One nazi less?

[Elok]

Well, we already tried violent protests and riots and I don't think they accomplished a whole lot. What's exciting about this to me is not that I think the protests themselves will affect Trump--I think he'll ignore them--but that:

1. They represent a LARGE turnout. Seven million people is pretty big even for the US. Just looked it up, and only sixteen of the fifty states even have more than seven million people. Only ten have more than ten million. Two Utahs--except Utah's population includes children and these were mostly grown adults--just got together to express hostility to Trump's agenda. He replied by calling them antifa or something and sharing an AI diarrhea-dumping video, because he is just all class.
2. They are not violent, which makes them harder to discredit as unAmerican antifa, opportunistic looters, paid Soros professionals, etc.
3. While apparently led by left-wingers, they are not explicitly tied to a Left-wing message. Previous anti-Trump marches all felt like they were by and about the Democrats, or sometimes about Democratic issues. Protests for abortion rights can go **** themselves for all I care. I've seen signs from a Blue perspective at these marches, but a lot of them were just generic "we're a democracy, mmmkay" stuff.

Put it all together and it feels like, potentially, the core of an actually functional resistance to the MAGA agenda that can speak for America as a whole, instead of the partisan-hack embarrassment of the last ten years. It could still collapse but it's not nothing.

[Dauphin]

I'm not seeing it. But I'll see how it plays out and will stand corrected.

[The Mad Monk]

Gandhi?

[Aeson]

I'm yet to see a protest that influenced a party in power. Poll Tax protests resulted in Thatcher being kicked from office, but they were accompanied by riots and I think that played a larger part.

EU referenda marches, anti-Iraq war marches, Gaza/Palestine marches, fox-hunting marches. All drew huge crowds. Diddly-squat outcome.

Not saying don't march, but unless it gets violent, I don't think much will change. I'm probably not being fair to peaceful movements, but are there good examples of where they actually work when there is no sizeable violent protest running alongside it?

I am NOT advocating violence. Just making an observation.

US protests that were mostly nonviolent and lead to significant changes:

Universal Suffrage
Civil Rights
Vietnam Protests
Apartheid

In the Philippines People Power ousted Marcos.

India has been mentioned.

Liberian Sex Strike

[Aeson]

Boycotts of specific businesses have in many many cases forced businesses to make changes.

A general strike of 10% of the workforce and/or general boycott by 10% of consumers would almost surely force significant concessions.

[Aeson]

Prediction: A US sex strike would topple any regime in days.

[Lorizael]

I'm sure you've all heard about the new Pentagon press policy that would have turned media outlets into administration mouthpieces, and how everyone including Fox News flipped them the bird? Only OANN agreed, and I understand they were an admin mouthpiece already. Not sure I've even run into their coverage but if they lick more boots than Fox I'm sure it's a doozy.

That's gotta sting for poor former Fox guy Petey Hegs. But it's good to see the press actually showing a bit of backbone and solidarity.

[Elok]

I suspect it was the "and you agree not to publish leaks" thing that sunk it in Fox's case. They're a business first and foremost, leaks tend to be extremely hot news, and they stood to gain basically nothing by foregoing that opportunity purely to grovel while everybody else in the industry said no. I guess Trump could turn on them in retaliation, but he needs them more than vice versa, maybe?

[Dauphin]

Gandhi?

There were violent uprisings at the same time.

U.K. left India after the war. It’s not clear cut to me that Gandhi made a difference on the ruling class attitudes that was as sizeable as the general end of colonial empires new world order that was resulting from the war.

Happy to be told how I am wrong. I am not educated on the ins and outs of the independence movement.

[Aeson]

Unity always carries "the implication" per It's Always Sunny. Ghandi's movement showed unity and self reliance. Most of the violence was in direct response to violence from the British. It was also a very small percentage of the population involved.

After WWII India had a large, battle hardened military that mutinied (largely peaceful protest).

There were roughly 20,000 Indians per British person in India at the time. 1 million plus in the Indian armed forces. All Indians had to do was show the British the door at that point. That the Indians didn't just murder all the remaining British when they tried to reneg on the promise of independence showed quite a bit of restraint.

[Dauphin]

So I guess the US has sectarian violence and partition to look forward if the no kings takes off.

[yes, tongue in cheek]

[N35t0r]

So I guess the US has sectarian violence and partition to look forward if the no kings takes off.

[yes, tongue in cheek]

Also if it doesn't.

[Geronimo]

It was refreshing to see so many people peacefully and non-disruptively gather. They didn't even leave a big mess. It reminded me of the "tea party" demonstrations. Ultimately, however I think that parallel may indicate that these demonstrations, though huge and impressive may be useless for predicting where things are headed politically.

[Dauphin]

I attended the EU referendum marches. They had no impact. I left the country as a direct consequence. Mainline politicians in the UK are now discussing revoking permanent residence status for migrants who followed all the rules to get their status.

Actual quotes

I went to Handsworth in Birmingham the other day to do a video on litter and it was absolutely appalling.

“It’s as close as I’ve come to a slum in this country. But the other thing I noticed there was that it was one of the worst integrated places I’ve ever been to. In fact, in the hour and a half I was filming news there I didn’t see another white face

Robert Jenrick - Minister for Immigration under the last Conservative government

There are also a large number of people in this country who came here legally, but in effect shouldn’t have been able to do so. It’s not the fault of the individuals who came here, they just shouldn’t have been able to do so.

“They will also need to go home. What that will leave is a mostly but not entirely culturally coherent group of people,”

Katie Lam - a Conservative Home Office minister

Reform under Farage are leading the polls. He had this banter on the radio with a presenter:

If I said to you that swans were being eaten in Royal Parks in this country, that carp were being taken out of ponds and eaten in this country, by people who come from cultures that have a different… would you agree it was happening here?”

[Presenter asks if he has proof this is happening?]

“Neither of us can prove or disprove this”

[Present asks who is allegedly doing this]

“People who come from countries it’s quite acceptable”.

[Presenter references online claims regarding Eastern Europeans and Romanian, does he mean them]

“So I believe.”

Things are worse than when I left.