5 ms·

Note that this includes things like strikes and boycotts. Obviously non-violent but many people complain immediately when a protest inconveniences their commute

Note that this includes things like strikes and boycotts. Obviously non-violent but many people complain immediately when a protest inconveniences their commute by 10 minutes or something. We’ve got this warped idea that a proper protest is when some people gather in some designated area that the authorities allow them to, and they don’t inconvenience anyone. That’s absurd when you consider what a protest is about.

robertlagrant 2y ago
It's absurd when it doesn't inconvenience anyone who can do what the protest is about. It's like when UK schoolkids "went on strike for the planet". No one who could've done anything was bothered, and no one who could do something about it in the future was educated.
- schmidt_fifty 2y ago
  [dead]
- bongodongobob 2y ago
  Think of it this way. Say a group of people are protesting a Walmart being built in their downtown district. People are out in the streets, traffic is jammed up, and "people who can't do anything about it" get pissed off. Commuters are mad, the local businesses are mad. So these people "who can't do anything about it" call their alderman, mayor, whatever "You need to do something about these protests, it's affecting my business/commute". It adds pressure for those in charge to capitulate and stop the protests. I don't know why this is so hard for people to understand. Edit: I can't reply to the comment below this for some reason, but ok they send the police to break up protests against Walmart. Which looks absolutely terrible. "Our mayor sides with Walmart over the people." That adds to the narrative and is paradoxically possible a net positive for the protestors.
  - cmmeur01 2y ago
    In reality they just send more cops / more funding for cops.
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    I don't think that's what's been happening. The protestors have been so annoying, blocking amubulances, etc, that they are definitely making their causes look bad. And on video.
    - bongodongobob 2y ago
      Disruption is the point. I'll have to bow out of this conversation as I am not able to understand those who don't get this.
      - robertlagrant 2y ago
        Oh - I see. It's extremely easy. Disrupting people who can't do anything about it in a way that turns the focus on you being the problem, not politicians, will mean that politicians will not be affected by the disruption.
        bongodongobob 2y ago
        No, they complain to the politicians. Then they have to decide whether or not they beat the shit out of people with police or grant their wish. Protests are not about gaining allies, they are strictly about disruption.
      - blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
        You aren’t entitled to break the law, steal from others, hold them hostage on highways, etc just because your view is not popular. That’s what illegal protests / riots are - people who are so entitled that they think they’re allowed to do whatever they want until they get their way. That’s not acceptable in a civil society and they should face harsh consequences for it.
        KittenInABox 2y ago
        Do you disagree with the illegal marches and blocking of traffic during the protests to grant black people and women the right to vote in the united states? Should women who illegally march for the right to vote be "harshly" consequenced?
- mikeyouse 2y ago
  Yet here you are, talking about their action 6 years later. Maybe it was more impactful than you're giving it credit for?
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    I assume this is parody, but just in case it's not: I am not someone who can do something about this, other than what I'm already doing. A schoolchild "going on strike" is not anything. Other than a less educated schoolchild.
    - mikeyouse 2y ago
      Good thing you're not the single person who became aware of the climate strike! I suspect many of the politicians who can actually influence things also remember the massive school strikes. Many protests are designed to raise awareness in addition to the 'stretch goal' of achieving direct results - so demonstrating that hundreds of thousands of school kids are this focused on the topic is a pretty good outcome even if some of the random people who were vaguely aware of the strikes can't do anything to help their demands. Said another way, it's not about you.
      - robertlagrant 2y ago
        > so demonstrating that hundreds of thousands of school kids are this focused on the topic is a pretty good outcome I'm sure that 15 years after the "strike" when they all hit voting age this may become useful information, but the politicians today are probably not thinking that far ahead. > Said another way, it's not about you. This seems breathtakingly silly. I'm not saying it is about me.
    - squigz 2y ago
      > I assume this is parody, but just in case it's not: I am not someone who can do something about this, other than what I'm already doing. Maybe other people aren't already doing those things. Maybe some people saw these kids and thought, "You know, those kids are right. I should do something about that."
- keybored 2y ago
  There are ineffective protests. Like protesting the Russian invasion in a Nato country. What for? I’m sure there are reasons. But the ones I can think of (tele-support, tele-morale?), well I don’t buy them.
- black_puppydog 2y ago
