What types of externalities invalidate the claim of "peaceful" in the context of method of protest?

[rambot]

As a hypothetical, there could be 10,000 completely peaceful, scattered protests and ONE protest that results in hundreds of people killed. Mathematically (from raw percentages), it would be accurate to say that the "protests" were "mostly peaceful". But an honest assessment would show that the "protests" were in fact quite deadly when objectively analyzed.

An honest person wouldn't think that at all.

A rational person would think there that was an abberation.

See this here:

That circle is called an "outliers".


You shouldn't use outliers to define a trend. THAT is not honest

 

[RDKirk]

There was a time, back in the Viet Nam war days, when lots of protests were going on. Despite the protests, the war dragged on but I knew the a war was over when my staid, conventional elderly aunt and uncle got on a bus with other seniors and travelled from Vallejo down to 'San Francisco to take part in a protest. Is that the kind of thing you are afraid of? That some of the people who are protesting might not be the leftist zombies of your stereotype?

I certainly did not say that every person who protests is some kind of "leftist zombie."

I'm sure they have sincere personal opinions, and I know that there are more people get involved on the street level than those who are standing members of various groups.

But there are various groups--hundreds of them--that do have standing members that they can put on the street with little delay, planning, or inter-organizational planning.

 

[RDKirk]

I'm sorry, but if one person has the right to come into someone's place of work... who's been peacefully contributing to society for years... and rip them away from friends and family by deporting them to a place that they've never been, then by golly that person has the right to block a highway and inconvenience others in the process.

As a human being, I have the exact same rights that you have, and if your rights include inconveniencing me then my rights include inconveniencing you.

Technically speaking, those people are here illegally. We can certainly debate--and should debate--how that fact should be handled.

But we should not debate that fact.

That fact means there is a difference between them and you or I while we are not in violation of the law but they are.

 

[RDKirk]

The other aspect that often gets downplayed, is the fact that the "peaceful" (as in, not the ones physically doing anything illegal) ones are often complicit in getting the "loose cannons" whipped up into a frenzy.

So for instance, one person with a megaphone shouting "police are corrupt, and we're not going to take it anymore, it's time for action!" in a hostile tone (while a couple hundred people applaud), is the only greenlight the irrational guy with brick in his backpack needs to throw it at a cop car.

It also doesn't help that the "peaceful" protestors are often cheering it on when the "violent few" are acting out.

That seems to be the pattern I've noticed in a lot of these videos, it'll only be 1 or 2 people lighting the cop car on fire are smashing it, but there's certainly no shortage of people, not engaging in the act itself -- but enthusiastically cheering it on.

View attachment 366277

So for instance, in this one, there were only 2 or 3 people actually whipping the Molotovs and bricks off the bridge, but the hundreds of others lining the bridge were cheering while it was happening.

And while there's obviously no law against cheering for a squad car fire, I think we can all agree that does create a bad incentive structure.

Yeah, that's how lynchings used to happen.

 

[RDKirk]

In general, I don't think it's an effective form of protest if by effective we mean changing the position of others on an issue. It think it can lead to resentment and violence. But it does depend on context. Stopping a tank with one's body and stopping traffic with a group of bodies might seem to be similar forms of protest but context changes a lot. There's something about Tank Man during the Tiananmen Protests that doesn't quite ring the same with folks stopping the evening commute.

Well, Tank Man didn't change anything, either.

 

[RDKirk]

The same goes for the person working at Home Depot... they're just trying to mind their own business. Why is it fair for one to be inconvenienced, but not the other?

Because one is, in fact, breaking the law.

We can debate how that should be handled, but we should not debate the fact that a person in illegal status is not the same as a person who is not.

 

[RDKirk]

Maybe this is just my impression, but I think the later stages of the Viet Nam War protests show how peaceful protests become effective, i.e., huge numbers. Once aunt and uncle get involved, once much of the populace is on the same page, changes start happening.

That's because the participation of "aunt and uncle" is the red flag that voters are paying attention.

 

[RDKirk]

You shouldn't use outliers to define a trend. THAT is not honest

But that happens so often on both sides in so many ways.

Both sides have outliers they want to be treated as normalcies.

 

[probinson]

An honest person wouldn't think that at all.

A rational person would think there that was an abberation.

See this here:
View attachment 366280

That circle is called an "outliers".


You shouldn't use outliers to define a trend. THAT is not honest

The Pareto Principle is not about "outliers". It's about identifying the significant few factors that provide the largest impact. In this context, the significant few people setting things ablaze are not "outliers". They are the ones making the largest impact in the protest, as the Pareto Principle demonstrates.

 

[rambot]

The Pareto Principle is not about "outliers". It's about identifying the significant few factors that provide the largest impact. In this context, the significant few people setting things ablaze are not "outliers". They are the ones making the largest impact in the protest, as the Pareto Principle demonstrates.

The example you provided was a GREAT example of an outlier.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "largest impact". Because, in fact, ALL of the violence that the left did through BLM really didn't accomplish/have ANY impact in the end.

 

[durangodawood]

The Pareto Principle is not about "outliers". It's about identifying the significant few factors that provide the largest impact. In this context, the significant few people setting things ablaze are not "outliers". They are the ones making the largest impact in the protest, as the Pareto Principle demonstrates.

