It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


How can true protest be peaceful?

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 10:59 AM
There's a problem that I personally have, especially with the today's average picketer/protester; Bear in mind when you read this that I don't condone senseless violence in any way BUT a revolution isn't supposed to be quiet and passive-aggressive it need's to be loud, violent, and extremely angry. I mean after all, if conditions arent so bad that you only want to go stand outside of a building with a sign or alternatively if your not willing to face what might go wrong with a violent revolt, then to be quite frank you don't deserve a revolution.

I watched the video from the G20 summit and found it amazing that for the first time that I've noticed people are finally starting to rage against the machine, I mean after all the government exists to serve the people and yet we are nearly entirely subservient to them at this point, it makes me outraged personally and in going back to my original question...

How is that you can be broiled up enough to go out of your way to try and make a statement and yet you just want to make some sign's, walk some predetermined course by the system that your supposed to be raging at and call it protest. I suppose that in the very definition of protest that it would after all saying you don't want cheese on a cheeseburger would technically be protesting against it right? My issue generally comes from people ( Keep in mind this part right here is my opinion, but isn't it awesome to share 'em ) who do protest and think that violence and oppression is not normal, I mean age wise America is due for a revolution, remember the oppressed will always become the oppressor and thus the circle will continue. So when I see people simply marching it kind of ( to quote peter griffin ) grinds my gears, it's truly disgusting to see to me, not the aspect that these people want change and are willing to do something about it, I think that's awesome at least they don't sit on the couch all day; it's disgusting to me that people have not taken up arms or at the very least stopped taking flack from a moving wall of police decked out in riot gear, I really want someone to at least throw a bottle or a rock at one of these guys. My mother will often say that "they're just doing they're job" but in my opinion ( Which isn't worth all that much really lol ) they choose they're job, and honestly if some guy tried to take out your family wouldn't you cal him an oppressor no matter what the reason.

Now that I just segued quite length-fully let me go ahead and finish up by saying, Protest should not be peaceful; it should be seething and outraged, protest should be a violent tempestuous beast, it should be the same as revolt and not some poor excuse to avoid getting our finger nails dirty.

However anyone who does practice peaceful protest, this is not meant as an attack on you, more just a semi-rant and semi-get-up-and-do-something to those that aren't already. And like I said earlier if you do anything even if you donate a dollar a year to a 9-11 truth group I thank you that you do on some level care. Keep it up protesters and revolter's will win this thing eventually.

To close with one of my favorite old, whatcha-ma-callits that I think fits the whole situation perfectly 'You gotta break some eggs to get an omelet'. If you made it this far thank you for reading and putting up with my sometimes overzealous point of views, if you have a different opinion than me please leave a comment I love bouncing ideas around its the only way to make mine and yours better

posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 11:15 AM
Just like the leaders, nobody wants to do it first. but everyone will be more than willing to go second.

[edit on 27-9-2009 by gandhi]

posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 11:27 AM
reply to post by Awolscout

I believe there needs to be a catalyst, something that turns the tide of opinion. At the moment when the average person sees protesters they are against them. Especially when they are shouting 'down with the NWO' etc, etc.

We need something to happen so that more people become sympathetic to the cause. Its all about numbers.

When there are small numbers there is only one way to make a difference, and that's violence. This is no good in the long run because, once again, the minority will be labelled 'terrorists' and will become targets.

But a mass movement is different. It doesn't need violence to intimidate. It is, by its very structure, an intimidating device.

There is nothing more scary to TPTB than 150,000 people all marching in silence. There are no need for words, signs, banners.

Its all self explanatory.

We need to win people over at this point and peaceful protest is the only type of protest that will do this.

Lets let 'them' make the mistake of using violence.

Spread the word.

