# What is "peaceful" protesting?



## D34DL1N3R (Apr 23, 2021)

What do you consider peaceful and non peaceful protesting?

How about this small incident for starters? Peaceful or not peaceful? I believe it was peaceful until the social worker jumped in and started running her mouth. My own personal opinion of this single incidence is that It was even peaceful in the beginning right when she got there and was asking the lady if she was ok, if she wanted to talk, if she could sit next to her, etc. But then she started getting loud, rude, obnoxious, telling everyone to fuck off and how horrible every one is, blah blah blah blah blah. Once she got going she wouldn't shut her mouth. Should have absolutely been arrested for being a public nuisance. She even threatened violence towards the officers who were all doing nothing but standing there. Not a single time during the entire video did I see the police or the EMTs make a single wrong move. The murder of George Floyd was absolutely wrong in every way and I am glad that prick was found guilty on all three accounts, however... imo protesting in this manner (or worse, this is only 2 people blocking a street with one of them acting like a crazy lunatic) does NOTHING for the cause. NOTHING. By watching the video does it seem like ANYone. Including the rest of the black people, are even REMOTELY empathetic to her cause? it's causing more harm than good.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/bla...iral-power-of-black-sisterhood-174904227.html


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Apr 24, 2021)

Guess non of the super far lefties can come up with any good justification for shitty protesting behavior. Thought maybe one of you would want to try reversing the damage they've caused themselves in my mind. I'm absolutely 100% still a Dem, but my views on this matter alone drastically changed after first hand personal experiences with it.


----------



## MikaDubbz (Apr 24, 2021)

Non-violent protesting, including no destruction of property


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Apr 24, 2021)

MikaDubbz said:


> Non-violent protesting, including no destruction of property



Right, naturally. But how about the example I gave in the video? Did you watch it? Do you feel that it is an example of peaceful protesting, or not? There was no destruction of property and no one was physically harmed, but would you consider it peaceful, or right for her to act in the manner she did? I understand tensions are extremely high, but was it peaceful protesting, or nah?


----------



## Taleweaver (Apr 25, 2021)

Is there a proxy of the video anywhere else? I can read the entire article (which doesn't reflect anything in the OP), but the video isn't available in my region.

I'm inclined to say it's non - violent protest, but I'll concede its not a fair discussion without having to have seen the actual video.


----------



## AncientBoi (Apr 25, 2021)

me saying: I protest your question.


Answered. 350 xp points


----------



## chrisrlink (Apr 25, 2021)

well the 1960's had some peaceful sit ins until racist cops came along dragging out blacks from diners beating them (sounds familiar) things did change desegragation Jim crow other civil rights victories now not saying the protesters are all good but if a cop was beating me for no reason other than peacful protest i'd fight back despite me breaking the law at that point,also if the press on camera identify's themselves and still get arrested we have problems stemming from our bill of rights even wonder if they (the police) target press like CNN and even leave fox news alone good experiment to try there imo


----------



## Xzi (Apr 25, 2021)

I mean there's physical assault and then there's verbal assault.  I wouldn't say that one Karen among the protestors acting like a Karen is enough to deem the whole event "violent" by any means.  But any protest that gains enough momentum attracts agitators, both left-wing and right-wing, or sometimes even apolitical individuals.  People who don't actually care about the subject of the protest, and only want to take advantage of the situation to destroy property or loot businesses.


----------



## smf (Apr 25, 2021)

Yeah, the woman sitting in the road is pretty peaceful. I'm sure the police have been told to fuck off before, they should be able to cope with that. Peaceful protesting has nothing to do with being quiet or invisible.

If she was throwing something at them then it wouldn't be peaceful, but it's not like she can attack them sitting on the floor.


----------



## WiiMiiSwitch (Apr 25, 2021)

Not hurting anyone physically or breaking stores


----------



## MikaDubbz (Apr 25, 2021)

smf said:


> Yeah, the woman sitting in the road is pretty peaceful. I'm sure the police have been told to fuck off before, they should be able to cope with that. Peaceful protesting has nothing to do with being quiet or invisible.
> 
> If she was throwing something at them then it wouldn't be peaceful, but it's not like she can attack them sitting on the floor.



Agreed, if your form of protesting includes being obnoxious or even spewing hate speech, but you aren't physically hurting anyone or damaging any property, then I'd say that's absolutely still a peaceful protest. You may come across as a douche bag in the process but nothing about it was actually violent.


----------



## smf (Apr 26, 2021)

MikaDubbz said:


> Agreed, if your form of protesting includes being obnoxious or even spewing hate speech, but you aren't physically hurting anyone or damaging any property, then I'd say that's absolutely still a peaceful protest.



I think making threats to people that would hurt them is also not peaceful. I'm not a first amendment cult member, but even if you have the legal right to say something then it doesn't mean it's peaceful.

I'm not bothered about snowflakes that are triggered by protesters daring to ask for things, but if a protester was intimidating someone then it's not really peaceful.


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Apr 26, 2021)

smf said:


> Yeah, the woman sitting in the road is pretty peaceful. I'm sure the police have been told to fuck off before, they should be able to cope with that. Peaceful protesting has nothing to do with being quiet or invisible.
> 
> If she was throwing something at them then it wouldn't be peaceful, but it's not like she can attack them sitting on the floor.



I'm referring to the other woman, the social worker. Not the one that was originally there by herself. For the most part I would agree that the original woman was in fact peacefully protesting.

