3 ms·

> Blocking infrastructure that others rely on is militancy If protesters blocked all the routes - yes. But it's a case of causing inconvenience. Causing inconv

> Blocking infrastructure that others rely on is militancy If protesters blocked all the routes - yes. But it's a case of causing inconvenience. Causing inconvenience is militancy only in a very broad definition of militancy. But it's a very typical thing to see - when you're in a privileged position and all convenience is targeted at you, loss of that convenience is often perceived as oppression.(Have you heard how evangelicals in US moan about being the actual oppressed people?) >A very narrow minority does this, and usually it is out of ignorance, not malice. Knowingly breaking rules is malice.

throwawaysea 6y ago
Blocking some routes is the same as blocking all the routes in many cities, since road space is often near capacity. Therefore physically preventing someone from going home is militancy. Such actions cause multi-hour gridlocks. It prevents busy people from getting home to their families. It prevents emergency vehicles from making it to those in dire need. In major cities, such disruptive actions are stealing tens of thousands of hours from people in aggregate. That is not just an inconvenience. You are casually tossing around the word privilege but the real privilege is thinking that your desire for cycling infrastructure is more important than the needs of a much larger number of people that are harmed. > Have you heard how evangelicals in US moan about being the actual oppressed people? I am not religious but there are many ways in which they are correct to make that claim as well. > Knowingly breaking rules is malice. Sounds like you agree that protesters blocking infrastructure is malice.
- JAlexoid 6y ago
  > Blocking some routes is the same as blocking all the routes in many cities You literally described inconvenience and told me that it's not inconvenience. That's Olympic level mental gymnastics ;) > I am not religious but there are many ways in which they are correct to make that claim as well. Sure... > Sounds like you agree that protesters blocking infrastructure is malice. Last time I checked protests are not illegal. Using public roads to protest - not breaking rules.

throwawaysea 6y ago

Blocking some routes is the same as blocking all the routes in many cities, since road space is often near capacity. Therefore physically preventing someone from going home is militancy. Such actions cause multi-hour gridlocks. It prevents busy people from getting home to their families. It prevents emergency vehicles from making it to those in dire need. In major cities, such disruptive actions are stealing tens of thousands of hours from people in aggregate. That is not just an inconvenience. You are casually tossing around the word privilege but the real privilege is thinking that your desire for cycling infrastructure is more important than the needs of a much larger number of people that are harmed. > Have you heard how evangelicals in US moan about being the actual oppressed people? I am not religious but there are many ways in which they are correct to make that claim as well. > Knowingly breaking rules is malice. Sounds like you agree that protesters blocking infrastructure is malice.

JAlexoid 6y ago
> Blocking some routes is the same as blocking all the routes in many cities You literally described inconvenience and told me that it's not inconvenience. That's Olympic level mental gymnastics ;) > I am not religious but there are many ways in which they are correct to make that claim as well. Sure... > Sounds like you agree that protesters blocking infrastructure is malice. Last time I checked protests are not illegal. Using public roads to protest - not breaking rules.