  Because "literally all the adult population" can't, as you seem to imply, do anything about it? Protest is not always about immediately having your demands met. It's nearly always part of a longer game. And if you're a 16 year old who has no financial leverage, no job to strike from, no company to make different decisions with, and who won't be able to vote for another 2 years, raising an issue with the people that can doesn't seem like such a bad idea. Besides, these protests got younger generations' voices into mainstream TV and newspapers. That's more than "appropriate" protest ever did.
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    > And if you're a 16 year old I'm talking about "strikes" that were 7-year-olds. Junior schools were striking. > That's more than "appropriate" protest ever did. I don't care about appropriate; just about effectiveness.
    - KittenInABox 2y ago
      Genuinely: what do you know about effective protesting? Are you speaking from experience as a successful organizer who got legislation passed or local policies reformed due to your activism? Do you have sociological papers on the phenomenon maybe, are you a journalist who investigates this? Your criticisms would have more weight if I had a better idea from which the experience you had to make these criticisms.
      - robertlagrant 2y ago
        This is called "ad hominem". Make a counterargument, rather than attacking the person.
        KittenInABox 2y ago
        I genuinely want to know their experience in organizing to get better context as to their expertise. They are the one making claims about what works and doesn't work. I don't know jack shit about organizing, so I'd like to know if I should take their opinion as an educated one or a layman.
notaustinpowers 2y ago
Remember everyone! A protest with permission is just a government-approved parade!
blackhawkC17 2y ago
Would you say the same for an anti-abortion protest or something similar? Many people want their protests to be very disruptive but forget they’re not the only ones with grievances. They’re a lot of people willing to grind society to a halt over any perceived slight, across all ideologies…let us just unleash the craze then.
- keybored 2y ago
  > Would you say the same for an anti-abortion protest or something similar? Is your point that since I presumably am pro-choice (correct) since this is a more liberal forum I will disagree with this point? Well I don’t. The same principles apply. Those who want to illegalize abortion or whatever have to follow the same principles.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  In most areas, causes from the right aren’t treated similarly. And it also seems odd that the number of participants matters at all - if you take over some place as an individual, you’ll be arrested. But if there’s 50 of you, that may not happen. The ability to selectively enforce the law based on viewpoint or situation is a hole in our system.
- eli 2y ago
  I don't agree with them and I don't think it's very nice, but anti-abortion protestors can and do scream at people walking into clinics or imply they're working with the clinic and hand out misleading brochures and "gifts." That's their right. Sometimes they break the law by blocking doors or shoving people (or worse) and get arrested. That's their right too. Sometimes they break the law and don't get arrested because local law enforcement is sympathetic to their cause. That is a problem. Otherwise, sure, they can protest in ways that inconvenience people.
  - itsdrewmiller 2y ago
    I think you mean they have the agency to break the law, not the right to do it.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Why is that absurd? In most countries, including the US, protests are only allowed under certain conditions. You can’t do things like take over public infrastructure. Such protests are violent, not peaceful, and should be treated as such. I think it’s absurd that some people think that they’re owed an audience for their unpopular ideas. They can use normal discussions and the political system to convince others. But stealing from them (their time and therefore money) is not okay.
- keybored 2y ago
  Why is it absurd? Because protests are popular (populus) means of compelling someone, like the authorities. So playing by the rules of the authorities is absurd. Of course the authorities have the incentive to make the protests as neutered as possible.
  - blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
    It’s it just authorities. Most people don’t want to hear about the cause of some random protester. Stealing their time is a crime. When protests involve illegal acts, they’re riots not just protests. It’s compelling someone by force. Do I have the right to come occupy your home because you don’t share my ideas? If not why would that be okay elsewhere? We have existing, legal avenues for both lawful protest and political change that people can use.
    - KittenInABox 2y ago
      > Stealing their time is a crime. Oh shit! Is it? Can I finally arrest tourists for walking slowly in my city? They bother me way more than the occasional protest does (less than once a month, while tourists are in my way every day I go outside)!
psunavy03 2y ago
> We’ve got this warped idea that a proper protest is when some people gather in some designated area that the authorities allow them to, and they don’t inconvenience anyone. That’s absurd when you consider what a protest is about. OK, fine, but you also don't get to decide how other people interpret your actions. You can fuss and bother about how trivial it is to you that someone's commute got delayed by 10 minutes, but if you're pissing off the person you're trying to get your message to, you're still shooting yourself in the foot. Persuasion is contextual; you don't get to dictate someone else's feelings and you don't get to force them to see things your way.
