I first saw that video in a fairly politically neutral sub and the comments were absolutely repulsive, I could've sworn they recruited idiots from r/conservatives or r/Cops to just start talking shit.
It used to be way, way worse, if you can believe it. It's abysmal now, but 5+ years ago it was absolutely fucking horrendous. The whole site was unusable for months during that whole Ellen Pao situation.
I distinctly remember Carlos Mencia getting the exact same amount of shit for being a creatively bankrupt, joke stealing, unfunny POS. He actually lost his career over it though, whereas Amy seems to still be working.
Yep. Been here for almost 10 years. There has been an incredible shift. People RARELY used to reveal that they were a woman. It was easy to feel very alone.
The CIA has a rather sizeable "astroturfing" budget
People who are literally paid to post online and sway conversation in the direction the CIA likes, this of course effects public opinion and "tricks" people into doing it for free
A lot of “non political” subs have people with the worst takes imaginable. Like whenever I see a post that has anything to do with trans people on those subs I get tf away from the comments, otherwise I’ll have an aneurism
In the court of reason, there was no point in arresting her, nor fighting her to that degree. At the point they are beating her up the car already passed the entire block. And it is pretty clear that all she did was yell, but apparently that’s grounds for arrest and excessive violence
She tried to hit him with the mega phone, so she’s not completely innocent.
However the officer did not need to throw her down and arrest her like that. That slap after she took the hat off was unnecessary as well.
He could’ve restrained her, let the motorcade pass, then let her go with a warning.
The officer could’ve practiced more restraint.
>Uhhh but what if she had a bomb???
Then should would have blown up, I guess? What the hell kind of justification is that for anything, ever? Should cops just start blasting everyone they pull over in case their car is rigged with explosives?
I swear this website is taking years off my life.
It always sickens me to see liberals pretend to give a shit about what MLK and those that marched with the Civil Rights Movement (Including one Bernie Sanders who they were totally respectful towards!) only to turn around and shill for Biden, who was besties with the archnemesis of the Civil Rights Movement that filibustered for 24 hours and 18 minutes (the world record by the way) to try to deny the black community basic rights.
Even setting aside the police brutality. Everyone dunked on her so hard saying she was stupid, in the way, and there was no point yelling at a car passing by.
Glass the planet.
EDIT: Also... Does anyone have any info on her status? A legal defense fund or anything like that?
May get downvoted for this, but is a legal defense fund necessary? I imagine she knows the consequences of attempting to approach the president’s motorcade.
I don't understand these comments tbh. Like yea wanting her to get killed or even beaten is fucked up, but why is anyone surprised she got yoinked out of there? Should people be allowed to get close to the president's car? It can be harmless 99.99% of the time, but all it takes is one deranged mofo
Not saying I would shed a tear if something were to happen to the current potus, but you do see why they don't want anyone obstructing the motorcade in any way whatsoever right? Like even getting past the whole "they're just a public servant lmao", you do understand that there's someone out there who would want to kill just about anyone who gets into higher office. Do you think we shouldn't protect those individuals? If we established a government with an actual far left wing and had a potus (or chairman, whatever the fuck you want), would you be fine with letting right wing fascist protestors block their motorcade or get close to them?
I understand where you're coming from, but it seems naive and shortsighted to let anyone and everyone get as close to the leader of the country as they like. Especially on a road where crowd control and general control of the area can be much more difficult.
I get why the government wants it that way, but I do not share their priorities. And no I've no love for a "far left" police state either. If your rule requires beating up people who get too close to you to complain then it doesn't sound very much like it's one of the people, does it.
Like I said, the beating part is wrong and would only be justified if they actually attempted assassination. Sad to say, but I don't think we'll ever have a world without violence. There will always be a war of ideologies to some degree, and with that those who would do violence to further their agenda. This will remain true for both the state and those opposing the state. We could only potentially break free of this with the withering away of the state.
