Anti-Trump Marches And Rallies Planned For April 15 - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Cureless;51715536]I'm not saying people shouldn't have a voice, just they shouldn't go around fucking with people's lives in order to voice their opinion and that's what always happens. These people can't just calmly sit on the sidewalks and wave their signs and chant their slogans. They always gotta blocks streets, start fires, beat people up, etc. It's never peaceful with them. Yeah it's nice to stand up for something and make yourself known, but there's people who gotta get to work and people who don't want their shit smashed up just because other people are feeling angsty.[/QUOTE] Violent protestors are a minority

[QUOTE=Cureless;51715289]Or you know, just wait out the 4-8 years like a good citizen and stop looking for reasons to block up the streets, trash the place and incite violence.[/QUOTE] "like a good citizen" that's some creepy wording there

[QUOTE=Cureless;51715536]I'm not saying people shouldn't have a voice, just they shouldn't go around fucking with people's lives in order to voice their opinion and that's what always happens. These people can't just calmly sit on the sidewalks and wave their signs and chant their slogans. They always gotta blocks streets, start fires, beat people up, etc. It's never peaceful with them. Yeah it's nice to stand up for something and make yourself known, but there's people who gotta get to work and people who don't want their shit smashed up just because other people are feeling angsty.[/QUOTE] 1) "calmly sitting on sidewalks and waving signs" doesn't do shit 2) the reason these people are protesting is because people like you belittle their problems to "angst"

make your protests into something that is easy to ignore please i swear people will listen more

[QUOTE=Cureless;51715536]I'm not saying people shouldn't have a voice, just they shouldn't go around fucking with people's lives in order to voice their opinion and that's what always happens. These people can't just calmly sit on the sidewalks and wave their signs and chant their slogans. They always gotta blocks streets, start fires, beat people up, etc. It's never peaceful with them. Yeah it's nice to stand up for something and make yourself known, but there's people who gotta get to work and people who don't want their shit smashed up just because other people are feeling angsty.[/QUOTE] There were millions of protesters around the world, don't get attached at the dipshit minority of around 300 in two or three cities in the US that rioted.

I feel like arguing with Cureless is pointless seeing as he is apparently totally unaware of what protests are or how they work.

Just a friendly reminder (though it shouldn't have to be said) for anyone that says "but all I see is violent protests online and on the news", no shit. There's hardly any media coverage on peaceful stuff because it's so common and doesn't get as much attention. Just like you don't see in the news about respectful police officers doing their jobs everyday, just the bad ones.

[QUOTE=Cureless;51715536]I'm not saying people shouldn't have a voice, just they shouldn't go around fucking with people's lives in order to voice their opinion and that's what always happens. These people can't just calmly sit on the sidewalks and wave their signs and chant their slogans. They always gotta blocks streets, start fires, beat people up, etc. It's never peaceful with them. Yeah it's nice to stand up for something and make yourself known, but there's people who gotta get to work and people who don't want their shit smashed up just because other people are feeling angsty.[/QUOTE] Oh true that rowdy protest with hundreds of thousands of people and zero arrests in DC was sure quite the scene. People talking loudly literally everywhere. Was a horror show.

[QUOTE=Mechanical43;51715624]make your protests into something that is easy to ignore please i swear people will listen more[/QUOTE] That's basically what it boils down to. If they aren't trying to shut them down or corral them so they can be easily ignored in the first place with "free speech zones" and protest permits, then they try to tell them to stay docile and quiet so they can't have a real impact. They don't come right out and say it, because that would be too obvious and give people a reason to tell them to fuck off, but they cleverly use phrases like "in the interests of safety", "to preserve order", "to keep the peace", etc. It makes them seem like they're honestly concerned with your well-being and the well-being of everybody else. In truth, they just don't want to deal with you or what your movement has to say. Protests turning into riots are usually a sign that people are angry. Gee, what could they be angry over? Perhaps because they're being ignored in spite of having legitimate criticisms and points to make against the current government? Perhaps they're reasonably scared of the direction that this country is taking? For the life of me, I just don't know lol... You can only hold so many million man marches, make so many demanding phone calls, and write so many angry letters to your Congressmen and other officials before it becomes clear that nobody's listening to you and never had any intention of listening to you in the first place. If you're using these peaceful tactics and they're not working, what's the alternative? Naturally, people are going to get aggressive and resort to violence when it comes to that. That's because violence-- whether it's destroying property, beating people, killing people, making threats, etc.-- works at getting attention. And again, this is natural. It makes sense. When your government is openly and unashamedly lying to you (or presenting you with "alternative facts", to quote the current administration), when it's ignoring your objectively-valid concerns, and when it's clearly not looking out for you and representing your best interests like it's supposed to be by design, no shit you're probably going to be mad about it. Or at least I would certainly hope you'd be mad enough to get aggressive about it. Complacency and apathy are the worst things in a democracy, and you can't always change things with protests. [editline]23 January 2017[/editline] Yeah, it sounds nice to think we can all just hold hands, march around with picket signs, and shout slogans in order to cure all our problems. But you can't always do that unfortunately. Sometimes it doesn't work. We have a bad habit of only focusing on Martin Luther King, the Freedom Riders, the March on Washington, etc. while completely forgetting Malcolm X, the Black Panthers, and the race riots that occurred across the country during the 1960s. That's what it took to get proper civil rights for blacks in this country. For that matter, look at the idolization of Gandhi and the non-cooperation movement in India. People have a bad habit of remembering them but conveniently forgetting things that also helped achieve Indian independence like India House, the Simiti, Ghadar Party, the HSRA, Bhikaji Cama, and Vinayak Savarkar assassinating British officials and attacking Raj offices, sabotaging railways and telegraph lines, stealing money and weapons for their cause, literally fighting and dying in the process for their country. Etc. Violence is unfortunately an inherent component of politics. That's how it has always been, that's how it will always be. It's pretty obvious why this happens. It's honestly amazing that only around 400-500 people were being aggressive during the Women's March.

