New research says framing protests as fights for civil rights 'backfires.' So what might work?
New research says framing protests as fights for civil rights 'backfires.' So what might work? - Berkeley News
Well, yeah. Be general. If I want to sell candy I don't market it to 11-year-old claustrophobic basketball players, I market it to kids.
Every specificity that is added to the movement's message scares away potential supporters that can no longer identify. This is global though. Every fringe group wants to add their message to the masthead of every protest. The left has had this problem forever.
You might be interested in !aspen_anti_billionaire_society@midwest.social
I'm not super familiar with it, but the sole mod has been quite outspoken about trying to make it a "big tent" and not allow it to be pulled by every extreme away from the singular goal of taxing the 0.01%, not even going after the 1%.
Thanks! I read a few of their comments, I agree in principle, but saying Occupy Wallstreet failed because antagonizing the 1% isn't broad enough is a wild take :D
Speaking for everyone around me I hear talk...
Frame it as "fuck billionaires".
People don't like movements with no direction.
The existing political parties phrase valid resistance as resistance that does not meaningfully impact or change anything.
People are sick of going and standing around and then going back to work, seeing that nothing has changed.
I've gone to every protest in my city this entire year and it hasn't accomplished anything.
I think people support replacing our administrative branch for a lot of reasons, but nobody in a position of power is directing people to take action that makes meaningful change happen.
The problem is that people are not exercising their political power to the fullest extent.
Going to a demonstration where people are just standing around and voice their concerns doesn't actually exert any legitimate political power. It is toothless. Failure to listen to demands doesn't hold any consequences for them or threaten their control. They know we will all still have to go home and participate in the system that they control and gives them their power over us.
Protests of the past worked because the people stopped listening to their authority and threatened to take back control for themselves. That took monumental efforts of organizing to allow people to exert their own political power over their labor in order to put a wrench into the gears of the system.
The point of a protest is for, the reason it worked in the past was due to, people taking a stand to say "change this system to better benefit us or we are going to change it without you"
It's time to start changing.
You’re allowed to say Cunt on the Internet
But not on TV.
So if your sign is going to make the news, you need the asterisk.
A fight against monarchy seemed to work well.
How so?
The "No Kings" protests we just had, brought out massive numbers all over the country.
This country is so fucking stupid and brainwashed.
The establishment has spent the last century doing everything in its power to control the narrative around the Civil Rights Movement (and, even though not mentioned, the Labor Movement before it) into this idealized "peaceful revolution", making sure to erase any mentions of the effective methods which were able to buckle the system and force it to listen to demands from our education.
This article explains exactly why and proves that they were effective in their efforts. Now, when we need to do the same thing as our forefathers, no one knows what we need to do, and insist on copying half measures without understanding the full picture of why those methods worked in the first place. People have this idealized vision of that time period; a vision that was tailor made to ensure compliance and that they be wary of those who actually know the truth and advocate for effective methods of protest or alternatives.
what might work?
Actual fights. The first time we fought the Nazis, we didn't beat them by protesting; we beat them with bombs and bullets.
Nonviolent options only work under the threat of a violent plan-B.
...and plan-A has been completely ignored for decades.
Is this just your conjecture, or do you base this on something? Because there is research that supports nonviolent protest movements being the more effective path.
Can you link that research?
It's based on observing current events through the lens of the education I've received on history. Protests by themselves today require a ridiculous scale to accomplish peanuts; contrast that to MLK Jr's protests during the civil rights movement. His got shit done. Why? Because the Black Panthers were standing by with rifles. Today's protests are all bark from a toothless mouth, so we're allowed to yip away until it's out of our system, then the status quo just keeps trucking along. There's no modern iteration of the Black Panthers to back up all of our nonviolent protests.
The 50501 movement / ICE protests are starting to show promise, but again, scale - we've seen nationwide protests regularly for months, and so far all they've accomplished is being an inconvenience for ICE... in exchange for making themselves a target to multiple facets of the military.
We need more than noise.
Please share the research, I'm genuinely interested.
Simple, honest, fair reporting.
Rights -> Job -> Head
Head or head?
It must be framed as keeping children and parents together
Six to nine years ago, it was easy to make the case that virtually everything had improved since the 1960s and that evoking that era made modern issues look relatively minor in comparison. But now we have federal agents rounding people up en masse and shipping them off to foreign prisons without a hearing—there are at least some dimensions of the current situation where a comparison with the 1960s accentuates how serious things have become.
Yeah, that one paragraph made this entire story worthless. We have gestapo kidnapping people and warfighters on the street facing down Americans. It's no longer hyperbole to compare the times.