Viva la revolution!

posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 12:41 AM
reply to post by LiveForever8

My post had literally nothing to do with the NWO, my point was just to ask how can true protest be peaceful? When protest originates from something angry and a deep unsettlement in people, if your able to protest peacefully and calmly then whatever your protesting about can't be all that bad can it?

posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:39 AM
if theres enough people then a peaceful protest would work....if there had of been 100000s of people at the G20 protesting i dont know what the police would have done...maybe started shooting live rounds..who knows...but a peaceful protest can work..all it takes is enough people.

one thing that may happen is that the protest may turn nasty if the police start to shoot at the people..but that then is not the protestors fault.

posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 05:33 AM
reply to post by Awolscout

I can see your point in using violence against those that use violence against you.
But the trouble with protesting today is that these days, TV is monitored and edited and easily done so by those that not only control it but they are the ones that want to control you, let me just say this, History is written by the victors.

Now with the G20, look at the Philly G20 as oppsed to the London G20 in April this year ( I was there for that BTW) at the London G20 there was thousands of protesters , from all different callings with their own agendas, only when the police started to 'crack down on the violence' i.e when the agent provocatuers started to wreck the only building in the area that DIDN'T have boarding up ( a set up in my opinion to justify the police beating up and kettling the crowds) there were more protesters than police, and in the end the police ended up having to look bad to the country by the kettling maneouver.

Now with the Philly G20 the protesters were outnumbered by 4 to one , 300 'demonstraters against the 1200 or so police. There were no real news crews or reports as far as I've seen here in the UK, just a lot of people youtube footage. Now you have the police in Philly looking like they won by beating a few distruptive protesters ( mainly students who didn't even know a protest was going on) now youtube footage is NEVER going to be the same as a news crew viewing on the scene as with youtube you only have one side , but with a news crew you can at least have the chance to show both, interview both sides and let the public make their mind up.
Now with the Philly G20 there were blatent AP's ( those old fat gits sorry police officers according to rumour ) trying to incite violence so the Philly police could justify their outnumbering the genuine protesters.

Violence begets violence, yes we want change , all of us, only TPTB don't want real change , they still want to control us. But we the public can protest peacefully, en masse and then show the world that TPTB are the bad guys , trouble is though is that people WILL be killed to instill fear, people WILL be hurt, but nothing as substantial as trying to change the world for the better is without a little sacrifice on someones part, trouble is? NO ONE wants to step up to the plate and run the risk, we are told to be lazy , to be sheep(le) and told pain and suffering is the reward for attempting to change the world for the better. So we don't try, we're still waiting for a hero to step into the fire in place of us.

That will NEVER happen, there isn't a superhero to take the bullet for us, we must decide if we want to change the world for the better or if we're simply going to wait and let the tide rush over us and drown us all?
You can watch someone drowning and KNOW they are going to drown or you can jump in and TRY to save them, yes you could drown as well but the fact is YOU TRIED, and others SAW you try, they might be spurred to jump in and help, some will simply stand and watch but their the ones that will rejoice same as you as you pull the victim out, but they will feel ashamed at not attemping to help, then you can rub it in their faces.

Changing the world is never without sacrifce on someones part, above all you Americans SHOULD KNOW THAT. Your founding fathers ran the risk of being killed if they failed, but they didn't , now you have ( had ) a country your so proud of, but that is slipping into the darkness simply because your waiting for a new patriot to show you the way.

IMO, I'd say tell your friends, your families, the people on the streets, as many people as you can , ALL of you march to Washington, pull the Whitehouse down and start again, or simply better, march INTO the senate buildings, surround your 'representatives' and demand they get rid of the lobbyists and those who seek to bring down your way of life, otherwise the people will be displeased, and the one thing TPTB do not want is a community with a backbone.

My favourite saying at the moment is " If your not part of the solution , then your part of the problem".......

[edit on 30/9/09 by DataWraith]

posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 05:21 PM
You are absolutely correct, the original poster and most of the people in this thread. It all depends on the situation.

Somethings are silly enough and unimportant enough to where a sign and a banner will do, others require masses of people, but I believe what the OP is saying is that most important things should have real revolution.

