..but first you have to slink into a metal cage surronded by barbed wire. What the f*** is this? Am I the only person *disgusted* by the handling of protestors in Boston?
Bah. Posted by Insanity Plea (Member # 2053) on :
Any link?
(edit: because somehow I came across more cross than I anticipated) Satyagraha
[ July 25, 2004, 06:41 PM: Message edited by: Insanity Plea ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
This has become pretty common, sadly; the idea that protests need to be shuttled off to one side so no one has to see them grew from a tiny seed about five years ago to the standard operating procedure today.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
I respect protestors and think they have a right to protest, but is it ever at all effective in winning people over to your side?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Maybe I'm just too young, but I have never understood the point of protesting besides making a nuisance of yourself to those in authority.
Posted by Insanity Plea (Member # 2053) on :
I suddenly see why they've been pushed off to the side. Satyagraha
Posted by HRE (Member # 6263) on :
quote: I respect protestors and think they have a right to protest, but is it ever at all effective in winning people over to your side?
Perhaps it doesn't make conversions, but it lets people know that you are not always a meek minority. For instance, the Gay Pride events showed people that homosexuals weren't filthy diseased animals living in the dirt, but instead Fathers, Mothers, Teachers, Neighbors, and friends.
quote: Maybe I'm just too young, but I have never understood the point of protesting besides making a nuisance of yourself to those in authority.
Martin Luther King, Jr. Mahatma Gandhi The Boston Tea Party Mary Elizabeth Lease Alice Paul Tiananmen Square The Berlin Wall Protests
Need I go on?
quote: I suddenly see why they've been pushed off to the side.
Do not be too worried. The next generations bring with them hope. There are many in my generation whose idols are not Michael Jordan or Sammy Sosa, but instead, Martin Luther, Martin Luther King, Jr., Gandhi, and Marx.
The only concern for those who lead the next wave of protests will be in keeping them peaceful; the attitudes of my generation lend themselves more to violent action than Satyagraha.
Posted by Insanity Plea (Member # 2053) on :
I am "the next generation" and I see nothing but apathy. Don't get e wrong, I do have hope...just not much. Satyagraha
Posted by meltier (Member # 6728) on :
The caged protesters can not be good publicity for the Democratic National Convention, but with all of the terrorism scares I guess its not surprising.
Posted by HRE (Member # 6263) on :
I am the next generation, too...maybe we should be a bit more specific? Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Great reply, HRE. Posted by Lupus (Member # 6516) on :
at many political speeches they keep people back since otherwise they yell to the point where the speeches cannot be heard by those who want to hear. They are not just being disruptive to the politicians, they are being disruptive to other citizens. There are also the safety issues to worry about.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
When protesters go from voicing their opinion for people who want to hear to hear to forcing people to hear the opinion I don't think that's protected speech. On the other hand I can't honestly say that I'm aware of what's exactly happening in Boston, I can just guess based on previous patterns. Of course Ghandi and Martin Luther King both did use civil disobedience so I suppose its not an inherently bad tool.
Posted by HRE (Member # 6263) on :
Did King voice his opinions to people who "wanted to hear"?
No, he took them to the street with the Montgomery Bus Boycott. He was not shouting at bystanders, but his message was more powerful than words could ever be.
Posted by Promethius (Member # 2468) on :
I think the security threats make this necessary. As long as they treat all of the protestors the same I dont see a problem with this. Protests are notorious for getting out of control.
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
Protests can have an effect - if only to bring public awareness to the issue the protestors are championing.
Is it singularly useful? Rarely ever. Is it a useful trick in the book of political activists? Yes.
A large public demonstration always does wonders for keeping an issue alive, garnering media attention and drawing public awareness to your cause.
As for keeping the protesters under control - far too often, a mob mentality or group mindset will take over, sometimes instigated by one or two trouble-makers. Now, consider a terrorist trying to make use the protests for cover.
Security is here to stay - get used to it.
-Trevor
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
quote:The caged protesters can not be good publicity for the Democratic National Convention, but with all of the terrorism scares I guess its not surprising.