[QUOTE=Cureless;51715289]Or you know, just wait out the 4-8 years like a good citizen and stop looking for reasons to block up the streets, trash the place and incite violence.[/QUOTE] Yeah, fuck democracy, you must blindly listen to your glorious leader and agree with everything he says and don't question it ever ever or you'll be shot right away.

[QUOTE=Cureless;51715289]Or you know, just wait out the 4-8 years like a good citizen and stop looking for reasons to block up the streets, trash the place and incite violence.[/QUOTE] Actually being a good citizen entails taking part in the democratic process, and that means protesting and demonstrating to make your voice heard if necessary.

[QUOTE=Govna;51715954]Violence is unfortunately an inherent component of politics. That's how it has always been, that's how it will always be. It's pretty obvious why this happens. It's honestly amazing that only around 400-500 people were being aggressive during the Women's March.[/QUOTE] A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.

Are the tax returns of politicians immune to Freedom of Information Act requests in the United States? I know that exemptions are often made for private matters that aren't necessarily in the public's interests, but I'm not sure that it could be argued here.

[QUOTE=lNloruzenchi;51717566]A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.[/QUOTE] Yep. Some people are reasonable enough to be convinced by argument and debate, but they don't necessarily make up the majority of people. Your average person has a need to be right, will argue and fight in order to satiate that need, and is not willing to publicly admit when they're wrong or to change their views in accordance with being proved wrong-- they will invent alternative explanations that in their minds convinces them they're right, and they will probably isolate themselves even further in their echo chambers that confirm their mindset and validate their feelings and beliefs. There's several things to be understood here: 1) In order to achieve lasting and sweeping change, it's necessary to educate the youngest generations in accordance with what changes you want to see. If you can get the children on your side, you've got control over the future. Their parents may disagree with you and them, but they don't matter in the end; they will age and eventually die. The children on the other hand are the people who will grow up to become the adults of tomorrow, and they will inherit whatever it is you have thusfar created. They will move away from their parents, start lives of their own, and have children of their own. The cycle will repeat itself then. While the general mindset will not remain static from generation to generation, it will to a certain degree still remain intact between them. Planning decades-long social changes is entirely possible. 2) You can't rely on logic alone to get people to join your side. Again, some people have the ability to be reasonable. Most people however are not interested in detailed debates and long arguments, statistics, facts, etc. Anything that seems too complicated for quick understanding, anything that demands their attention for more than a few seconds in other words. Most people are influenced by their feelings. You're going to have to work to address this element as well. Pageantry, symbolism, visual and auditory stimuli basically are important here. You also have to appeal to their feelings concerning their inner needs: the need to feel belonging, the need to feel like there's importance/meaning in their lives, the need to feel special or validated, etc. An echo chamber will have to be created for your own side to convince them to stay the course. 3) Grassroots movements are key. If you can make people feel as one with you, you're guaranteed to attract a devoted following. That means getting them to be loyal to the ideas and goals of your movement, not just to the charismatic figures in it (which are also important; think Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren). They need to be made to feel and understand the relevance to their own lives of what your movement stands for as well as what you personally as a leader stand for. Speak to them in their language and on their level. There's a component of populism here, but all successful politicians have to be to some extent or another populists. For anybody that's interested in this, I'd suggest they study Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (the Shah of Iran) and his social, political, and economic reforms. He was an excellent leader at providing a high quality of life for his people (education, healthcare, careers, industry, an all-round increased standard of living, etc.), but unfortunately had severe shortcomings when it came to understanding how to get people on his side and how to keep them loyal and under control. He did understand in a cynical sort of way how people work (self-interested, sometimes ingrateful, etc.), and he also understood that transforming Iran into the new society he wanted would take generations; the old, backwards conservatives would have to die out (the future supporters of Khomeini and the Islamic Revolution, in other words) so the young progressives could take the reins and carry on. Unfortunately, he didn't keep the young progressives loyal and make them feel a connection to him as a charismatic leader, which is what paved the way for the civil unrest that led up to his abdication and made Khomeini's seizure of power possible. At the root of it, it's basically a matter of waging a war of psychology and skillfully applying it across as many different areas of life as you can in order to win. At the same time, physical aggression also has its place as a necessary tool for keeping things moving along and maintaining order. It also has a powerful psychological aspect to it if used correctly.