If anyone wondered what would have happened in the US if the US had a wave of protests similar to Hong Kong… This is what would have happened. In fact, this protest seems better organized, more structured, and a little awe inspiring to be honest
Now the question is if the students can organize en masse and march on the capital to occupy the Capitol.
You don’t match on the capitol unless you want to be painted with the same brush as the Jan 6 Rioters.
Even Caesar knew what crossing the Rubicon meant, and would result in.
Coordinated peaceful protests are the only way to go
These kids are already being attacked by state security forces using more weaponry than the Jan 6 traitors were facing and your conclusion is we need more peace?
Coordinated peaceful protests never achieved a major right.
Coordinated peaceful protests are what an authoritarian system tells you is “the only way to go, bcs we don’t want to get attracted when the majority wants a change we the few don’t want” …
Even if you think a revolution is the way to go, you don’t do that by marching on the capital. Control of a building doesn’t give you control of the government. The Jan 6th people were fucking stupid. How you would do it is dispersed action that can’t be broken up or tracked easily. I don’t know how people are so stupid to think taking over a building would do anything. What reality are you living in?
A march on the capital as a protest could be good though. It won’t change anything itself, but it could motivate people and show there’s interest in the movement. Not an actual invasion of the capital, but a large group showing up to demonstrate.
Wait … you think … Jan 6th was … a protest?
Im not Murican, but that doesn’t seem right.Also I think I was clear that Im taking about protesting for rights, like how we got 5 day workweeks, women voting rights, etc.
If eg a military coup happens I do not think anyone would label it as a protest.Also, protesting is a fairly democratic thing to do, it’s not about occupying some university building (like, what even are the damages?), it’s about letting your opinion to be heard, to get attention on the issue, to let people know it’s not just them.
And our (current) society is such that people pay attention (& education on the subject) by how ‘loudly’ they hear it. Ofc media is part of the problem (for profit or gov controlled both lead to less professionalism), but so is most people barely having enough time & energy to survive, much less ponder issues, organise, make change happen, etc.
Wait … you think … Jan 6th was … a protest?
Im not Murican, but that doesn’t seem right.No. I tried rereading my comment to see how you got that, but it seems fine. It was a very stupid attempted coup. You can’t do a coup by taking over the capital building though. That’s not how that works.
I may see how the confusion came. By “march on the capital as a protest”, there’s been many protests that use that term to refer to marching on Washington D.C., not the capital building itself. The comment before used that phrase to also include “to occupy the capital” referring to the capital building like Jan 6. That is not a protest, nor would it be achieve anything.
Oh, yes, re-reading the whole thing I see that too (and I might have been too confrontational for no reason, sry about that, wasn’t even intentional).
I was then really replying to just the last paragraph how only peaceful protests are ok. The fact that the comment was predominantly about Janny the Sixth and intentionally relating it that to “protests should be peaceful” I automatically disregarded as bs and focused only on that last bit of propaganda.
Coups however do often include physically storming buildings (or having access to it by default) to seize the legislature powers & using some sort of “official” pathway to power (just to have a basis for the administration & military to now follow the new regime as if technically nothing changed).
Yeah, I’m not the one who said peaceful protests are the only way to do things. I disagree with that. Most effective protests are called violent even when they’re not. The state will use violence against them and then claim they were violent. Peaceful protest can be a useful tool, but it isn’t the only tool. Storming that capital building is not a useful tool though. It’s only useful if you want to destroy a movement.
Coups however do often include physically storming buildings (or having access to it by default) to seize the legislature powers & using some sort of “official” pathway to power (just to have a basis for the administration & military to now follow the new regime as if technically nothing changed).
Sure, but it’s rarely, if ever, control of the building itself that gives that power. If you can control the people who wield it and force them to grant you power, that’s how it happens. That or kill them all and become the de facto controllers, but that requires a large military presence around the nation and that’s what gives power. That’s probably required in the case of any coup for that matter. Some people are going to turn against you and you have to be able to stop them.
HK was hugely coordinated though. It would be like if not just a campus but the whole city was in on it because they knew they didn’t have a choice, and the tactics were more specific to what would work against the CCP, not the US. If it was in another country that wasn’t an oppressive autocracy, it would probably have been very effective.