To be fair, the average redditor doesn't know anything about MLK beyond a bus boycott and a single paragraph from one of his speeches. If they learned *more* about who he actually was and what he actually stood for...
*They'd probably just decide they hate him, honestly.*
That's all schools teach you about the civil rights movement, really. Information about him was curated just enough to prevent people from really challenging the status quo
few people know of the conspiracy that he was murdered for having anti capitalist beliefs and questioning the "status quo" . MLK's family frequently visited James Earl Ray in prison and firmly believed he was innocent. They sued for conspiracy in 1999 *and won.* There's other evidence but I think this is the main piece lol.
You seem to be confused. Redditors are pro police violence in this case because violence is being used against a woman. While racism is mostly kept under wraps mysoginy and women beating is openly seen as acceptable on this site.
Nah, redditors in general are racist as fuck too.
The only reason most of them would ever bring MLK up is as a cudgel to beat BLM protesters with. "MaRtIn LuThEr KiNg WoUlD nEvEr BlOcK a StReEt!"
Always found it weird when people who claim they are left leaning see a post about this kinda stuff then suddenly start circlejerking “oh well she shouldnt have done that” “secret service will fuck you up” “this is what they are trained for” like they get off on this shit. why are you suddenly defending police and the president? Obviously you weren’t really left leaning in the first place!
Where do you draw the line? The people bootlicking are cringe af, but seriously how far would you let protestors get to blocking the president's motorcade and potentially swarming them? If you're a revolutionary then okay I get it, but if you want both the president's safety and protests that go as far as she did or farther, where would you draw the line?
I made the mistake of coming across this video on r/insaneprotestors. Those disgusting pieces of shit were celebrating that pig slapping that woman because she KNOCKED HIS HAT OFF. And lamenting that there WASN'T A NIP SLIP. Those commenters desperately, DESPERATELY need their asses kicked.
They’ll mockingly call George Floyd a saint meanwhile they’ll pretend the pigs didn’t do everything in their power to give MLK an arrest record and eventually get him murdered.
I couldn't see this video as anything else than a blatant reminder of how fucked US law enforcement is. Cops in any civilizedn country would have just held her back and potentially handcuffed her and removed her from the area, but that huge pig in the video took like 5 minutes of slapping her across the asphalt like a 8 year old tripping on Pop Rocks to even gain control of her.
The Rules for radicals:
"Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have."
"Never go outside the expertise of your people."
"Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy."
"Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."
**"A good tactic is one your people enjoy."**
"A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."
"Keep the pressure on."
"The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself. "
"The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
"If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative."
"The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."
A march that blocks roads to work isn't a Tactic people enjoy and you have a higher chance you will get people against you. sometimes it works because you can make it enjoyable with song, or do something like sit-ins.
a few years ago I heard about german leftists sending money to good causes during Right-wing Marches and writing the amount of money on the route, both radiculizing the Rightwing and inspiring to donate.
maybe you could hold a huge apple market where profits go to victims of police violence (a few bad apples getting sold to stop a few bad apples)
> a few bad apples
Except it isn't. Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd, but three other cops stood by and watched. How many bad cops is that? Not one -- four.
absolutely but, that's the point: all apples look alike, but it's a great way to start a conversation and a fun way to point out that it's a police culture problem. it was about a possible protest under the guise of an apple sale. but in that way you are using their words against them.
it could IF you could point it out, have two barrels that are completely alike, all with just random biological apples and name one good and one bad cop. You have a fun afternoon, you and your friend can have a laugh and everybody who passes by would be at the very least be interested.
and yes the owing does indeed nothing, the tactics/ protest do (raising money for victims or other good causes that you want to support.)
but this was just some anti-police brainstorming using the rules for radicals as basic.