@Taleweaver

Read the comments section, plenty of truths in there about the social worker


----------



## smf (Apr 26, 2021)

D34DL1N3R said:


> Read the comments section, plenty of truths in there about the social worker



Why would I care about the unverifiable opinions of randoms about a woman that happened to be walking past a protest?


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Apr 26, 2021)

smf said:


> Why would I care about the unverifiable opinions of randoms about a woman that happened to be walking past a protest?



Unverifiable? Ummmmmmmm. Shes IN THE VIDEO SAYING AND DOING THE THINGS PEOPLE ARE ACCUSING HER OF. The point of reading the comments is to have insight as to why so many people feel she was in the wrong and NOT peacefully protesting, whatsoever. She was trying to incite violence and stir the entire fucking pot."walking past a protest"??? That's not even what happened. Did you even WATCH the video? Wow. Omfg. The lady you're saying "walked past" joined in the protest of the lady being perfectly peaceful sitting on the ground & started a complete shit show.

Directly quoting you, "if a protester was intimidating someone then it's not really peaceful." So what you're saying then, is that you agree the social worker that was protesting, was not peacefully protesting.


----------



## smf (Apr 26, 2021)

D34DL1N3R said:


> was not peacefully protesting.



Did it affect anyone present? Whether something is peaceful or not comes down to whether there was conflict, you can't have one sided conflict.


----------



## CMDreamer (Apr 26, 2021)

The only peaceful protesting I've ever known is the one made by Gandhi. Everything else is far distant from being peaceful, even yelling words at other people can't be considered peaceful.

Peace is a very distorted word, just like Democracy.


----------



## Louse (Apr 29, 2021)

peace was never an option

crowbar is always the answer


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

Peaceful protesting is punching cops in the face and calling them pussies

in minecraft


----------



## chrisrlink (Apr 29, 2021)

CMDreamer said:


> The only peaceful protesting I've ever known is the one made by Gandhi. Everything else is far distant from being peaceful, even yelling words at other people can't be considered peaceful.
> 
> Peace is a very distorted word, just like Democracy.



as i posted earlier most civil rights protest were peaceful from the suppressors (Minority as in blacks)  standpoint it's when we threw in the cops into the mix (all of them racist white men) that things got ugly


----------



## Louse (Apr 29, 2021)

wait er uh

gorben freedmont minceraft pe mod


----------



## AmandaRose (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> Peaceful protesting is punching cops in the face and calling them pussies


I call that justice for their actions to certain people.

Any time I read about American cops I think of the lyrics from the Clash song Know Your Rights. 

Number one
You have the right not to be killed
Murder Is a crime!
Unless it was done
By a policeman or an aristocrat.


----------



## Louse (Apr 29, 2021)

AmandaRose said:


> I call that justice for their actions to certain people.
> 
> Any time I read about American cops I think of the lyrics from the Clash song Know Your Rights.
> 
> ...


eye for an eye mf
your eye
my haunted metal implement

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

in all seriousness tho all of the truly peaceful protests were based on economics 
boycotts and trade and delicious salt 

but the people dont have that power anymore
we tried with gamestop and it failed at the hands of the lawyer army


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

Louse said:


> we tried with gamestop and it failed at the hands of the lawyer army



When the state refuses the right of the worker to participate in trading Gamestop stocks, the proletariat must take to the streets and seize the means of stock trade. Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.

-Marx probably


----------



## Valwinz (Apr 29, 2021)

to be peaceful there is no looting or getting in the middle of roads


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

not hurting anyone, not destroying anything, basically not breaking any laws. you wanna circlejerk in a park and bitch about stuff? more power to you, you wanna do it on my private property or disrupt the flow of traffic? thats a problem


----------



## Louse (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> not hurting anyone, not destroying anything, basically not breaking any laws. you wanna circlejerk in a park and bitch about stuff? more power to you, you wanna do it on my private property or disrupt the flow of traffic? thats a problem


fight me


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Louse said:


> fight me



on what?


----------



## Louse (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> on what?


the ground dumbass

you talk like you'd prefer if nothing ever gets protested, and thats not very AMERICAN to me mf

nothing gets done unless the big money men are forced to do something about it
if we all just stand in a park and sing jambalaya then they can just ignore us


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Louse said:


> the ground dumbass
> 
> you talk like you'd prefer if nothing ever gets protested, and thats not very AMERICAN to me mf
> 
> ...




what makes you think they give a damn about you either way? these elitists dont drive, they have drivers, private security, well protected buildings, they dont give a damn what you  do, when you burn shit down,  they laugh as your taxes go up because now the state has to spend money to fix the shit you broke.


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

Personally, I don't think there is such thing as a peaceful protest. Even in the protest that Gandhi made, violence is still inflicted on the self. Hunger Strikes obviously not only destroy the body, but even afterwards there are lasting permanent effects on your body and mind that never go away if you've gone on strike for long enough. Bobby Sands knew this, Dolours and Marian Price knew this very well, just to give some examples of other hunger strikers.

Any real protest implies violence, even a protest that is planned to be peaceful will often be met with harsh violent suppression from the state unless the protest is endorsed by the state, implicitly or explicitly. We've seen peaceful candlelight vigils for our dead like Elijah McClain be destroyed by violent police time and time again. By nature a protest is a movement against the state, and if the state wants to protect its interests then said protest will be met with violence. Generally if you aren't being beaten up by cops you're probably doing something wrong, regardless of whether or not you are the one that incited violence (historically it has usually been cops or other state forces that incite violence, and I could give many examples to support this).