The law of peaceful protest is silly, when in our very history books we are taught of revolutions from other countries. Imagine the French (or other) revolutions, would they have gotten anywhere by simply lining up outside the governments buildings and holding signs? No! What was done is what had to be done, they cut off their king's head.

I'm not saying I even believe this needs done today, because this isn't what was in question. What was in question is the form of protest, and I do believe that if something requires it then the people should storm the governments they live under and do whatever it takes for change.

The only reason most people think differently is the Internet, the media, and other ways that we can communicate so rapidly have created a sort of government controlled "hive mind".

We are taught that in other countries, violent revolution has saved entire populations, but in our own you should never raise more than a sign. Although, you can't really blame governments for wanting to stay in power, it is simple self preservation.

But yes, I agree, all protest should not be peaceful.

posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 06:03 PM
reply to post by Awolscout

I have been saying this for years! The old reason for peaceful protest argument gets me for a minute then I remember the peaceful protest against the Iraq war that nobody wanted, im sure you all remember but a distant memory to most people these days.

LiveForever8 150000 silent protesters will not scare a government they will just be quietly smiling at what a peaceful bunch of protesting sheep they have.

I share your dismay. But the time will come. At some point enough will be enough. But it is to late now, any kind of western revolution especially the violent kind would not succeed. Dream on.

posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 06:19 PM
It hardly can be done anymore. Either the protest is done by stupid people with fantasy-like gatherings singing with guitars forgetting about their main cause or it is wild violence destined to become a mass riot. Thing with the first example is that the 1960s' protests were not like that as they are today. They were about the cause and seeking action, where today many protests in imitation of a peaceful protest turn into a new-age cult-like gathering.

On the other side, you have fake anarchists who want to vandalize, extremists who are threatening, and people who have no true sense of reality nor realistic goals in mind except "we are going to push and shove, and you are going to listen or else!" These types of protests have been heightened and tainted with undercover police officers posing as protesters or people who have no leadership skills.

A peaceful protest must come with realistic goals and must be guide through leader(s) in order to accomplish those goals through pacifistic means. But for this work, you need lots and lots and lost of numbers. Gandhi had a vast number of people, but he also wrote articles, spread the word around, and got people to sing to his tune. You watch some of those old videos - those British guys were nasty. Anyway, peace means sacrifice and you must be willing to be beaten, bruised or even killed if you really, really want to go the peaceful way.

Martin Luther King Jr. is another peaceful revolutionary. The march on Washington should never be forgotten. You really need a leader to lead the way. It only takes a single person to change the course of history.

The government has taken power away from protesting because people are not either not smart enough, occupied, or not willing enough to commit themselves to a cause through peace.

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 08:20 AM
I have no link but i think you will find that Ghandis followers did eventually result to violence. And although im not knocking Ghandi he was all for the british establishment until they shunned him. The reason india got its independence back was more to do with the British not being in the position to sustain its rule.

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 08:28 AM
A peaceful protest :

Everything is OK Montage

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 01:41 PM
I took a photo this guy in the west end and i seem to remember him not being to keen on it. The video's very funny all the same, not that they will change anything, just give people a bit of a laugh.

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 01:51 PM
reply to post by Drexl

Only because he wasnt arrested. Whats the difference between that one and the Pittsburgh protest? The pittsburgh one had cops amongst the demonstrators causing trouble with the police. It would most likely have happened in the above video too unless he had been alone.

So yeah... be alone, then you can be peaceful. Otherwise, someone will join the gang and cause problems so you get attacked by the police.

Originally posted by kode
The video's very funny all the same, not that they will change anything, just give people a bit of a laugh.

Its inspiration, not only entertainment. At least to me.

[edit on 1-10-2009 by Copernicus]

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 02:25 PM

Originally posted by Copernicus

Its inspiration, not only entertainment. At least to me.

[edit on 1-10-2009 by Copernicus]

True. Come to think of it, it sounds a bit like he's reciting ATS posts.

new topics

top topics


log in