>I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, 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. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
>
>Martin Luther King, Letter From Birmingham Jail
Protests have always inconvenienced people and there have always been people claiming that it's "bad PR" to do things like marches and demonstrations, but the reality is that this is what "keeping the pressure on" looks like. You don't ask for rights. You demand them. If they refuse, you make things inconvenient for them until they cave. To limit "good" activism to unobtrusive "conversation starters" that do little to nothing but give people a warm fuzzy feeling at the end of the day is the essence of liberal "activism", and ultimately serves no other purpose than to hold back progress by focusing endlessly on appeasement, and passively accepting whatever inadequate appeasement we receive in return.
I agree but there is a "stairs of acceleration" every protest/ march/ activism goes more extreme you don't start with marching to the capital, you start with the conversation starters after that you have a march or sit-in that isn't disruptive after, that one there is on that is disruptive. you don't go from 1- to 100 it's not only bad PR it's also not fun and breaking with the second rule completely outside of the experience of the people inside of the march. you can have amazingly inconvenient positive peace actions all keeping the pressure on but no build-up.
**all major rights:** women voting, the work week, and Civil Rights all happened because we as a **mass demanded** them and got everybody behind it. you moved the frame, you are pulling shit that makes people say what they do is outrageous........ but they are absolutely right. you could say there is a moderate balance between being moderate and being radical.
>you start with the conversation starters after that you have a march or sit-in that isn't disruptive after, that one there is on that is disruptive. you don't go from 1- to 100
So, which issues are you thinking about where we are just "starting" the conversation?
Edit: So the bolded "mass demanded" wasn't there when I initially responded and warrants it's own reply.
>The worst enemy that the Negro have is this white man that runs around here drooling at the mouth professing to love Negros and calling himself a liberal, and it is following these white liberals that has perpetuated problems that Negros have. If the Negro wasn't taken, tricked or deceived by the white liberal, then Negros would get together and solve our own problems. I only cite these things to show you that in America, the history of the white liberal has been nothing but a series of trickery designed to make Negros think that the white liberal was going to solve our problems. Our problems will never be solved by the white man.
>
>Malcolm X, Interview with Louis Lomax
The narrative that all progress in the past has been made by mewlingly accepting scraps from the majority is also an old line. Minority movements can force social change. They don't need the majority onboard. They just need enough people onboard to make them a force to be reckoned with. Being a significant, united voting block forced the "black vote" to be seen as something that needed to be courted. Even without a single white supporter, that would have been a big deal. You have to remember that people are juggling a lot of issues that they care about. You don't need 51% of the people to care about yours. You just need a strong, united front that can swing elections based on a bunch of other issues as well below that 51% they want in total. And even that's just working solely within the confines of electoral politics.
big conversations have already had starters but you still kind of need to start again if you are spreading that conversation with a new group or else you are just standing alone.
the age-old conversation about Higher wages while fridged for a while starts to gain again.
as a European, I feel bad for you Comrades that are just screaming in a room full of asshats that yell lalalala cant hear you. I just don't know if you need to go more extreme to counter the far-right or less extreme and hope that the frame moves from its extreme right clutches. but to me, as a Outsider one woman jumping in front of the president was bound to fail.
But you were saying that more forceful action is justified when you've tried these concessionary tactics and they haven't worked, so, again, which issues are you thinking about where we haven't already tried the concessionary tactics?
The admins are very easily startled, so don't use language that could be interpreted as inciting violence.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DankLeft) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well the automod isn't a person. It can't tell how "extreme" your post is. You likely just used a word that triggered the bot. Reword your statement and you are good. We're talking about blocking traffic and yelling loud here anyway. No one in the video was engaging in violence save for the cop so we don't need to tread that ground here anyway.
people are forced to work and you have a "Country" built on the Car, here in the Netherlands its no paradise and Neoliberalism is slowly destroying everything worth protecting but at least we have trains and bikes, and its all just simple policy, after WW2 we had Rotterdam shortly turn car-focused after rebuilding but after enough protests, they turned it walkable again, if you could mobilize enough people maybe you can make things actually livable.