Truly peaceful protest is a liberal lie, and acting like violent protests haven't achieved many social gains for oppressed groups is ahistorical. The state will never peacefully cede power unless it is beneficial to the state or if the cost of violence is greater than retaining certain powers. I obviously don't like violence, but when you protest a violent and oppressive state it is inevitable that you will be met with violence. Martin Luther King Jr. knew this very well when he marched from Selma to Montgomery.

I just find it funny that "patriots" will wax poetic about the 1776 revolution but still act like violent protest is bad/an ineffective means of social change because that's 100% untrue and denies centuries of historical precedent set by revolutionaries.


----------



## Louse (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> what makes you think they give a damn about you either way? these elitists dont drive, they have drivers, private security, well protected buildings, they dont give a damn what you  do, when you burn shit down,  they laugh as your taxes go up because now the state has to spend money to fix the shit you broke.


thats very sad but true

i suppose the least we could do is not fight amongst ourselves
we cool?


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Louse said:


> thats very sad but true
> 
> i suppose the least we could do is not fight amongst ourselves
> we cool?




oh yea idgaf what anyone says,  i dont know gba temps policy  on things but protesting is not the answer, the FIRST answer is unity. This dumb shit where we have to stroke the ego of people is insane, look we are all people, we eat sleep and poop, have a nice day, lets focus on the fact that we have communist leaders in our states and focus on fixing THAT problem.

Our whole election system is fucked. Why do we have someone, regardless of party tell us what they are gonna do for us and never do them?  show us you are capable by making things happen and THEN you are worthy of that position, not promises that can't be kept.


----------



## Julie_Pilgrim (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> Personally, I don't think there is such thing as a peaceful protest. Even in the protest that Gandhi made, violence is still inflicted on the self. Hunger Strikes obviously not only destroy the body, but even afterwards there are lasting permanent effects on your body and mind that never go away if you've gone on strike for long enough. Bobby Sands knew this, Dolours and Marian Price knew this very well, just to give some examples of other hunger strikers.
> 
> Any real protest implies violence, even a protest that is planned to be peaceful will often be met with harsh violent suppression from the state unless the protest is endorsed by the state, implicitly or explicitly. We've seen peaceful candlelight vigils for our dead like Elijah McClain be destroyed by violent police time and time again. By nature a protest is a movement against the state, and if the state wants to protect its interests then said protest will be met with violence. Generally if you aren't being beaten up by cops you're probably doing something wrong, regardless of whether or not you are the one that incited violence (historically it has usually been cops or other state forces that incite violence, and I could give many examples to support this).
> 
> ...


But a black guy stole a tv once or something


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

ill probably get in trouble for saying this but the real answer was what happened in january after the alleged steal which i will not comment on.  What did we do? we went into the senate building which is illegal, even though we own it because its paid for with tax dollars. was there loss of life? absolutely i do not condone that, but what i do condone is that message, do you wanna know why they called it a riot? because they were scared, because for the FIRST time in american history we saw something we didnt like and we sought to change it the right way


----------



## Julie_Pilgrim (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> because for the FIRST time in american history we saw something we didnt like and we sought to change it the right way


[citation needed]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Scott_pilgrim said:


> [citation needed]
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party



what, specifically did that achieve?


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> for the FIRST time in american history we saw something we didnt like and we sought to change it the right way


https://www.pbs.org/wnet/african-am...ss/history/did-african-american-slaves-rebel/ (slave rebellions)
https://www.history.com/topics/gay-rights/the-stonewall-riots (stonewall riots)
https://blog.education.nationalgeog...w-a-riot-helped-to-ratify-the-19th-amendment/ (suffragettes movement)
https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/selma-montgomery-march (Selma-Montgomery march)
https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html (Black Panthers march on the Capitol)

The first time? What the hell are you talking about lol.

I could find more but these are the first that came to mind.


----------



## Julie_Pilgrim (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> https://www.pbs.org/wnet/african-am...ss/history/did-african-american-slaves-rebel/ (slave rebellions)
> https://www.history.com/topics/gay-rights/the-stonewall-riots (stonewall riots)
> https://blog.education.nationalgeog...w-a-riot-helped-to-ratify-the-19th-amendment/ (suffragettes movement)
> https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/selma-montgomery-march (Selma-Montgomery march)
> ...


 Here's another example, you may or may not have heard of these guys 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

Scott_pilgrim said:


> Here's another example, you may or may not have heard of these guys
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States


I don't really endorse their goals or mentality but I do support my fellow gays in solidarity so I have no choice but to *ahem* stan


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Scott_pilgrim said:


> Here's another example, you may or may not have heard of these guys
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States



right but thats before america


----------



## Julie_Pilgrim (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> right but thats before america


It's still in the history of this country


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> https://www.pbs.org/wnet/african-am...ss/history/did-african-american-slaves-rebel/ (slave rebellions)
> https://www.history.com/topics/gay-rights/the-stonewall-riots (stonewall riots)
> https://blog.education.nationalgeog...w-a-riot-helped-to-ratify-the-19th-amendment/ (suffragettes movement)
> https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/selma-montgomery-march (Selma-Montgomery march)
> ...




that doesnt answer my question, what did any of those things do?


looking athe the slave rebellion, correct me if im wrong but i thought old honest abe took care of the whole slave thing, was i taught incorrecty?