Edit: hey downvote if you want, but tell me something like this doesn’t take coordination:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/23/hong-kong-protesters-join-hands-in-30-mile-human-chain
Their oppressive autocracy vs our (?)
Liberal media in HK pumped up the young full of lies in HK so they would protest against a country that would provide them housing, a better quality of living and most importantly; democracy. Its a hard truth to swallow but more HK protestors killed other HK people than police vs HK protestors…
Something most people in HK dont have as an account of being a british colony for 100 years.
This is… Not evidence of coordination, but of network effects. The same reason that hockey fans descending into a riot after losing Game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals is not an indication that they organized a riot.
Unlike the Hong Kong protests, these protests are for actual issues instead of an NED fueled fight to prevent the extradition of a guy who murdered his girlfriend.
That’s exactly what they should do. Take this energy to DC and storm the Capital.
You guys really try to use that to make it less of an issue.
Man you’re fucking stupid if you’re anything but a troll or this is a bad joke. The capital building is just a building. Taking control of it does nothing. It’s just a good way to destroy a movement. You don’t put all of your biggest followers into a group to do something illegal in a way that makes them easy to track and follow, especially when achieving victory still does nothing except getting you arrested or killed a little while after and doing nothing.
Congress can operate operate out of any building. They operate out of that one by tradition. It doesn’t hold any power itself. If you take it then now you have control of a perfectly normal building, not something powerful.
Ask Trump, he’s good at that kind of thing.
Blue state, blue governor, blue mayor, blue senators, you physically cannot get more blue if you tried.
And yet, here we are
“…a one-party state but, with typical American extravagance, they have two of them.”
Even the thin blue line is actually red apparently.
There’s 0 difference between Red Team and Blue Team. They’re both the same team.
The blue team is slightly better at pinkwashing their imperialism though
Red mayor pretending to be blue*
I would say at this point there’s no discernable difference between a blue mayor and a red mayor pretending to be blue.
Maybe if we vote more blue, this won’t happen again…
“Blue mayor” and “Blue governor” are REALLY stretching the definition here… with a healthy push from the ever shifting Overton window.
Look at actions, not words or badges that people pin to their own lapels without earning them.
They’re members of the Democratic party. They are, by definition, blue.
They are a reddish shade of purple, at best.
US Supreme Court justices are, by definition, the highest arbiters of truth in the US… BUT the definition is clearly trailing the reality.
Actions, not words.
Regardless of what side of the issue being protested you are on if you are in favor of cops in riot gear breaking up a peaceful protest, you are a traitor to our country.
It’s that simple. You cannot stand for American values and cheer that a peaceful protest was dismantled by government goons.
You cannot stand for American values and cheer that a peaceful protest was dismantled by government goons.
Lol
Lul indeed. I wonder what would be the result if someone asked the world what ‘American values’ are …
… or if we asked historians.
Keep fighting, my brothers and sisters.
ACAB
Where’s the next Kent State? The weapons and armor are much bigger this time.
The Bell Riots - September 2024
Ohio is red these days and the college still exists, don’t take away their shots at history!
'Gotta act fast if we want to continue supporting genocide.
How to turn protesters into radicals.
Honestly the police are the ones keeping the movement alive by basically forcing the media to cover it.
If there were no police or insane counter protestors it would have been easy for the media to ignore. Like how many days in a row can you have a segment that’s basically like “Let’s go down the ground, yup protestors are still here… back to you” before the audience gets bored
It’s hard to say who’s keeping it alive in reality. Media is covering it because they can make a culture war thing out of it. The police are there because the media is there. The counter-protestor are there because of the former culture war thing. Then the media is also there to get images of the chaos they fomented.
Funny how whenever literal nazis gather and protest cops are nowhere to be found
No, they’re there, just not in uniform.
Smoke more pork
Bacon for breakfast
This referred to CUNY a few times. I thought that, City University of New York, was a different institution, and I got the impression the article was referring to Columbia University as CUNY. Maybe I missed something?