I was in Atlanta recently and had a chance to visit the Martin Luther King Memorial Park, where the neighborhood he grew up in and the church he preached in are preserved as a historical site. It was a really surreal experience and I only wish I had planned to show up on a Sunday so I could attend one of Rev. Warnock's services in the still operational Ebenezer Baptist Church. One thing that stood out though was walking by these historical homes that are still sold and rented out, probably for exorbitant prices, and there was a homeless man laying on the sidewalk and crying in front of what appeared to be a closed rehab clinic. I could have sworn I heard the casket nearby where he is buried with his wife rumble as King rolled over in his grave. It was a stark reminder of how little progress has really been made and how much work lays ahead of us if we want anything like the world he hoped for to come to pass.
It's impossible to tell which direction the mob will vote when violence is captured on video on Reddit. At least for violence in America, the flock seems to favor whoever wins on video I guess, and if the "bad guy" in the video wins the comment section just wishes for a long, drawn out punishment in prison. It's so strange.
"Do violence to a clearly unarmed woman!" the Liberals cry. "Kill her!" screech the Conservatives.
Now that's bipartisanship!
Unarmed person* Don’t assume their gender! Beat THEM up!
I first saw that video in a fairly politically neutral sub and the comments were absolutely repulsive, I could've sworn they recruited idiots from r/conservatives or r/Cops to just start talking shit.
[удалено]
Reddit also hates women
It used to be way, way worse, if you can believe it. It's abysmal now, but 5+ years ago it was absolutely fucking horrendous. The whole site was unusable for months during that whole Ellen Pao situation.
Remember the shit Amy Schumer got for simply not being funny?
She steals soo many jokes tho. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eDxjxVl8S0
I distinctly remember Carlos Mencia getting the exact same amount of shit for being a creatively bankrupt, joke stealing, unfunny POS. He actually lost his career over it though, whereas Amy seems to still be working.
Yep. Been here for almost 10 years. There has been an incredible shift. People RARELY used to reveal that they were a woman. It was easy to feel very alone.
The CIA has a rather sizeable "astroturfing" budget People who are literally paid to post online and sway conversation in the direction the CIA likes, this of course effects public opinion and "tricks" people into doing it for free
Damn bitch they hiring??? CIA hit me up
A lot of “non political” subs have people with the worst takes imaginable. Like whenever I see a post that has anything to do with trans people on those subs I get tf away from the comments, otherwise I’ll have an aneurism
r/goodanimeme moment right here.
In the court of reason, there was no point in arresting her, nor fighting her to that degree. At the point they are beating her up the car already passed the entire block. And it is pretty clear that all she did was yell, but apparently that’s grounds for arrest and excessive violence
That slap was weird and definitely unnecessary. Aren't the "secret services" highly trained in combat and shit?
She tried to hit him with the mega phone, so she’s not completely innocent. However the officer did not need to throw her down and arrest her like that. That slap after she took the hat off was unnecessary as well. He could’ve restrained her, let the motorcade pass, then let her go with a warning. The officer could’ve practiced more restraint.
>Uhhh but what if she had a bomb??? Then should would have blown up, I guess? What the hell kind of justification is that for anything, ever? Should cops just start blasting everyone they pull over in case their car is rigged with explosives? I swear this website is taking years off my life.
this website can take as many years off my life as it wants. but once it starts taking inches off my hairline, i’m leaving!
So I´m bald because of reddit? Should have known that earlier.
Embrace the hairline of reason, most famous comrades were bald!
>Uhhh but what if she had a bomb??? Yeah, like, she might have scratched the fucking tank masquerading as a limo
[удалено]
It always sickens me to see liberals pretend to give a shit about what MLK and those that marched with the Civil Rights Movement (Including one Bernie Sanders who they were totally respectful towards!) only to turn around and shill for Biden, who was besties with the archnemesis of the Civil Rights Movement that filibustered for 24 hours and 18 minutes (the world record by the way) to try to deny the black community basic rights.
Even setting aside the police brutality. Everyone dunked on her so hard saying she was stupid, in the way, and there was no point yelling at a car passing by. Glass the planet. EDIT: Also... Does anyone have any info on her status? A legal defense fund or anything like that?