----------



## Julie_Pilgrim (Apr 29, 2021)

Also, bonus 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> right but thats before america


Oh yeah I forgot the entire continent of America didn't exist at this point in time. My bad


----------



## Julie_Pilgrim (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> Oh yeah I forgot the entire continent of America didn't exist at this point in time. My bad


The founding fathers invented america


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> that doesnt answer my question, what did any of those things do?
> 
> 
> looking athe the slave rebellion, correct me if im wrong but i thought old honest abe took care of the whole slave thing, was i taught incorrecty?


Slaves freed themselves, Lincoln only "abolished" slavery to retain the union.
Suffragette movements gave women the right to vote.
Stonewall riots led to the abolition of anti-gay laws, I wouldn't be here if not for the riots.
Selma to Montgomery led to important gains in the civil rights movement and led to the establishment of the civil rights act, same with the Panthers going to the capitol.

You are seriously misinformed.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> Oh yeah I forgot the entire continent of America didn't exist at this point in time. My bad



are we talking about geography or history?


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> are we talking about geography or history?


Both


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> Slaves freed themselves, Lincoln only "abolished" slavery to retain the union.
> Suffragette movements gave women the right to vote.
> Stonewall riots led to the abolition of anti-gay laws, I wouldn't be here if not for the riots.
> Selma to Montgomery led to important gains in the civil rights movement and led to the establishment of the civil rights act, same with the Panthers going to the capitol.
> ...



oh shit, yea im gonna actually go to the school board tomorrow and tell them the civil war was a hoax, thank you random internet user for opening my eyes

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Seliph said:


> Both



well ill let you discuss geography on your own, i dont have any interest in naming the continents, its not relevant to the discussion


----------



## Julie_Pilgrim (Apr 29, 2021)

Scott_pilgrim said:


> The founding fathers invented america


what the fuck is a "native american"


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> Slaves freed themselves, Lincoln only "abolished" slavery to retain the union.
> Suffragette movements gave women the right to vote.
> Stonewall riots led to the abolition of anti-gay laws, I wouldn't be here if not for the riots.
> Selma to Montgomery led to important gains in the civil rights movement and led to the establishment of the civil rights act, same with the Panthers going to the capitol.
> ...



aside form wikipedia do you have any proof that those actions SPECIFICALLY contributed to  those changes? because i was actually under the impression most women didnt want the right to vote as it would come with mandatory pail duty which alot of women didnt wanna participate in.


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> aside form wikipedia do you have any proof that those actions SPECIFICALLY contributed to  those changes? because i was actually under the impression most women didnt want the right to vote as it would come with mandatory pail duty which alot of women didnt wanna participate in.


Yes, you can literally read any of those sources. Or do your research on each event if you would like. Some of them aren't Wikipedia sources and all of these events are known as pivotal events in women's history, black history and LGBTQ history (in the US at least). Anyone with even an intro level of knowledge to US protest  history should know these things.

Also of course women wanted to vote. If I lived back then I would be fighting to vote too. We're people just like you who want to live our lives unchained. There are many examples of revolutionary and emancipated women throughout history. To suggest otherwise is just... deeply foolish.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> Yes, you can literally read any of those sources. Or do your research on each event if you would like. Some of them aren't Wikipedia sources and all of these events are known as pivotal events in women's history, black history and LGBTQ history (in the US at least).
> 
> Also of course women wanted to vote. We're people just like you who want to live our lives unchained. To suggest otherwise is just... deeply foolish.






Seliph said:


> Yes, you can literally read any of those sources. Or do your research on each event if you would like. Some of them aren't Wikipedia sources and all of these events are known as pivotal events in women's history, black history and LGBTQ history (in the US at least).
> 
> Also of course women wanted to vote. We're people just like you who want to live our lives unchained. To suggest otherwise is just... deeply foolish.



only one of those sources appears to be from a reputable source, youll understand if i dont take a .com link with quite so much veracity. But thats fine, i take back everything ive said folks, keep protesting clearly its working! love all the change!

edit: i was wrong, thats an op ed on nat geo, so its 0 reputable sources

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Seliph said:


> Yes, you can literally read any of those sources. Or do your research on each event if you would like. Some of them aren't Wikipedia sources and all of these events are known as pivotal events in women's history, black history and LGBTQ history (in the US at least). Anyone with even an intro level of knowledge to US protest  history should know these things.
> 
> Also of course women wanted to vote. If I lived back then I would be fighting to vote too. We're people just like you who want to live our lives unchained. There are many examples of revolutionary and emancipated women throughout history. To suggest otherwise is just... deeply foolish.




also can you show me what part of my sentences i specifically said women werent empancipated or revolutionary? i dont recall saying that but wtf do i know right.  I guess my concern is that just because someone tells me thats true, doesnt, you know, make it true, did you know santa clause isnt real? shit haunts me to this day.


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> only one of those sources appears to be from a reputable source, youll understand if i dont take a .com link with quite so much veracity. But thats fine, i take back everything ive said folks, keep protesting clearly its working! love all the change!
> 
> edit: i was wrong, thats an op ed on nat geo, so its 0 reputable sources
> 
> ...


I'm baffled by your reasoning. A source can be valid regardless of web address. If you want to find these events on a .gov or .org or .balls or .whatever website, they are very easy to find. You don't seem to want to argue in good faith though so... this definitely isn't worth it.

