It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

How does protest=change?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2012 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Maybe I'm missing something here. Maybe someone can help me understand how protests= true change and freedom and resignation of corruption...etc.

I suppose the protests in Egypt were successful and I see that history has shown them to facilitate change, but I'm still confused as to how banging some pots and pans together every night (for example) is going to be enough to get it done. The crooks takin' us for this long ride are sitting right now in their cushy offices giggling at how easy it is to ignore Our cries. Do these protests touch them uncomfortably at all? They seem wise to Our shenanigans and have figured out how to counter Our current game plan.

I don't know...maybe the wrong people are protesting


Imagine that corrupt-official-of-the-day, sitting in his patent, leather, office chair, wanted some coffee only to find that his office assistant was off exercising their freedom of speech. Somewhat vexed he decides to go on this coffee run himself only to find that his personal driver is also MIA. Questioning his need for coffee he trudges down to the local coffee shop to find it bursting to the seam with the 'common folk' on their way to rally, but none of them working and none of them willing to show him how to work the espresso machine. To his dismay he notices his maid among the throng and realizes he won't find a freshly made pot of coffee at home either. Not only that, but the local grocery store is also (read sign) "OUT TO GET OUR FREEDOM BACK!" and The People are supportive of this temporary inconvenience because They not only understand the importance and urgency, but they are in fact marching along right beside them. So now this guy is tired, upset and experiencing caffeine withdrawals. Sure, it isn't much in the larger scheme of things, but the people nearest him have managed to affect him much more in the last couple of hours than 50 days of protests from people who are already willing or available to sacrifice their comforts (like a paycheck or a full pantry) for the rest of Us.

But lets get back to reality--that assistant, driver, maid, coffee barista, and grocery clerk do not feel they can literally afford to act as is needed to save this world and make it a living hell for those who have been making it hell for Us. Do not take me for bashing those already out there, but I'm sorry--we need more than students, housewives, and the unemployed to put themselves on the line. They are doing a good job of banding together, but TPTB see right through them to those that will continue to bow for the sake of their jobs, their families and their very livelihood.

God I hope We are not too late! Believe me, I would looove to be proven wrong. I want Us ALL to have our freedom. I want Us all to not merely survive, but to thrive. I would also love to have a more meaningful personal action in this than a dumb little post on a conspiracy site
I'm right there with most everyone else--just moved to a new city and am on the job hunt to put food on my table. I get it, an idea is pretty much a mute point without sacrifice.

Its just...THEY know all this. So what is a protest really going to do?
edit on 27-5-2012 by awakendhybrid because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 27 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Protest in and of itself, does not bring about change, at all.

People making the decision that they need to begin doing things in a different way, is what brings about change. Occupy and related movements, are not primarily useful as protest movements. Their value comes from their ability to bring people together, exchange information, and get more genuinely useful things (such as stopping house foreclosures) accomplished.

To the extent that protest is able to bring about change, it does so by bringing the things that need to change, to people's attention, and letting them know that something is wrong.

Using sit ins, as one example, as a means of fighting house foreclosures, works because it makes the banks and other institutions involved, look bad. It generates negative publicity for them, so that people won't want to do business with them. That causes them to lose money, and money is the only thing they care about...so they will cease and desist on that basis.

Occupy only really do things that they are comfortable with, however; despite their claims to the contrary. Despite the fact that they can be jailed and/or bashed by the police, protest is comfortable. It's predictable, it's routine, and you don't have to think about what you're doing very much. The vast majority of human beings are extremely unintelligent, and have virtually no capacity for individual autonomy or initiative. They're sheep, so they need things which they can do as a herd. Protest is such a thing.

If they were really willing to go outside of their comfort zone, they would boycott the mobile technology they use. They won't do that, because that is too inconvenient for them. They likewise won't limit themselves to drinking water rather than soft drinks, in order to prevent said soft drink corporations from obtaining their money. They won't stop going to Starbuck's, or McDonald's.

It needs to be said over and over again, that the only thing that the corporate world cares about is money. The only way we can stop them doing what they do, is to stop giving them money, or otherwise work towards making sure that they don't get it. Most people don't want to do that, however, because as mentioned, it would mean going without the goods and services that those corporations provide.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   
The best form of protest comes at the ballot box.

That is why the TEA Party was so effective.

Get a bunch of people bent of social disruption gathered up in one place, and politicians could care less.

Get a bunch of actual voters gathering, politicians start listening.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4
The best form of protest comes at the ballot box.


How many more times are you going to need it to be proven to you, that your political system is no longer functional, before you will finally accept it?

This is like the old Chinese story about a fisherman who dropped his net into the water next to his boat, and then spent an hour or so frantically looking for the net in the bottom of his boat, because he couldn't swim.