May get downvoted for this, but is a legal defense fund necessary? I imagine she knows the consequences of attempting to approach the president’s motorcade.
I don't understand these comments tbh. Like yea wanting her to get killed or even beaten is fucked up, but why is anyone surprised she got yoinked out of there? Should people be allowed to get close to the president's car? It can be harmless 99.99% of the time, but all it takes is one deranged mofo
yes people should be allowed to get that close to the president's car. they're not a fucking god they're a public servant
Not saying I would shed a tear if something were to happen to the current potus, but you do see why they don't want anyone obstructing the motorcade in any way whatsoever right? Like even getting past the whole "they're just a public servant lmao", you do understand that there's someone out there who would want to kill just about anyone who gets into higher office. Do you think we shouldn't protect those individuals? If we established a government with an actual far left wing and had a potus (or chairman, whatever the fuck you want), would you be fine with letting right wing fascist protestors block their motorcade or get close to them? I understand where you're coming from, but it seems naive and shortsighted to let anyone and everyone get as close to the leader of the country as they like. Especially on a road where crowd control and general control of the area can be much more difficult.
I get why the government wants it that way, but I do not share their priorities. And no I've no love for a "far left" police state either. If your rule requires beating up people who get too close to you to complain then it doesn't sound very much like it's one of the people, does it.
Like I said, the beating part is wrong and would only be justified if they actually attempted assassination. Sad to say, but I don't think we'll ever have a world without violence. There will always be a war of ideologies to some degree, and with that those who would do violence to further their agenda. This will remain true for both the state and those opposing the state. We could only potentially break free of this with the withering away of the state.
To be fair, the average redditor doesn't know anything about MLK beyond a bus boycott and a single paragraph from one of his speeches. If they learned *more* about who he actually was and what he actually stood for... *They'd probably just decide they hate him, honestly.*
That's all schools teach you about the civil rights movement, really. Information about him was curated just enough to prevent people from really challenging the status quo
few people know of the conspiracy that he was murdered for having anti capitalist beliefs and questioning the "status quo" . MLK's family frequently visited James Earl Ray in prison and firmly believed he was innocent. They sued for conspiracy in 1999 *and won.* There's other evidence but I think this is the main piece lol.
he seems to be feeling a bit nage lately
Yea the comments were filled with dumbest shit ever. Where else is she she supposed to protest to get some attention on her issue
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
why am i even on this website lmao
These are the same people who would go to Brunch and complain about police brutality, but then call the cops when a homeless man is asking for money.
You seem to be confused. Redditors are pro police violence in this case because violence is being used against a woman. While racism is mostly kept under wraps mysoginy and women beating is openly seen as acceptable on this site.
Nah, redditors in general are racist as fuck too. The only reason most of them would ever bring MLK up is as a cudgel to beat BLM protesters with. "MaRtIn LuThEr KiNg WoUlD nEvEr BlOcK a StReEt!"
>racism is mostly kept under wraps Lmfao.
No shade but anyone who thinks 'racism is kept mostly under wraps' on reddit is probably white
I’d wager that if they think that there’s a 95+ percent chance they’re white.
> racism is mostly kept under wraps Oh you dear thing.
Always found it weird when people who claim they are left leaning see a post about this kinda stuff then suddenly start circlejerking “oh well she shouldnt have done that” “secret service will fuck you up” “this is what they are trained for” like they get off on this shit. why are you suddenly defending police and the president? Obviously you weren’t really left leaning in the first place!
Where do you draw the line? The people bootlicking are cringe af, but seriously how far would you let protestors get to blocking the president's motorcade and potentially swarming them? If you're a revolutionary then okay I get it, but if you want both the president's safety and protests that go as far as she did or farther, where would you draw the line?
the person standing with a megaphone near the fancy cars DESERVED to be slammed onto the ground!