- bongodongobob 2y ago
  Nope, that's the point. Protests aren't intended to gain allies. It's to put pressure on those in charge. Pissing people off and interrupting commerce is literally the point.
  - trashtester 2y ago
    The protest itself may not be about gaining allies, but protests depend on being able to gain allies if those in charge meet them with enough force to stop them. If protests go too far, to the point where the general public will cheer for anyone putting the protesters in jail for a decade, the protest is going to be ineffective.
    - the_snooze 2y ago
      There's something profoundly insulting about protesters treating the general public as a simple means to an end, instead of potential allies to connect with. The way I see it, if I believe my cause is righteous, then I'd be doing it a deep disservice by presenting it in the most alienating way possible. I should want to bring people over to my side. Otherwise, it shows I'm not serious---that the cause itself is secondary to my conviction, that I'd rather be seen fighting than go home a victor.
      - bongodongobob 2y ago
adolph 2y ago
> inconveniences their commute by 10 minutes I’ll have a double of whatever a person demonstrating this lack of compassion is protesting.
dehrmann 2y ago
> inconveniences their commute by 10 minutes The right to protest ends once it interferes with others' freedoms.
dgfitz 2y ago
"Inconveniencing people" is such a...polite? take, which I don't agree with. * Wife in labor, need to get to the hospital. Stuck in traffic for hours. Mom and/or baby die. * Job interview, been unemployed for 8 months, late, stuck in traffic for hours. No job. * Ambulance trying to rush a patient in critical condition to hospital. Stuck in traffic. Dead. * Trying to pick kid up from daycare. Hours late, huge fee, kicked out of daycare, possibly lose job. I can keep going. Let us assume for a second that all the above scenarios are people who are neutral to the cause of the protest. Now they hate the cause of the protest, along with all of the people who felt second-order effects from the "inconvenienced" people. "Inconveniencing people" is such an arrogant, selfish, self-centered way to view a protest that can have lasting consequences. Accepting that at collateral damage is, frankly, bullshit.
- keybored 2y ago
  I said what I meant. My experience is informed by examples of people complaining about inconveniences in the literal (not as a euphemism or as a downplay) way. I can’t help you if you get enraged by hypothetical scenarios.
  - dgfitz 2y ago
    Here is your hypothetical: https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/second-protest-blocks-all-lanes-of-golden-gate-bridge-san-francisco/ https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/second-protest-blo... > "I'm gonna try to get through," Scott said. "My daughter needs me. She's got four little ones there and I'm supposed to be helping take care of them while she's working." > "Our poor Uber driver," said Brianna & Brienne, two passengers visiting from out of town.
    - keybored 2y ago
      Okay. You certainly have more of a right to be incensed over a grandparent being kept from his babysitting compared to hypotheticals where mothers, babies, and critical-care patients are dying. I have not and I will not complain about people complaining about real inconveniences when they happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time through no fault of their own. And all of this doesn’t change the fact that protests should not be discouraged or be made unlawful (although apparently according to that state trooper it already is) considering that protesters have quite important things that they are protesting themselves, according to their own thinking. From that link (one of the “poor Uber driver” girls): > "Yes it's an inconvenience," Brienne added. "But it's also inconvenient to be inconvenient to a human being in Gaza right now."
Minor49er 2y ago
You may want to reconsider your stance on blocking ambulances in case you ever find yourself in one, needlessly dying because of someone else's political cause who will hand-wave the end of your life away as a mere inconvenience
- Avshalom 2y ago
  I can't afford an ambulance thanks to someone else's political cause.
  - Minor49er 2y ago
    Actually, you probably can
    - xracy 2y ago
      Literally just gainsaying someone on the internet about their insurance. And your gainsay is hedged without actually providing them with some resource they could use to inform them? You're really making a contribution with this comment. /s
      - Minor49er 2y ago
        I appreciate HN comments being self-referential sometimes, but this is just ridiculous
        xracy 2y ago
        Actually this is not ridiculous.
- keybored 2y ago
  I suspect that I will think very irrationally in a life or death situation, like for example blaming protesters for that. Thankfully I’m not in such a situation right now which means that I can assess the situation in terms of likelihood of doing harm.
throwaway44773 2y ago
My main complaints with protests these days is that they seem to be astroturfed to keep the discontent people busy with protest that cannot bring about any meaningful local changes. Either they are about far away things happening in the world, or they are about vague ideas with no concrete steps to achieve any meaningful impact.
- keybored 2y ago
  That’s an interesting opinion and it might well be the case.
tharmas 2y ago
Exactly. No inconvenience = no power. Both sides need to learn to negotiate and compromise.

