Comment by immibis
4 days ago
Protest has never stopped a government from doing what it wanted. Not a single time in history.
When it's appeared to work, that has one of two causes: either the government didn't really care very much to begin with, or it was the other extremely violent group that made the government choose to appear to back the protest group in order to give into the violent group's demands while saving face. (See civil rights)
> Protest has never stopped a government from doing what it wanted. Not a single time in history
This is nonsense.
> or it was the other extremely violent group that made the government choose to appear to back the protest group in order to give into the violent group's demands while saving face
Violence isn't needed. Protest is designed to tip the balance of power.
Name some times protests worked, then. It wasn't civil rights, nor was it Stonewall (which was a riot).
Some of the Eastern European anti-Soviet revolutions probably qualify. I suppose it depends on whether the U.S.S.R. "wanted" to crush the protests violently but couldn't. It certainly did conduct violent reprisals in several cases.
Civil rights in the US has been, I agree, sanitized. No, civil rights didn't progress solely because the majority in power was touched that minorities demanded their rights so peacefully and insistently. There was a violent side too, that provided necessary pressure.
> Name some times protests worked
We're three days out from 2025 and Nepal and Madagascar have already been forgotten?
Like, there is criticism of the 3.5% rule [1] for being too narrowly based. But the hot take that protest never works is genuinely one I haven't seen yet.
Are you confusing protest and terrorism?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3.5%25_rule