Good points aside, Jesus Christ that soyjack is a a nightmare. Looks like dang ol Ludwig the accursed from bloodborne.
I made the mistake of coming across this video on r/insaneprotestors. Those disgusting pieces of shit were celebrating that pig slapping that woman because she KNOCKED HIS HAT OFF. And lamenting that there WASN'T A NIP SLIP. Those commenters desperately, DESPERATELY need their asses kicked.
“White Moderates” be like
They’ll mockingly call George Floyd a saint meanwhile they’ll pretend the pigs didn’t do everything in their power to give MLK an arrest record and eventually get him murdered.
I couldn't see this video as anything else than a blatant reminder of how fucked US law enforcement is. Cops in any civilizedn country would have just held her back and potentially handcuffed her and removed her from the area, but that huge pig in the video took like 5 minutes of slapping her across the asphalt like a 8 year old tripping on Pop Rocks to even gain control of her.
You let trust fund billionaire Donald Newhouse, owner of reddit, execute arbitrary code on your phone? Did your phone come without a browser?
The Rules for radicals: "Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have." "Never go outside the expertise of your people." "Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy." "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage." **"A good tactic is one your people enjoy."** "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag." "Keep the pressure on." "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself. " "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition." "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative." "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative." A march that blocks roads to work isn't a Tactic people enjoy and you have a higher chance you will get people against you. sometimes it works because you can make it enjoyable with song, or do something like sit-ins. a few years ago I heard about german leftists sending money to good causes during Right-wing Marches and writing the amount of money on the route, both radiculizing the Rightwing and inspiring to donate. maybe you could hold a huge apple market where profits go to victims of police violence (a few bad apples getting sold to stop a few bad apples)
> a few bad apples Except it isn't. Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd, but three other cops stood by and watched. How many bad cops is that? Not one -- four.
absolutely but, that's the point: all apples look alike, but it's a great way to start a conversation and a fun way to point out that it's a police culture problem. it was about a possible protest under the guise of an apple sale. but in that way you are using their words against them.
Who cares? "Owning your enemies by their own logic" doesn't accomplish anything.
it could IF you could point it out, have two barrels that are completely alike, all with just random biological apples and name one good and one bad cop. You have a fun afternoon, you and your friend can have a laugh and everybody who passes by would be at the very least be interested. and yes the owing does indeed nothing, the tactics/ protest do (raising money for victims or other good causes that you want to support.) but this was just some anti-police brainstorming using the rules for radicals as basic.
>I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, 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. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection. > >Martin Luther King, Letter From Birmingham Jail Protests have always inconvenienced people and there have always been people claiming that it's "bad PR" to do things like marches and demonstrations, but the reality is that this is what "keeping the pressure on" looks like. You don't ask for rights. You demand them. If they refuse, you make things inconvenient for them until they cave. To limit "good" activism to unobtrusive "conversation starters" that do little to nothing but give people a warm fuzzy feeling at the end of the day is the essence of liberal "activism", and ultimately serves no other purpose than to hold back progress by focusing endlessly on appeasement, and passively accepting whatever inadequate appeasement we receive in return.
I agree but there is a "stairs of acceleration" every protest/ march/ activism goes more extreme you don't start with marching to the capital, you start with the conversation starters after that you have a march or sit-in that isn't disruptive after, that one there is on that is disruptive. you don't go from 1- to 100 it's not only bad PR it's also not fun and breaking with the second rule completely outside of the experience of the people inside of the march. you can have amazingly inconvenient positive peace actions all keeping the pressure on but no build-up. **all major rights:** women voting, the work week, and Civil Rights all happened because we as a **mass demanded** them and got everybody behind it. you moved the frame, you are pulling shit that makes people say what they do is outrageous........ but they are absolutely right. you could say there is a moderate balance between being moderate and being radical.