robertlagrant 2y ago

It's absurd when it doesn't inconvenience anyone who can do what the protest is about. It's like when UK schoolkids "went on strike for the planet". No one who could've done anything was bothered, and no one who could do something about it in the future was educated.

schmidt_fifty 2y ago
[dead]
bongodongobob 2y ago
Think of it this way. Say a group of people are protesting a Walmart being built in their downtown district. People are out in the streets, traffic is jammed up, and "people who can't do anything about it" get pissed off. Commuters are mad, the local businesses are mad. So these people "who can't do anything about it" call their alderman, mayor, whatever "You need to do something about these protests, it's affecting my business/commute". It adds pressure for those in charge to capitulate and stop the protests. I don't know why this is so hard for people to understand. Edit: I can't reply to the comment below this for some reason, but ok they send the police to break up protests against Walmart. Which looks absolutely terrible. "Our mayor sides with Walmart over the people." That adds to the narrative and is paradoxically possible a net positive for the protestors.
- cmmeur01 2y ago
  In reality they just send more cops / more funding for cops.
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  I don't think that's what's been happening. The protestors have been so annoying, blocking amubulances, etc, that they are definitely making their causes look bad. And on video.
  - bongodongobob 2y ago
    Disruption is the point. I'll have to bow out of this conversation as I am not able to understand those who don't get this.
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      Oh - I see. It's extremely easy. Disrupting people who can't do anything about it in a way that turns the focus on you being the problem, not politicians, will mean that politicians will not be affected by the disruption.
      - bongodongobob 2y ago
        No, they complain to the politicians. Then they have to decide whether or not they beat the shit out of people with police or grant their wish. Protests are not about gaining allies, they are strictly about disruption.
    - blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
      You aren’t entitled to break the law, steal from others, hold them hostage on highways, etc just because your view is not popular. That’s what illegal protests / riots are - people who are so entitled that they think they’re allowed to do whatever they want until they get their way. That’s not acceptable in a civil society and they should face harsh consequences for it.
      - KittenInABox 2y ago
        Do you disagree with the illegal marches and blocking of traffic during the protests to grant black people and women the right to vote in the united states? Should women who illegally march for the right to vote be "harshly" consequenced?
mikeyouse 2y ago
Yet here you are, talking about their action 6 years later. Maybe it was more impactful than you're giving it credit for?
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  I assume this is parody, but just in case it's not: I am not someone who can do something about this, other than what I'm already doing. A schoolchild "going on strike" is not anything. Other than a less educated schoolchild.
  - mikeyouse 2y ago
    Good thing you're not the single person who became aware of the climate strike! I suspect many of the politicians who can actually influence things also remember the massive school strikes. Many protests are designed to raise awareness in addition to the 'stretch goal' of achieving direct results - so demonstrating that hundreds of thousands of school kids are this focused on the topic is a pretty good outcome even if some of the random people who were vaguely aware of the strikes can't do anything to help their demands. Said another way, it's not about you.
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      > so demonstrating that hundreds of thousands of school kids are this focused on the topic is a pretty good outcome I'm sure that 15 years after the "strike" when they all hit voting age this may become useful information, but the politicians today are probably not thinking that far ahead. > Said another way, it's not about you. This seems breathtakingly silly. I'm not saying it is about me.
  - squigz 2y ago
    > I assume this is parody, but just in case it's not: I am not someone who can do something about this, other than what I'm already doing. Maybe other people aren't already doing those things. Maybe some people saw these kids and thought, "You know, those kids are right. I should do something about that."
keybored 2y ago
There are ineffective protests. Like protesting the Russian invasion in a Nato country. What for? I’m sure there are reasons. But the ones I can think of (tele-support, tele-morale?), well I don’t buy them.
black_puppydog 2y ago
Because "literally all the adult population" can't, as you seem to imply, do anything about it? Protest is not always about immediately having your demands met. It's nearly always part of a longer game. And if you're a 16 year old who has no financial leverage, no job to strike from, no company to make different decisions with, and who won't be able to vote for another 2 years, raising an issue with the people that can doesn't seem like such a bad idea. Besides, these protests got younger generations' voices into mainstream TV and newspapers. That's more than "appropriate" protest ever did.
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  > And if you're a 16 year old I'm talking about "strikes" that were 7-year-olds. Junior schools were striking. > That's more than "appropriate" protest ever did. I don't care about appropriate; just about effectiveness.
  - KittenInABox 2y ago
    Genuinely: what do you know about effective protesting? Are you speaking from experience as a successful organizer who got legislation passed or local policies reformed due to your activism? Do you have sociological papers on the phenomenon maybe, are you a journalist who investigates this? Your criticisms would have more weight if I had a better idea from which the experience you had to make these criticisms.
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      This is called "ad hominem". Make a counterargument, rather than attacking the person.
      - KittenInABox 2y ago
        I genuinely want to know their experience in organizing to get better context as to their expertise. They are the one making claims about what works and doesn't work. I don't know jack shit about organizing, so I'd like to know if I should take their opinion as an educated one or a layman.

