this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2025
7 points (100.0% liked)
Today I Learned (TIL)
7815 readers
1 users here now
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
/c/til is a community for any true knowledge that you would like to share, regardless of topic or of source.
Share your knowledge and experience!
Rules
- Information must be true
- Follow site rules
- No, you don't have to have literally learned the fact today
- Posts must be about something you learned
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What is good enough for you?
Quiet everyone, Mustakrakish is about to tell us the acceptable number for a protest.
Go ahead, the floor is yours.
Not that poster, but judging by what the largest protests in the US ever - the George Floyd protests - achieved when it comes to police violence in the US (it's the same or worse now), in the present age in the US merelly coming out and walking for a bit in your own time while holding a board up doesn't seem to achieve anything.
Think of it from the point of view of the Political and Money "elites" in the US: they get zero direct negative impact from the riff-raff in their own time doing a big march against the elite's puppet mango emperor, and there is no single Historical instance in the US were the lower classes rebelled against the upper classes and properly fucked them up, so the masses marching isn't even a warning of increasing risk for them - they control the entire political system in the US and make sure whomever is in a position to get elected for a position of political power is always in their pocket, and do not fear the desinfranchised population because they never ever moved against them.
The murder of the CEO of UnitedHealthcare by a single person seems to have achieved more in terms of scaring the powerful than even the millions that came out demonstrating against the police killing of George Floyd.
(I bet that in a place like France, still today the masses coming out even if doing nothing but marching and holding some boards, are cause for concern amongst the "elites")
I actually saw something quite similar in the UK when I lived there: the powerful just didn't care because even large numbers of people doing some polite marching did not damage the interest of the elites and because they had no reason to be concerned with their personal safety because the plebes had never actually rebelled against the upper classes.
That said this situation in the US is even less concerning for the elites because the crowds are so firmly focused in the puppet and disregarding the puppet masters, that even very indirectly there is zero risk for the true powers.
Maybe as some other poster suggested, a general strike would be more effective.
Protests aren't about the Political and Money "elites" as you put it because they don't care no matter what.
You think they'd give a shit if what is happening in LA is happening everywhere? They're like cockroaches that will skitter into hiding until it's safe to come out and monopolize on the ruin.
Protests are about galvanizing support and building unity among the populace. The US has been so divided for so long and that division has been manipulated and grown to benefits those "elites".
I do think a general strike may be effective but it's unrealistic. A nationwide general strike would require massive financial and material support. Where will that come from?
They work on a smaller, union scale because they're supported by the union and outside supporters that are not on strike. They work in other countries that have the social programs in place to support the people which is something the US does not have.
I keep seeing this repeated comparison to France but let's look at that. France is a country a little smaller than the state of Texas with an adult population only slightly more than the total population of California.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's a little easier to coordinate a general strike in a country with 1/6 the population of the US spread across an area 1/15 the size of the US.
Protests in the US are getting bigger and more widespread but it's like a slow wave, it takes time to build.
Look, it can totally seen how the protests give hope to others by showing them that "they're far from alone in their concerns" and doing so in a way which is independent of mainstream political parties (which is good, since in my experience when political parties capture protests, they use such movements for their own personal good, in the process weakening the original movement).
In fact I totally approve of the protests and (even though I'm not American) I'm happy with just how big they were because maybe American has enough good people to make it a better country in the World stage (plus, frankly, I have some American acquaintances from minorities and don't want to see them suffer).
What I fear is that people here in Lemmy are crazily over-celebrating the protest as some kind of ending in itself when it's at best a beginning, and not even the beginning of the end but the beginning of the beginning.
If these protests aren't leveraged to organize grassroots movements to start doing things like guerrilla (in the marketing sense, rather than violent sense) campaigns to oust the crooked politicians no matter what their party is and weaken the influence of Money in politics, they're worthless, same as the George Floyd protests ended up being worthless because they didn't led to any organized follow through to force politicians to restructure policing in America.
So my point is that people need to keep their eye on the long term solution for America's problems, and that doesn't stop with kicking Trump out, it requires a far deeper cleanup of the American political system and addressing the problems of common Americans so that another guy like Trump (or, more likely, worse) doesn't get eventually get in power after Trump is out.
Trump is not the disease, he's a symptom, so merely Trump out isn't going to cure it.
Denigrating the effort to date doesn't do anything to further your point. Instead it serves to quell support and push a negative outlook and view of protesting.
Offering support, encouragement and advocating for sustained effort would.
You mentioned the George Floyd protests and said, in relation to that, "merelly coming out and walking for a bit in your own time while holding a board up doesn’t seem to achieve anything" but that's not true.
During and immediately after George Floyd the protest effected a lot of change but then the protests stopped, complacency set in.
No, the cure is sustained effort. The problems in the US have been building and evolving for decades, if not longer, and they'll take at least that long to get a handle on.
A general strike?
Funded by?
Looting and mutual aid
looting will not be supported by the majority
Oligarchy is not supported by the majority. Yet it exists nonetheless
oligarchy is supported by the rich and powerful which is how it exists against the majority; I doubt you're suggesting looting is a feasible option for the same reasons...
The point is that majority support is unnecessary for a thing to exist. In fact, it increasingly appears to be an irrelevant metric in general
yes, I agree entirely- but I'm not sure what further point you are making or how it is relevant
Looting may be warranted or unwarranted. But, because majority support is not relevant, we shouldn't evaluate the propriety of looting based on this metric
ah, maybe I should clarify when I said looting wouldn't have majority support, I was assuming a context where a populist movement (i.e. made up of the majority) was trying to find strategies to gain some economic independence such that they can afford a general strike- mutual aid might be a popular option (as well as how unions use their funds from dues to pay work on strike), but my point is only that looting is likely to be an unpopular option, and thus one that would harm the movement's reputation and ability to remain supported by the majority on which it depends.
I did not mean that in absolute terms anything must justify its existence through majority support, as you pointed out that's not how the world works.
Maybe a protest that goes longer than 2 hours, on a weekend, where everyone dispereses and goes back home to watch the game? Maybe one that causes actual resistence and pushback? Not one that amounts to a community day in the park?
Look at the LA protests. More akin to this:
So your mad that protesters in other cities aren't being attacked by local police and federal agents, got it.
Pass the word everyone, if you're not getting hit with tear gas and rubber bullets your protest doesn't matter. Might as well not even try.
Law enforcement will only target protests that are a threat to the oligarchy.
If a planned public protest is not targeted by law enforcement then it has been determined to be a toothless protest
I'm not sure if you forgot a /s or if you're being serious. If serious this is some ridiculous logic.