It’s more complex than that, and a protest has more important benefits than a mere direct message (incl. networking), but a ruler or military/police won’t change their mind because a million people said “I don’t like this”. There needs to be some threat, like a strike or even violence, to make them suddenly care about ethics.
That’s inaccurate. Hell the government hates strikes so much, some states have passed legislation making collective bargaining, and strikes illegal. When a government tries to tell you that doing something reasonable is wrong, and in fact illegal, that means it’s working.
Got any examples? Because what’s first coming to mind for large modern strikes is the train strike that the Biden government explicitly outlawed. (before the environmental disaster in West Palestine, Ohio)
I think that if the US government is overhauled, guaranteed UBI would be key to allowing for effective strikes. The coercive power of losing your home and going hungry is what allows the powers that be to ignore the protests of the people.
I agree… but the direction of the world is making it very clear that won’t happen. Heck, Denmark just raised their retirement age to 70. There is no more time for baby steps. We need literal heads on plates if we are even going to keep what we have now. Just remember, billionaires don’t change and they done give up power.
Thus demonstrating the power of the peaceful protest.
Meaning it has no power, right?
It’s more complex than that, and a protest has more important benefits than a mere direct message (incl. networking), but a ruler or military/police won’t change their mind because a million people said “I don’t like this”. There needs to be some threat, like a strike or even violence, to make them suddenly care about ethics.
To state officials, any interruption of economic activity is a form of violence.
One reason why they are so effective and why state police are so enthusiastic in preventing them from occurring.
Strikes are useless nowadays, at least for government change in the US. The government just says “ok, strike.” And then knows you’ll stop eventually.
That’s inaccurate. Hell the government hates strikes so much, some states have passed legislation making collective bargaining, and strikes illegal. When a government tries to tell you that doing something reasonable is wrong, and in fact illegal, that means it’s working.
Got any examples? Because what’s first coming to mind for large modern strikes is the train strike that the Biden government explicitly outlawed. (before the environmental disaster in West Palestine, Ohio)
On strike as in they don’t give a shit it won’t work.
I think that if the US government is overhauled, guaranteed UBI would be key to allowing for effective strikes. The coercive power of losing your home and going hungry is what allows the powers that be to ignore the protests of the people.
I agree… but the direction of the world is making it very clear that won’t happen. Heck, Denmark just raised their retirement age to 70. There is no more time for baby steps. We need literal heads on plates if we are even going to keep what we have now. Just remember, billionaires don’t change and they done give up power.
In the meantime, we use voluntary strike funds for a similar effect.
If you divide the data into red states and blue states, you’ll see that police killings have fallen in blue states, but risen in red states.
Have a source?
Did. Can’t seem to find it in my link pile anymore. Take from that what you will. I’ll update if I can find it.
The article you didn’t read?
The article that so many people have commented on having incomplete data?
Does this include deaths in ICE detention centers?