notaustinpowers 2y ago

Remember everyone! A protest with permission is just a government-approved parade!

blackhawkC17 2y ago

Would you say the same for an anti-abortion protest or something similar? Many people want their protests to be very disruptive but forget they’re not the only ones with grievances. They’re a lot of people willing to grind society to a halt over any perceived slight, across all ideologies…let us just unleash the craze then.

keybored 2y ago
> Would you say the same for an anti-abortion protest or something similar? Is your point that since I presumably am pro-choice (correct) since this is a more liberal forum I will disagree with this point? Well I don’t. The same principles apply. Those who want to illegalize abortion or whatever have to follow the same principles.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
In most areas, causes from the right aren’t treated similarly. And it also seems odd that the number of participants matters at all - if you take over some place as an individual, you’ll be arrested. But if there’s 50 of you, that may not happen. The ability to selectively enforce the law based on viewpoint or situation is a hole in our system.
eli 2y ago
I don't agree with them and I don't think it's very nice, but anti-abortion protestors can and do scream at people walking into clinics or imply they're working with the clinic and hand out misleading brochures and "gifts." That's their right. Sometimes they break the law by blocking doors or shoving people (or worse) and get arrested. That's their right too. Sometimes they break the law and don't get arrested because local law enforcement is sympathetic to their cause. That is a problem. Otherwise, sure, they can protest in ways that inconvenience people.
- itsdrewmiller 2y ago
  I think you mean they have the agency to break the law, not the right to do it.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

Why is that absurd? In most countries, including the US, protests are only allowed under certain conditions. You can’t do things like take over public infrastructure. Such protests are violent, not peaceful, and should be treated as such. I think it’s absurd that some people think that they’re owed an audience for their unpopular ideas. They can use normal discussions and the political system to convince others. But stealing from them (their time and therefore money) is not okay.

keybored 2y ago
Why is it absurd? Because protests are popular (populus) means of compelling someone, like the authorities. So playing by the rules of the authorities is absurd. Of course the authorities have the incentive to make the protests as neutered as possible.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  It’s it just authorities. Most people don’t want to hear about the cause of some random protester. Stealing their time is a crime. When protests involve illegal acts, they’re riots not just protests. It’s compelling someone by force. Do I have the right to come occupy your home because you don’t share my ideas? If not why would that be okay elsewhere? We have existing, legal avenues for both lawful protest and political change that people can use.
  - KittenInABox 2y ago
    > Stealing their time is a crime. Oh shit! Is it? Can I finally arrest tourists for walking slowly in my city? They bother me way more than the occasional protest does (less than once a month, while tourists are in my way every day I go outside)!

psunavy03 2y ago

> We’ve got this warped idea that a proper protest is when some people gather in some designated area that the authorities allow them to, and they don’t inconvenience anyone. That’s absurd when you consider what a protest is about. OK, fine, but you also don't get to decide how other people interpret your actions. You can fuss and bother about how trivial it is to you that someone's commute got delayed by 10 minutes, but if you're pissing off the person you're trying to get your message to, you're still shooting yourself in the foot. Persuasion is contextual; you don't get to dictate someone else's feelings and you don't get to force them to see things your way.