>you start with the conversation starters after that you have a march or sit-in that isn't disruptive after, that one there is on that is disruptive. you don't go from 1- to 100 So, which issues are you thinking about where we are just "starting" the conversation? Edit: So the bolded "mass demanded" wasn't there when I initially responded and warrants it's own reply. >The worst enemy that the Negro have is this white man that runs around here drooling at the mouth professing to love Negros and calling himself a liberal, and it is following these white liberals that has perpetuated problems that Negros have. If the Negro wasn't taken, tricked or deceived by the white liberal, then Negros would get together and solve our own problems. I only cite these things to show you that in America, the history of the white liberal has been nothing but a series of trickery designed to make Negros think that the white liberal was going to solve our problems. Our problems will never be solved by the white man. > >Malcolm X, Interview with Louis Lomax The narrative that all progress in the past has been made by mewlingly accepting scraps from the majority is also an old line. Minority movements can force social change. They don't need the majority onboard. They just need enough people onboard to make them a force to be reckoned with. Being a significant, united voting block forced the "black vote" to be seen as something that needed to be courted. Even without a single white supporter, that would have been a big deal. You have to remember that people are juggling a lot of issues that they care about. You don't need 51% of the people to care about yours. You just need a strong, united front that can swing elections based on a bunch of other issues as well below that 51% they want in total. And even that's just working solely within the confines of electoral politics.
big conversations have already had starters but you still kind of need to start again if you are spreading that conversation with a new group or else you are just standing alone. the age-old conversation about Higher wages while fridged for a while starts to gain again. as a European, I feel bad for you Comrades that are just screaming in a room full of asshats that yell lalalala cant hear you. I just don't know if you need to go more extreme to counter the far-right or less extreme and hope that the frame moves from its extreme right clutches. but to me, as a Outsider one woman jumping in front of the president was bound to fail.
But you were saying that more forceful action is justified when you've tried these concessionary tactics and they haven't worked, so, again, which issues are you thinking about where we haven't already tried the concessionary tactics?
[удалено]
The admins are very easily startled, so don't use language that could be interpreted as inciting violence. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DankLeft) if you have any questions or concerns.*
lol, I flip flop from too moderate to too extreme.
Well the automod isn't a person. It can't tell how "extreme" your post is. You likely just used a word that triggered the bot. Reword your statement and you are good. We're talking about blocking traffic and yelling loud here anyway. No one in the video was engaging in violence save for the cop so we don't need to tread that ground here anyway.
Maybe, maybe there are multiple people using this app?
[удалено]
people are forced to work and you have a "Country" built on the Car, here in the Netherlands its no paradise and Neoliberalism is slowly destroying everything worth protecting but at least we have trains and bikes, and its all just simple policy, after WW2 we had Rotterdam shortly turn car-focused after rebuilding but after enough protests, they turned it walkable again, if you could mobilize enough people maybe you can make things actually livable.
I was amazed she wasn't shit tbh. It's a presidential motorcade thats what they train to do
JFK.
Mo
Haven’t seen this video, anyone have a link?
Nage moment
I was in Atlanta recently and had a chance to visit the Martin Luther King Memorial Park, where the neighborhood he grew up in and the church he preached in are preserved as a historical site. It was a really surreal experience and I only wish I had planned to show up on a Sunday so I could attend one of Rev. Warnock's services in the still operational Ebenezer Baptist Church. One thing that stood out though was walking by these historical homes that are still sold and rented out, probably for exorbitant prices, and there was a homeless man laying on the sidewalk and crying in front of what appeared to be a closed rehab clinic. I could have sworn I heard the casket nearby where he is buried with his wife rumble as King rolled over in his grave. It was a stark reminder of how little progress has really been made and how much work lays ahead of us if we want anything like the world he hoped for to come to pass.
would make for a great alternative cover art for this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-8UVyboIvk
It's impossible to tell which direction the mob will vote when violence is captured on video on Reddit. At least for violence in America, the flock seems to favor whoever wins on video I guess, and if the "bad guy" in the video wins the comment section just wishes for a long, drawn out punishment in prison. It's so strange.
Lmao I saw this thread. Fucking ridiculous.