Before I read your comment, I thought the protestors were saying the line to the king. So that he would be like politicians today acting like our say matters.
There were a lot of Pro-Palestinian protests last November in my city. One of them blocked a small bridge, and this was a conversation I had 3 times that day:
Some Chud: "This is really dangerous! What if an ambulance needs to get by!"
Me: "They're letting emergency vehicles pass, and police are on the scene to make sure nothing unsafe happens."
S.C.: "Well, they're certainly not winning anyone over with tactics like this!"
Me: "They're not trying to win you over, their stated goal is to force [X] politician to respond."
S.C.: "Well then they should go protest at [X] politicians house!"
Me: "They protested at [X]'s office last week, but it wasn't very disruptive, so you didn't hear about it."
I mean, any protest that isn't disruptive or making people uncomfortable isn't effective. That being said, there were some BLM protesters who chained themselves to some cement filled barrels a few years ago. They completely blocked a highway, causing delays for several ambulances that had to be rerouted. That's just stupid and dangerous. But if your goal is to force politicians to acknowledge the issue and take an official position on it, blocking a street or disrupting a public event is an effective tactic, as long as it's done safely.
Isn't the modern form of this essentially a mob of people telling you the king sucks while they hold you up on a very time sensitive quest to take your wheat to a different town with Holo?
Then the pitchfork wielders wonder why all the people doing trade gets a bad impression of them rathee than the oligarchy?
Never gets old, seeing idiots admit that hundreds or thousands of years can pass but the only way they can get what they want done is violence.
We live in a world where even war isn't profitable anymore, where you can overthrow leaders with a social media post, but you morons still choose dumb ape brain impulse.
Uhhhhhh what? The difference between us and those in power is the fact that those in power are willing to do violence to get what they want. The problem is you have a very limited definition of what violence is. When a train CEO cuts safety SOPs that results in a train derailing and poisoning a whole town, that's a form of passive violence against working people. When politicians pass laws restricting the rights of a specific demographic, that's a form of passive political violence. But the moment working people take the path only available to them, they are called apes and uncivilized? Nah fam, before every popular revolution, the people warned those in charge that equity and inclusion is needed to keep society going, leaders rebuff those plees. So no, stop blaming those with little to nothing for becoming fed up.
Oh really? So the protests of smashing in other people's businesses was necessary for changing the power structure? Did it work? Why not? How many protests have happened at actual seats of power? None? So this is all just bullshit posturing by dipshits that changes nothing except to keep working class people like those protesting on their knees?
I don't give a fuck if you're fed up, learn how your actions influence the world around you or stay inside and pout about it. Your violent revolution being focused into creating nothing but civil unrest and vandalism is short-sighted, hypocritical, and is completely absent of the virtues you claim to have. You are not an enlightened rebel, you're an overactive Karen trying to solve their problems with a tantrum instead of any direct plan. You get mad and break shit. That's your protest. How is that unlike an overgrown toddler?
I work retail, I have the most to gain from an actual shift in power structure but watching morons throw rocks into local businesses to protest a CEO getting a pay raise is the most retarded shit I can imagine besides you defending it.
I would really love an example for a war that didn't happen because it wasn't profitable, or a relevant leader toppled by social media. We live in a world where there aren't any politicians we can vote for to actually lead to any change, and wars are closer to many of us than they have been in a long time, both physically and through the visibility of social media and globalisation. If there's a peaceful way to stop this that you're aware of, please do enlighten us
I would really love an example for a war that didn’t happen because it wasn’t profitable
Holy shit. You think we made money in Vietnam? Made money in the Korean war? Think there's enough oil in the Middle East to justify a 20 year occupation? I bet the shoes of the Jewish people really gave us kickbacks in World War II.
War is almost never profitable and the only people who think it is are trying to drum up any excuse as to be violent little rebels. Can war lead to change? Absolutely. The dickless protests of ruining local shops are nothing more than annoying to the people who aren't affected by it and devastating to the people who are. Stop trying to be fucking virtuous rebels and stand with groups and organizations that are pushing for change without a fucking brick in their hand. Unreal I have to even explain this.
We live in a world where there aren’t any politicians we can vote for to actually lead to any change
What a double dose of retardation that is. I've heard nothing but "Trump is going to destroy democracy if he gets elected!" but now I have you saying "Nah they're bullshitting, it doesn't matter, never will." None of the politicians running are running on issues you want them to, that's your problem. Maybe instead of dressing in all black and vandalizing property you get with that same group and push someone into office. Imagine how effective that could be on jumpstarting a progressive candidate.
The only violence I'm okay with is the kind that makes less billionaires. Go Johnny Silverhand Trump Tower then get back to me.