bongodongobob 2y ago
Nope, that's the point. Protests aren't intended to gain allies. It's to put pressure on those in charge. Pissing people off and interrupting commerce is literally the point.
- trashtester 2y ago
  The protest itself may not be about gaining allies, but protests depend on being able to gain allies if those in charge meet them with enough force to stop them. If protests go too far, to the point where the general public will cheer for anyone putting the protesters in jail for a decade, the protest is going to be ineffective.
  - the_snooze 2y ago
    There's something profoundly insulting about protesters treating the general public as a simple means to an end, instead of potential allies to connect with. The way I see it, if I believe my cause is righteous, then I'd be doing it a deep disservice by presenting it in the most alienating way possible. I should want to bring people over to my side. Otherwise, it shows I'm not serious---that the cause itself is secondary to my conviction, that I'd rather be seen fighting than go home a victor.
    - bongodongobob 2y ago

adolph 2y ago

> inconveniences their commute by 10 minutes I’ll have a double of whatever a person demonstrating this lack of compassion is protesting.

dehrmann 2y ago

> inconveniences their commute by 10 minutes The right to protest ends once it interferes with others' freedoms.

dgfitz 2y ago

"Inconveniencing people" is such a...polite? take, which I don't agree with. * Wife in labor, need to get to the hospital. Stuck in traffic for hours. Mom and/or baby die. * Job interview, been unemployed for 8 months, late, stuck in traffic for hours. No job. * Ambulance trying to rush a patient in critical condition to hospital. Stuck in traffic. Dead. * Trying to pick kid up from daycare. Hours late, huge fee, kicked out of daycare, possibly lose job. I can keep going. Let us assume for a second that all the above scenarios are people who are neutral to the cause of the protest. Now they hate the cause of the protest, along with all of the people who felt second-order effects from the "inconvenienced" people. "Inconveniencing people" is such an arrogant, selfish, self-centered way to view a protest that can have lasting consequences. Accepting that at collateral damage is, frankly, bullshit.

keybored 2y ago
I said what I meant. My experience is informed by examples of people complaining about inconveniences in the literal (not as a euphemism or as a downplay) way. I can’t help you if you get enraged by hypothetical scenarios.
- dgfitz 2y ago
  Here is your hypothetical: https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/second-protest-blocks-all-lanes-of-golden-gate-bridge-san-francisco/ https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/second-protest-blo... > "I'm gonna try to get through," Scott said. "My daughter needs me. She's got four little ones there and I'm supposed to be helping take care of them while she's working." > "Our poor Uber driver," said Brianna & Brienne, two passengers visiting from out of town.
  - keybored 2y ago
    Okay. You certainly have more of a right to be incensed over a grandparent being kept from his babysitting compared to hypotheticals where mothers, babies, and critical-care patients are dying. I have not and I will not complain about people complaining about real inconveniences when they happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time through no fault of their own. And all of this doesn’t change the fact that protests should not be discouraged or be made unlawful (although apparently according to that state trooper it already is) considering that protesters have quite important things that they are protesting themselves, according to their own thinking. From that link (one of the “poor Uber driver” girls): > "Yes it's an inconvenience," Brienne added. "But it's also inconvenient to be inconvenient to a human being in Gaza right now."

Minor49er 2y ago

You may want to reconsider your stance on blocking ambulances in case you ever find yourself in one, needlessly dying because of someone else's political cause who will hand-wave the end of your life away as a mere inconvenience

Avshalom 2y ago
I can't afford an ambulance thanks to someone else's political cause.
- Minor49er 2y ago
  Actually, you probably can
  - xracy 2y ago
    Literally just gainsaying someone on the internet about their insurance. And your gainsay is hedged without actually providing them with some resource they could use to inform them? You're really making a contribution with this comment. /s
    - Minor49er 2y ago
      I appreciate HN comments being self-referential sometimes, but this is just ridiculous
      - xracy 2y ago
        Actually this is not ridiculous.
keybored 2y ago
I suspect that I will think very irrationally in a life or death situation, like for example blaming protesters for that. Thankfully I’m not in such a situation right now which means that I can assess the situation in terms of likelihood of doing harm.

throwaway44773 2y ago

My main complaints with protests these days is that they seem to be astroturfed to keep the discontent people busy with protest that cannot bring about any meaningful local changes. Either they are about far away things happening in the world, or they are about vague ideas with no concrete steps to achieve any meaningful impact.

keybored 2y ago
That’s an interesting opinion and it might well be the case.

tharmas 2y ago

Exactly. No inconvenience = no power. Both sides need to learn to negotiate and compromise.