My point is that these very well known protests are all examples of protest that have achieved real social gains for real people, again you seem to not know about them which is mildly concerning and I'm not a teacher so I'd rather not waste my time educating someone who doesn't want to learn.


----------



## Julie_Pilgrim (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> I'm baffled by your reasoning. A source can be valid regardless of web address. If you want to find these events on a .gov or .org or .balls or .whatever website, they are very easy to find. You don't seem to want to argue in good faith though so... this definitely isn't worth it.


Brb, gonna go make a .balls website


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

Scott_pilgrim said:


> Brb, gonna go make a .balls website


Go for it queen


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> I'm baffled by your reasoning. A source can be valid regardless of web address. If you want to find these events on a .gov or .org or .balls or .whatever website, they are very easy to find. You don't seem to want to argue in good faith though so... this definitely isn't worth it.



 yo uare absolutely right, i dont want to argue on faith, because that makes your belief no different than religion, and in that regard, thats great for you, but just because you believe it doesnt make it true.

and actually, im sure someone as intelligent as you will realize, that although a source MAY be relevant regardless of the web address, most of the time when presenting a thesis, you must use sources that are legitimate, like a scientific journal, or in this case a journal from someone who's worked in the industry for years. 

But ill tell you what, ill argue with you soley based on your faith, if you take it solely based on faith that im a king, i sure as shit can't prove it, but hey, its my faith


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> yo uare absolutely right, i dont want to argue on faith, because that makes your belief no different than religion, and in that regard, thats great for you, but just because you believe it doesnt make it true.









Clearly I've made a mistake by ever speaking up in the first place. I apologize. I appear to have gravely miscalculated the circumstances.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> Clearly I've made a mistake by ever speaking up in the first place. I apologize. I appear to have gravely miscalculated the circumstances.




no no no its fine really, you mightve missed the it so ill repeat it again.


I lolcatzuru hereby admit that i was wrong about everything i ever knew and that this user was correct about everything regarding history, lets keep up the good work folks!


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> I lolcatzuru hereby admit that i was wrong about everything i ever knew and that this user was correct about everything regarding history, lets keep up the good work folks!


Omg thank you I appreciate it so much bestie (▰˘◡˘▰)


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> Omg thank you I appreciate it so much bestie (▰˘◡˘▰)


----------



## Julie_Pilgrim (Apr 29, 2021)

You say after arguing


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

Anyways gang how about them peaceful protests? I love em


----------



## Louse (Apr 29, 2021)

hey have you guys heard of this great book called 1984


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Scott_pilgrim said:


> You say after arguing



well i wasnt really trying to argue with that person.  They told me everything i ever knew was incorrect and gave me a bunch of sources that are people making declarative statements and when i said i needed more to go on, that apparently was unacceptable, so thats fine, they can be right, i really geuniely dont care who had what to do with any of those things, i dont care if aliens freed the slaves, that information is useless to me. All i was doing is analyzing the dichotomy of peaceful protesting and somehow i got sucked into nearly joining a cult.


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

Omg wtf this is so Orwellian and Kafkaesque and Lovecraftian all at the same time we truly do live in a society


----------



## Xzi (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> and actually, im sure someone as intelligent as you will realize, that although a source MAY be relevant regardless of the web address, most of the time when presenting a thesis, you must use sources that are legitimate, like a scientific journal, or in this case a journal from someone who's worked in the industry for years.


Dude you can find information on the events Seliph referenced in nearly any half-decent history book or textbook.  Your laziness doesn't make those past events or their impact any less real.


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> well i wasnt really trying to argue with that person.  They told me everything i ever knew was incorrect



If you're gonna speak in reference to me at least say "she" you dweeb

pardon my language.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> If you're gonna speak in reference to me at least say "she" you dweeb
> 
> pardon my language.



you may not have noticed this about me, but i do not care, rather than having to join a cult about pronouns, i took the easy way out.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Xzi said:


> Dude you can find information on the events Seliph referenced in nearly any half-decent history book or textbook.  Your laziness doesn't make those past events or their impact any less real.



this post seems weird

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Louse said:


> hey have you guys heard of this great book called 1984



great? debatable  accurate as hell? you betcha


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> you may not have noticed this about me, but i do not care, rather than having to join a cult about pronouns, i took the easy way out.
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> ...








lol bye I don't wanna make this any more inflammatory than it already is. You clearly came here to do nothing but start shit and have contributed nothing of value or substance to this conversation. It's disappointing and I apologize to everyone in this thread for indulging you.



lolcatzuru said:


> great? debatable accurate as hell? you betcha


Please don't pretend you've read it lol


----------



## Xzi (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> this post seems weird


In what way?  I'm just trying to help you find a source you feel like you can trust, since you seem intent on throwing away sources provided by others without a second thought.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Xzi said:


> In what way?  I'm just trying to help you find a source you feel like you can trust, since you seem intent on throwing away sources provided by others without a second thought.



well idk if a book is gonna help me, unless harry potter turned about to be an auto biography. but it was weird because... idk theres something wrong it . like you are saying that, but im not getting to the part where i see the books, and the person who wrote the books is a professional who is highly regarded and an expert in the field, god DAMN is it weird


----------



## Louse (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> well idk if a book is gonna help me, unless harry potter turned about to be an auto biography. but it was weird because... idk theres something wrong it . like you are saying that, but im not getting to the part where i see the books, and the person who wrote the books is a professional who is highly regarded and an expert in the field, god DAMN is it weird


this post gives me bad vibes. imma peace out


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Louse said:


> this post gives me bad vibes. imma peace out



wtf does that even mean?