This is not just a Democratic National Convention thing. The last time Bush came to Fresno, the protesters' pen was located far away (almost a mile, if I remember correctly) from where he was speaking, tucked safely away where he wouldn't have to see or hear them.
Personally, I don't consider it free speech when any group is prevented from being within sight and hearing of the person or persons their message is intended for. I don't like it when any poltical person or group thinks that they are above hearing what all the people (who are, after all, their employers) have to say.
Posted by fallow (Member # 6268) on :
trev,
out of curiousity, has Hatrack actually ever had (held, or thrown) a good protest? (Snigger-digs don't count)
fallow
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
I'm such a newbie here Fallows, I couldn't even begin to guess.
As for relative free speech, the Democratic National Convention is, I believe, a private affair and as such not subject to free speech rights.
-Trevor
Posted by fallow (Member # 6268) on :
tremor,
It's 'fallow', lc "f" and no plurality.
free speech, then, isn't really a big concern of yours?
fallow
Posted by HRE (Member # 6263) on :
I have to say that that is a low blow, fallow.
Trevor is right, certain events and places are not subject to free speech laws.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
HRE, I have mixed feelings because in some cases King did break the law and therefore shouldn't he be punished? After all what good is law if individuals can decide for themselves without consequence which laws they should follow. On the other hand the cause certainly was worth it. So then how do we treat unlawful protests?
Posted by rubble (Member # 6454) on :
quote:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The issue is not if your presence is invonvenient, but what is the definition of "peaceably". In our country, if you're breaking the law you should expect to be arrested. You then have to address your complaint with the law in the court system.
Edit: add link
[ July 26, 2004, 02:24 AM: Message edited by: rubble ]
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
Feh, Fallow exists in a world all his(?) own.
And I don't hold any right to be completely without limitation or constraint.
-Trevor
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
So what are unlawful protests?
Posted by rubble (Member # 6454) on :
What is the definition of "peaceably assemble"
That's the crux in my opinion.
Dag. Help!
Posted by fallow (Member # 6268) on :
pshaw!
*judges hide behind guide rails of spectatorship*
fallow
Posted by rubble (Member # 6454) on :
Tremor, Fallows!
*giggles*
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
From a strict interpretation of the Amendment as posted, any assembly that is not
quote: or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
So one could argue that any assembly that is either not peaceable (peaceful?) or held specifically for the intent of being directed towards the Government for a redress of grievances could be construed as being an unlawful assembly.
Sorry, being snarky.
-Trevor
Posted by fallow (Member # 6268) on :
Trev,
Could I ask you, man2man, and if necessary, fallow2fallower... and if THAT don't work, um...
well, anyhow. can you PLEASE refrain from making fun of "my world"? I don't make fun of yours. And, I certainly don't whine about it to the resident authorities.
fallow
PS. That's not to say that I don't appreciate criticism or advise when it's constructive, helpful, or illluminating - and not just when invited.
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
Fal,
I didn't critique, critize or even comment on your world. I simply noted that you indeed have one of your own.
quote:Citing public safety concerns, the city originally denied the anti-war protesters permission for their march. But a federal judge ruled last Thursday that it be allowed.
quote:Several blocks away, about 1,000 anti-abortion advocates gathered at Faneuil Hall, the historic meeting house where patriots gathered before the American Revolution, and set off on their own march to the FleetCenter.
The two groups crossed paths at an intersection, where demonstrators exchanged angry words with one another. Some of the anti-abortion marchers laid down in the street. They soon stood up at the request of the police and the two marches continued their separate ways following a few minutes of confusion.
Peaceable. Mostly.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
But they might not have stayed that way...if not for the secutity level in the city.
Posted by HRE (Member # 6263) on :
quote: HRE, I have mixed feelings because in some cases King did break the law and therefore shouldn't he be punished? After all what good is law if individuals can decide for themselves without consequence which laws they should follow. On the other hand the cause certainly was worth it. So then how do we treat unlawful protests?
He was in jail numerous times for his deeds, yet he continued. There was actually an artivle in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Saturday where a sheriff had discovered the first mug shots of King, from when he led the bus boycott.
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)