In other words, you will still continue to try and make use of the broken ruins of the Republic, while the rotating dictators and their corporate friends laugh at you, rather than trying to do anything genuinely useful; purely because you are too afraid to do anything else.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by awakendhybrid
I suppose the protests in Egypt were successful and I see that history has shown them to facilitate change, but I'm still confused as to how banging some pots and pans together every night (for example) is going to be enough to get it done.


Change is a process, not a state, and protesting happens to be one of the steps in the process.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   
I actually suggest John Adams' letter to Hezekiah Niles [February 13, 1818] to see how change works.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 




If they were really willing to go outside of their comfort zone, they would boycott the mobile technology they use. They won't do that, because that is too inconvenient for them. They likewise won't limit themselves to drinking water rather than soft drinks, in order to prevent said soft drink corporations from obtaining their money. They won't stop going to Starbuck's, or McDonald's.


No they won't boycott mobile technology...that could quite literally be suicide. As far as the rest do you have some kind of proof that we drink soft drinks or frequent Starbucks (could be true, people are addicted to coffee) or eat at McDonalds? Why are you so silly sometimes?



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 01:01 PM
link   
I have no faith in the vote.

Obama promised us change. To me, that meant a change in Bush's policies.

Instead he continued Bush's policies. We still have senseless wars and our civil rights are being infringed upon more and more and the corporations are getting more and more powerful

I don't see any change.

Therefore, the vote failed.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Protests help people see there are numbers behind the dissent, that it's not just them, that there are lots of other people who feel the same (or similar) way and if you can get together, you can do something about it. Protest is the first step of change; it's the rallying cry that TPTB don't want going out anymore. If you can't silence it, you discredit it.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by petrus4
 



No they won't boycott mobile technology...that could quite literally be suicide.


If a sufficient number joined them, boycotting the mobile phone would ultimately be far less suicidal than not doing so.

As I said in the previous post; money is the lifeblood of corporations, Kali. It is what they need to survive, and it is literally the only thing that their operators care about. Successful boycotts, therefore, are the only real means available, of getting to the root of the problem.

We ultimately do not have any means of killing the beast, other than by starving it.
edit on 27-5-2012 by petrus4 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


I understand the power of boycott, to say that isn't part of the conversation isn't accurate. Citizen journalism, most especially through live streaming which can't be edited, is practically the lifeblood of the movement.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


Exactly, because there aren't sufficient numbers to boycott anything until there's a huge, majority movement that's cohesive in some way. Getting the word out and showing the real numbers and action in the streets is the first and vital step to those numbers coming out to make real change in the future.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   


It needs to be said over and over again, that the only thing that the corporate world cares about is money. The only way we can stop them doing what they do, is to stop giving them money, or otherwise work towards making sure that they don't get it. Most people don't want to do that, however, because as mentioned, it would mean going without the goods and services that those corporations provide.
reply to post by petrus4
 


Which of course is exactly what would need to happen on a massive scale. That is what I'm talking about--and I hate that I don't believe we will be willing to sacrifice our conveniences for such a movement.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   


This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.





They may teach mankind that revolutions are no trifles; that they ought never to be undertaken rashly; nor without deliberate consideration and sober reflection; nor without a solid, immutable, eternal foundation of justice and humanity; nor without a people possessed of intelligence, fortitude, and integrity sufficient to carry them with steadiness, patience, and perseverance, through all the vicissitudes of fortune, the fiery trials and melancholy disasters they may have to encounter.


I knew that at the heart of our inactivity is a base of fear, but it sort of concretized in my head now. So, maybe ONE person sheds their fear...what then? Protesting facilitates more and more people coming together, realizing they are not alone and shedding their fear all together.

TPTB could care less about the physical manifestation of a protest--they can stare at us from their office window all day unharmed. Drop that fear en-mass though and they'll start to have a growing problem.

My concern seems to stem from the actions BETWEEN a protest of many and change--that precarious bridge where more than just a few people have to have the courage to DO something (like a boycott). Right now we as a people are protesting on that cliff waiting to see who has the faith to step onto the bridge KNOWING others will follow behind them. The sheep mentality isn't COMPLETELY absurd



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by awakendhybrid
 


The protests in Egypt have brought change. But not the type of Change many of those young liberal protesters were looking for. The new Egyptian government will be made up of Islamists who want to have Islamic law. Pretty much the opposite of what the protesters wanted. Remember the Muslim Brotherhood were no where to be seen during the protests and now they hold the reigns of power.

Protest can bring attention to an issue and in some cases change. Think of the Suffragettes and the civil rights movement. These protests brought significant change. They were quite clear cut issues with clear aims, unlike protests like OWS, where no one is quite sure what they want and what success to them would be.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join