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

Bugsnax


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> Bugsnax



havent gotten around to that game yet, i did grab i when it was free, maybe ill fire it up now that i finished yakuza, after a little p snap.


----------



## Xzi (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> like you are saying that, but im not getting to the part where i see the books, and the person who wrote the books is a professional who is highly regarded and an expert in the field


I purposefully didn't give you specific recommendations because you'd reject them outright, just as you did with Seliph's sources.  Typing "history of (slave revolts/Stonewall riots/suffragettes/etc)" into Amazon yields tons of results.  Educate your own damn self.


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Xzi said:


> I purposefully didn't give you specific recommendations because you'd reject them outright, just as you did with Seliph's sources.  Typing "history of (slave revolts/Stonewall riots/suffragettes/etc)" into Amazon yields tons of results.  Educate your own damn self.



Yes i absolutely rejected op eds from someone who worked at nat geo once you are 100% right.

Look it would really be alot easier for you to see the part where i admit that im wrong about everything in my life and that person is right and then we can have a grown up conversation, i really have no interest in who freed or helped who, im wrong, thats wonderful, lets all be mature and get back on track.


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> i admit that im wrong about everything in my life and that person is right


Who's "that person" huh buddy huh I wanna hear you say it


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> Who's "that person" huh buddy huh I wanna hear you say it



similarly to your pronouns, i have no interest in looking at your name and copying and pasting it here.  Im taking it on faith you know who im talking about


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> similarly to your pronouns, i have no interest in looking at your name and copying and pasting it here.  Im taking it on faith you know who im talking about


Coward


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> Coward



once again you are 1000% right, as with everything


----------



## Louse (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> Yes i absolutely rejected op eds from someone who worked at nat geo once you are 100% right.
> 
> Look it would really be alot easier for you to see the part where i admit that im wrong about everything in my life and that person is right and then we can have a grown up conversation, i really have no interest in who freed or helped who, im wrong, thats wonderful, lets all be mature and get back on track.


Clearly you have missed the point. You should educate yourself before you argue your point.
If you have no interest in learning what is true and what is false, you can not truly fathom what is just.


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> once again you are 1000% right, as with everything


So true bestie




Also this is somewhat unrelated but this video rocks and you guys should totally watch it


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Louse said:


> Clearly you have missed the point. You should educate yourself before you argue your point.
> If you have no interest in learning what is true and what is false, you can not truly fathom what is just.



No no i understood what they were trying to say but its like that person said, i have to take it on faith, faith is useless to me.  Did you know dark energy was recently proven wrong?  it turned out the people who published theories on it got a little ahead of themselves! how weird is that.

The point im trying to make is, i dont care if someone wrote a book about it that once again does not make it true.  All i asked was for someone to point to a historical journal?  or similar prospect from someone with a reputation, i really dont want to go down this rabbit hole here and get off topic.  It's easier to agree and appease them so we can have an actual conversation.


if its all the same to you, id like to skip the part where i have to drop the mic and everyone starts frantically saying that just because this person was wrong doesnt mean mine is wrong and get to the actual point. we have a problem in this country, if they wanna sit around and bitch about it great, there are more productive means of getting what we want, however the narrative generally doesnt allow discussion on it.


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> No no i understood what they were trying to say but its like that person said


You're embarrassing yourself


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> You're embarrassing yourself



should i take that on faith?


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> peepee poopoo


Okay I don't even know what you're talking about at this point


----------



## lolcatzuru (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> Okay I don't even know what you're talking about at this point



i dont know but i must be like that person in that book because i didnt say that


----------



## Louse (Apr 29, 2021)

lolcatzuru said:


> i dont know but i must be like that person in that book because i didnt say that


cheers and gn mate


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Apr 29, 2021)

smf said:


> Did it affect anyone present? Whether something is peaceful or not comes down to whether there was conflict, you can't have one sided conflict.



How about you just answer the question with a simple answer, instead of with another question? Thanks.


----------



## Julie_Pilgrim (Apr 29, 2021)

D34DL1N3R said:


> How about you just answer the question with a simple answer, instead of with another question? Thanks.


The thing is there is no simple answer


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

Louse said:


> if we all just stand in a park and sing jambalaya then they can just ignore us


rereading through this thread and this comment is so good lmao

now I'm hungry, definitely gonna make jambalaya tomorrow.


----------



## RivenMain (Apr 29, 2021)

A planned gathering that wasn't forced if the public forbid the gathering at that time. Shouldn't hold one mind of thought, but procure alternative thoughts on the matter at hand. Be intellectuals bring some food cheese and crackers a hive mind that groups up on a individual for their thoughts is threatening Rational thinking doesn't exist when the only words you think and say are the ones you repeat. Be individuals discuss with other individually like 2 bros at a bar, but now imagine it like speed dating with a bunch of other individuals. If you truly believe in something you should be able to defend why you believe something individually. Getting upset and whining like a bitch because others don't agree with you means you lack evidence and reasoning. A protest should create awareness threats, destruction of property, inhumane acts against your fellow man is terrorism burning your flag unless you live in like germany it's terrorism. And any group that exists outside of your nation that's funded by foreign nations to impose their views on your nation is terroristic regardless of how they refer to themselves ex: blm.