From the outside you can do two things with protests:
1. make an honest attempt at understanding the impetus behind them.
2. highlight whatever episodes make your political opponents look bad.

As an observer, the significance of protest really depends on ones motivations.

 

[BCP1928]

Technically speaking, those people are here illegally. We can certainly debate--and should debate--how that fact should be handled.

But we should not debate that fact.

That fact means there is a difference between them and you or I while we are not in violation of the law but they are.

Technically speaking, rescinding ther legality and then arresting them for being criminals is closer to being a threat to you and me than you realize.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Technically speaking, rescinding ther legality and then arresting them for being criminals is closer to being a threat to you and me than you realize.

I'm sure the pendulum will eventually swing the other way just like it did in going from the 1970s, and then to the 1980s, and then to the 1990s.

Woosh, wooosh. Wooosh, wooosh. And then we'll feel the pinch of the Democrats once they get the vote once again.

 

[rambot]

Technically speaking, those people are here illegally. We can certainly debate--and should debate--how that fact should be handled.

But we should not debate that fact.

That fact means there is a difference between them and you or I while we are not in violation of the law but they are.

'I Don't Want To Hear' It!: AOC Calls Out Utter 'Audacity' Of GOP's Immigration Talk

″[They’re] making people undocumented by removing legal status, ending legal status, and then having the audacity to call them ‘illegal’ when they were here documented,” Ocasio-Cortez added.

That does not sound "illegal" to me if THEY remove legal status. Or at least that sounds manipulative and dishonest and anti legal immigration too.

 

[BCP1928]

I'm sure the pendulum will eventually swing the other way just like it did in going from the 1970s, and then to the 1980s, and then to the 1990s.

Woosh, wooosh. Wooosh, wooosh. And then we'll feel the pinch of the Democrats once they get the vote once again.

You might not have to wait that long. BTW, how do you defend this?

ICE agents ram car to take man into custody in Boyle Heights

A man was arrested in Boyle Heights Wednesday morning after ICE agents rammed into his car and pinned it between two unmarked cars.

abc7.com

 

[JustaPewFiller]

In general, I don't think it's an effective form of protest if by effective we mean changing the position of others on an issue. It think it can lead to resentment and violence. But it does depend on context. Stopping a tank with one's body and stopping traffic with a group of bodies might seem to be similar forms of protest but context changes a lot. There's something about Tank Man during the Tiananmen Protests that doesn't quite ring the same with folks stopping the evening commute.

Yeah - I came here to say similar.

The blocking of traffic. It's an act to aggravate people. Random people. People who may not agree with your cause. Or, maybe they do agree with your cause. You aggravate several 100 to several 1000 people and there are bound to be people in that group that actually agree that whatever you are protesting about is wrong. Your actions may cause them to re-think their views.

Speaking only for myself. Let's say I agree with you 100% that whatever you are protesting about is wrong. But, you make me miss work and get fired (or cause someone else to get fired) or cause someone to die because ambulance / fire / police can't get through because you are blocking traffic and sitting in the middle of the road, then I'm going want the police would come and drag you out of the road. Because it isn't effective protest, it is just aggravating random people. Its like kids going around egging houses and knocking over mailboxes of random houses on halloween.

Its kind of like climate protestors damaging art work. Full disclosure. I think there does need to be more action on climate. I also love art. I also think protestors who throw glue, soup, paint, or otherwise damage art work should be locked up and are doing nothing to further their cause. Many museums are as "green" as possible, many art lovers lean left, and the artists themselves are usually long dead. It does nothing to further their cause and just makes the protestors look bad.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You might not have to wait that long. BTW, how do you defend this?

ICE agents ram car to take man into custody in Boyle Heights

A man was arrested in Boyle Heights Wednesday morning after ICE agents rammed into his car and pinned it between two unmarked cars.

abc7.com

Am I supposed to make a qualified evaluation of an incident from a scant article "reporting" that incident? Seriously?

 

[JustaPewFiller]

You might not have to wait that long. BTW, how do you defend this?

ICE agents ram car to take man into custody in Boyle Heights

A man was arrested in Boyle Heights Wednesday morning after ICE agents rammed into his car and pinned it between two unmarked cars.

abc7.com

I don't.. Not fully..

If he hit an officer as the article says then he should be arrested.

BUT - there were probably many other ways to make that arrest other than how they did it. Say they guy they were after pulled a gun. Are the agents going to start blasting with an innocent baby and toddler in the car?

Also, the agents leaving the scene with and leaving baby, toddler and mom there in the middle of street before another agency got there to see if they were ok, needed medical help, etc. is inexcusable IMO.

The guy punching a CBP officer is a crime and he should be arrested for it. BUT, that doesn't excuse the actions of the agents in carrying out the arrest either.

 

[probinson]

The example you provided was a GREAT example of an outlier.

It was not. It was a great example of the Pareto Principle.

 

[probinson]

From the outside you can do two things with protests:
1. make an honest attempt at understanding the impetus behind them.
2. highlight whatever episodes make your political opponents look bad.

As an observer, the significance of protest really depends on ones motivations.

I would posit a third option: ignore it completely.