6 ms·

You could describe MLK’s protests as disruptive, causing gridlock, damaging to businesses, etc. BLM protestors danced on and destroyed statues as well. The wh

by edot 5y ago

You could describe MLK’s protests as disruptive, causing gridlock, damaging to businesses, etc. BLM protestors danced on and destroyed statues as well. The whole point of protest is to be disruptive. Being anti-vax is super stupid but protesting government mandates (or systemic racism, or anything) should be allowed.

bryanlarsen 5y ago
The whole point of an escalated protest is being willing to accept the consequences. If you park illegally, you expect to get a parking ticket, protest or no. You expect your vehicle to get towed. If you defy a court injunction, you expect to spend the night in jail. The people chaining themselves to trees expect to get arrested and spend time in jail. They also expect that their time in jail will help their cause. Being part of a protest is not a "get out of jail free" card. Rather the opposite, spending some time in jail is part of the point.
- Chris2048 5y ago
  What if they make up new laws?
  - ben_w 5y ago
    A government? Making up laws? I think that’s literally called “a day ending in ‘y’”. You may or may not have a higher power to defend you against bad laws, depending on your constitution and/or your government being e.g. treaty bound to an institution equivalent to the European Court of Human Rights.
    - Chris2048 5y ago
      Create new, targeted laws quickly. per guidelines: Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize.
      - ben_w 5y ago
        Even though your new caveat reduces the frequency by which governments do it, this is still absolutely how they operate. I’ve had to delay a meeting with my local MP back before I left the UK because they had an “emergency” debate (IIRC due to a court ruling that one of their laws was bad). I genuinely, sincerely, can’t see how your new version is supposed to strengthen your comment — there just isn’t enough in it for my mind to see a different hill to climb: https://kitsunesoftware.wordpress.com/2021/12/27/arguments-hill-climbing-the-wisdom-of-the-crowds/ https://kitsunesoftware.wordpress.com/2021/12/27/arguments-h...
        Chris2048 5y ago
        Emergency powers allow the overruling of safe-guards, grace/response-periods and due process. It is not "how they operate", it is explicitly outside the norm, and the emergency powers invoked by Trudeau had never been used before, let alone against non-violent civilians. > because they had an “emergency” debate Was it about (seldom used) emergency powers, and what was it in response to? A terror attack? An "emergency" debate about bad laws isn't the same as "emergency" powers. > a different hill to climb The missing context is the context of the thread - that we are talking about the actions of Trudeau actions against the protestors.
- david38 5y ago
  Uh no. The point is to get what you’re demanding. Why do you think protesters get defense attorneys? Why do you think all but the most extreme cry “first offense”? Why do you think college students are the most prolific protesters? To avoid punishment.
  - bryanlarsen 5y ago
    The point is to signal that you're willing to get arrested. That shows you're committed. If you're not willing to get arrested for your cause, some can accuse you of virtue signalling. They don't actually want to get arrested, but they do want to signal that they won't stop protesting just because they risk getting arrested.
verelo 5y ago
You could for sure. I would argue that in all cases there reaches a point where you either accept you’re breaking the law to invoke change or you’re simply going to have to keep trying to invoke change while accepting others don’t yet agree with you. These folks seem to be dealing in the bucket of issues where they have mixed support, they’ve said their piece, it’s time to change tactic if they believe in their causes, or they risk losing any sympathizers. Frankly I’m not one of them, but I’m sure there are people in Ottawa that might have supported them that now won’t. There’s also the issue that they were protesting provincial issues to the federal government. For weeks. After being told this constantly, some packed up and moved to the provincial legislator in toronto. They’re just not very well organized and it’s suggesting they might not be the issue anyone wants to hitch onto.

by edot 5y ago

bryanlarsen 5y ago

The whole point of an escalated protest is being willing to accept the consequences. If you park illegally, you expect to get a parking ticket, protest or no. You expect your vehicle to get towed. If you defy a court injunction, you expect to spend the night in jail. The people chaining themselves to trees expect to get arrested and spend time in jail. They also expect that their time in jail will help their cause. Being part of a protest is not a "get out of jail free" card. Rather the opposite, spending some time in jail is part of the point.

Chris2048 5y ago
What if they make up new laws?
- ben_w 5y ago
  A government? Making up laws? I think that’s literally called “a day ending in ‘y’”. You may or may not have a higher power to defend you against bad laws, depending on your constitution and/or your government being e.g. treaty bound to an institution equivalent to the European Court of Human Rights.
  - Chris2048 5y ago
    Create new, targeted laws quickly. per guidelines: Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize.
    - ben_w 5y ago
      Even though your new caveat reduces the frequency by which governments do it, this is still absolutely how they operate. I’ve had to delay a meeting with my local MP back before I left the UK because they had an “emergency” debate (IIRC due to a court ruling that one of their laws was bad). I genuinely, sincerely, can’t see how your new version is supposed to strengthen your comment — there just isn’t enough in it for my mind to see a different hill to climb: https://kitsunesoftware.wordpress.com/2021/12/27/arguments-hill-climbing-the-wisdom-of-the-crowds/ https://kitsunesoftware.wordpress.com/2021/12/27/arguments-h...
      - Chris2048 5y ago
        Emergency powers allow the overruling of safe-guards, grace/response-periods and due process. It is not "how they operate", it is explicitly outside the norm, and the emergency powers invoked by Trudeau had never been used before, let alone against non-violent civilians. > because they had an “emergency” debate Was it about (seldom used) emergency powers, and what was it in response to? A terror attack? An "emergency" debate about bad laws isn't the same as "emergency" powers. > a different hill to climb The missing context is the context of the thread - that we are talking about the actions of Trudeau actions against the protestors.
david38 5y ago
Uh no. The point is to get what you’re demanding. Why do you think protesters get defense attorneys? Why do you think all but the most extreme cry “first offense”? Why do you think college students are the most prolific protesters? To avoid punishment.
- bryanlarsen 5y ago
  The point is to signal that you're willing to get arrested. That shows you're committed. If you're not willing to get arrested for your cause, some can accuse you of virtue signalling. They don't actually want to get arrested, but they do want to signal that they won't stop protesting just because they risk getting arrested.

verelo 5y ago

You could for sure. I would argue that in all cases there reaches a point where you either accept you’re breaking the law to invoke change or you’re simply going to have to keep trying to invoke change while accepting others don’t yet agree with you. These folks seem to be dealing in the bucket of issues where they have mixed support, they’ve said their piece, it’s time to change tactic if they believe in their causes, or they risk losing any sympathizers. Frankly I’m not one of them, but I’m sure there are people in Ottawa that might have supported them that now won’t. There’s also the issue that they were protesting provincial issues to the federal government. For weeks. After being told this constantly, some packed up and moved to the provincial legislator in toronto. They’re just not very well organized and it’s suggesting they might not be the issue anyone wants to hitch onto.