too dissimilar from the likes of HSBC et al when they pay penance in the form of monetary notes for aiding and abetting criminals as defined by a given state) and join the protest, and there will be those who apply the tools refined during war agaisnt their "own" at such protests. Either way, only those who come out ahead outside of any virtue signaling will probably be the suppliers of such tools.
untog 10y ago
What a lazy criticism. What form of public protest is not virtue signalling by this standard? The drivers sacrificed their income to make a public statement.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

untog 10y ago

To make a statement and show solidarity. If you live and work in NYC it's very difficult to protest in a place that is not New York.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

wpietri 10y ago

You don't understand protest. Sure, one thing you can do is disrupt the specific people doing something bad. But that's pretty rare. As MLK explains, the point is to create a more general disruption so that everyone has to take notice of an issue they might otherwise ignore: "Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored." From his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail": https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.... The whole thing is worth reading. In particular, this bit always wakes me up: "I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: 'I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action'; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a'"more convenient season.' Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will."

WarmToaster 10y ago
And now blacks are ed because "shallow understanding from people of good will" led to the situation where more blacks kill other blacks in a year than the entire history of lynchings from the Ku Klux Klan. A significant number of AA males grow up in fatherless homes. The entire situation is an atrocity exhibition.
- temp-07567-56 10y ago
  Stop distracting. Blacks don't kill other blacks for being black -- but KKK did and hate groups do. MLK's quote about protest was relevant not for race reasons, but to illustrate that the insistence of order and the vehement resentment of unrest is not a passive stance, but a conscious ideological, statist one.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]