----------



## Seliph (Apr 29, 2021)

RivenMain said:


> And any group that exists outside of your nation that's funded by foreign nations to impose their views on your nation is terroristic regardless of how they refer to themselves ex: blm.


I don't really want to get into a debate but by this logic do you consider the US military to be a terrorist organization? Do you consider Capitalist imperialist organizations like the IMF or World Bank to be terrorists? Why or why not?

I know I do


----------



## RivenMain (Apr 29, 2021)

Seliph said:


> I don't really want to get into a debate but by this logic do you consider the US military to be a terrorist organization? Do you consider Capitalist imperialist organizations like the IMF or World Bank to be terrorists? Why or why not?
> 
> I know I do


  For Military no, Their existence is to serve to protect. They don't do anything without approval of the government and the president. To go against their government/President is treason. Banks don't hold loyalty to a individual nation they can work with a country, but I never seen them as terrorists.(Their neutral) Transferring wealth out of the country by individuals damages the dollar, but that's not a fault of the bank doing their job. Only the fault of the country being a importer instead of being an exporter. 

I consider journalism to be a prime form of Terrorism. Many of them learn foreign languages and are employed to promote different beliefs in countries example being Medusa a news outlet in Russia they wouldn't exist without foreign aid foreign journalists are moved their taught to blend in as spys and help promote western ideology's like gender roles and try changing the mindsets of youth.  This doesn't start after they become a journalist, but rather well still being in college.


----------



## Purple_Shyguy (Apr 29, 2021)

Peaceful protesting = mobs of leftists
"Mostly" peaceful protesting = The city is literally on fire


----------



## Xzi (Apr 29, 2021)

Purple_Shyguy said:


> Peaceful protesting = mobs of leftists
> "Mostly" peaceful protesting = The city is literally on fire


This but unironically.  Like five people can set a city on fire if they have enough molotovs.  And generally police are lax about these things because either they're the target of the protest, or they want to prove some sort of point.


----------



## smf (Apr 29, 2021)

D34DL1N3R said:


> How about you just answer the question with a simple answer, instead of with another question? Thanks.



I disagree that it's a simple question that can get a simple answer.
It's not my fault you want a simple answer.

It's easier to deal with examples, hitting a policeman over the head with a flag is not peaceful.


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Apr 29, 2021)

Scott_pilgrim said:


> The thing is there is no simple answer





smf said:


> I disagree that it's a simple question that can get a simple answer.
> It's not my fault you want a simple answer.
> 
> It's easier to deal with examples, hitting a policeman over the head with a flag is not peaceful.



Ones own opinion on whether or not the social worker was peacefully protesting is not a difficult thing or question to answer. It's either yes or no.


----------



## smf (Apr 29, 2021)

D34DL1N3R said:


> Ones own opinion on whether or not the social worker was peacefully protesting is not a difficult thing or question to answer. It's either yes or no.



I asked for details about the video because I found it too annoying to watch, but you refused to answer them.

But of the parts of the video I did watch there was no fighting, she was just running her mouth to people that didn't care. Therefore it's peaceful. But if I missed her harassing children, fighting with someone, or anything else that I wouldn't consider peaceful then please point that out and I'll change my opinion.


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Apr 29, 2021)

smf said:


> I asked for details about the video that you refused to answer because I found it too annoying to watch.
> 
> But of the parts of the video I did watch there was no fighting, therefore it's peaceful. But if I missed her harassing children, or fighting with someone then please point out and I'll change my opinion.



I'm not holding you hand, kiddo. Watch the video. If you are too "annoyed" to watch it, then don't participate in the conversation acting like you know whats going on. And I did answer. You refuse to see the answer, just like you refuse to watch the video then act like you know wtf is going on. Lmao. You're hilarious.


----------



## smf (Apr 29, 2021)

D34DL1N3R said:


> And I did answer. You refuse to see the answer



No, you did not answer it...

_How about you just answer the question with a simple answer, instead of with another question? Thanks._

If you're this much of a jerk in a discussion then I don't need to watch the video as it's safe to just disagree with everything you say.


----------



## digipimp75 (Apr 29, 2021)

To me a peaceful protest involves order and respect to other persons or property.   The minute a punch is thrown or a window is smashed, then it's over.   Of course the media still classifies these as "peaceful" sometimes.


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Apr 29, 2021)

smf said:


> No, you did not answer it...
> 
> _How about you just answer the question with a simple answer, instead of with another question? Thanks._
> 
> If you're this much of a jerk in a discussion then I don't need to watch the video as it's safe to just disagree with everything you say.



Yes, I very much did. I laid out several key details of the video plain as day for you. I feel you are the one being the jerk in this discussion. Especially since you couldn't be bothered to watch the video yet STILL continue to run your mouth. I'll just take it you're not going to answer because you don't have one due to the fact you are too childish and stubborn to do the research yourself or without your hand being held, and also seem to have some reading/reading comprehension issues. It's all right there for ya, buddy. I'll expect your answer next reply. Are you capable, or nah?


----------



## CMDreamer (Apr 30, 2021)

chrisrlink said:


> as i posted earlier most civil rights protest were peaceful from the suppressors (Minority as in blacks)  standpoint it's when we threw in the cops into the mix (all of them racist white men) that things got ugly



Yes that's a way of having control over the protest and send it in the direction they (who?) wanted it to go.

Recently there are Asian people attacks, Blacks have made their point stand so they (who?) had to change their goals. Latinos have always been on their sight, but they can't be considered a minority in the US.


----------



## JonhathonBaxster (May 14, 2021)

Protesting is gathering in often pre-desiginated areas while holding signs or wearing clothing supporting a common cause. Protests are often organized by first contacting the city and getting permission to gather in a certain area to protest. Protests also consist of verbal messages being relayed by people. That's it, it's very simple.

What is not protesting is destruction of property, arson, theft, trespassing, assault and murder. If a protest starts into those things it's no longer a protest and it's a riot.

There were actually over 1,000 instances of rioting by BLM and Antifa following the death of George Floyd. If you look at the other side, there was one single instance of rioting at the Capitol, absent arson. 

I personally refuse to get upset over 1 instance of a riot by one side when the other side refuses address their responsibility for thousands. How do you even get to ignore 1,000's of riots where people died, cars and buildings burnt, etc ... is beyond me.


----------



## notimp (May 23, 2021)

Ah. 

Don't want to look up the sources, so I keep it short.  The 1968-er generation of protesters actually wrote the political theory for that...

Thats the tame version, with much of the controversial stuff not touched upon:
https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-criminol-061020-124931

Those are the good parts:
https://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1093&context=unh_lr

Not sure if the important ones are in the footnotes, but there were actual influential figures in the sociology departments back then who wrote the political theory on civil disobedience, and argued strongly for "destruction of property" as being a valid and necessary part of that.  And there were others who obviously opposed it...  But that was a proper scientific discussion on political theory that was held back then. 

edit: This amuses me to no end right now... I'm still looking up the references that I know exist, but not in the top google search results, and not on Wiki in reference to the subject "direct action", which is identified as "propaganda" there... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_action 

Now I'm really motivated to dig out the political theorists, that propagated direct action and property destruction in the 1968 public debate. I know - that they were pretty mainstream back then... Now I _have_ to find them..


----------



## omgcat (May 23, 2021)

protesting doesn't HAVE to be peaceful. one all of the peaceful options have been tried, you basically have to break the peace. if protesting doesn't cause some sot of discomfort, it will be ignored and nothing will change.


----------



## notimp (May 23, 2021)

Damn, this is hard to source...  First text I found - that still doesnt mention the mainstream theorists in the sixites, but the reaction of the next generation of protesters to those...



> Disenchanted with a perceived lack of results from previous endeavors, student activists in the 1970s turned to new means of expressing their dissent. Levine (1980) summarizes this methodological shift:
> 
> _What stands out here is the decline in use of tactics familiar from the Sixties – building takeovers, strikes, demonstrations, and the destruction of property. What has taken its place are litigation and tactics ranging from lobbying and use of grievance procedures to educating the public and fellow students via seminars and research reports. (pp. 42-43)_
> 
> Students in the 1970s moved away from the direct action approach, so characteristic of the 1960s, and abandoned tactical variety in favor of educational and litigious means


src: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/217322217.pdf

Same source:


> The number of protests that involved the intentional destruction of property as tactic dropped from 11.6 percent in 1969 – 1970 to 1 percent in 1977 – 1978. Student takeover of a building occurred at 15.4 percent of campuses in 1969 – 1970, then had dropped to 0.8 by 1977 – 1978. Similar declines were reported for student threat of violence, which were reported at 20.3 percent in 1969 – 1970 and fell to 2.9 percent in 1977 – 1978. The student strike was reported at 13.9 percent of institutions in 1969 – 1970, then at 1 percent in the 1977 – 1978 sample.



To be edited. 

Still no luck on finding the ideologs behind the pro "destruction of property" strain in the late 1960s, but here is a quite dumb account of a contemporary trying to argue, that it means different things to students and "tha irish cop".  If you want to lol, read this:
http://www2.kobe-u.ac.jp/~alexroni/IPD 2015 readings/IPD 2015_7/Galtung_Violence, Peace, and Peace Research.pdf

To be edited.

Neat elitist historic account (only speedread so far, posted for personal reference (to read later)):
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1969/5/1/conflict-of-generations-pbnbo-matter-what/

To be edited.


Here we go..... 

Here is your answer on the academic level - without calling everything in favor of "violence against property" propaganda, like the Wikipedia entry - featuring at least one mainstream political scientist of the time (late sixties, early seventies), arguing in favor of it. Also offers a few more insights, that might be valuable as well. 



> The intellectual arguments about civil disobedience have been presented many times, with no agreement reached (Cohen, 1971; Singer, 1973; Zinn, 1968). The key factor causing differences in conclusions is the assumption about the legitimacy of the state. Those who assume the primacy and legitimacy of the state invariably take a narrow view of civil disobedience; those who question the state take a broader view.
> 
> Is it morally legitimate to break just laws in order to protest against unjust ones? For example, is it legitimate to block traffic if one agrees with traffic ordinances but wants to protest against laws against homosexuality? A narrow perspective, which requires civil disobedience not to challenge and hence undermine respect for valid laws, answers no. A broad perspective, which sees civil disobedience as part of a wider struggle for social justice, answers yes.
> 
> ...


src: https://documents.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/pubs/94psa.html

edit: Further reading, if you are interested:
https://ssudl.solent.ac.uk/id/eprint/997/1/2005_9_1&2.pdf


----------

