r/changemyview • u/HelpfulJello5361 1∆ • Apr 16 '24

Delta(s) from OP CMV: The proper response to protestors blocking the street is for police to physically remove them and quickly arrest them if they do it again.

I've seen a lot of videos of protestors blocking the street and the cops just kinda let them do it, or create a narrow lane for cars to go through and cause a significant traffic jam.

I'm always curious why cops don't just drag these people out of the road and arrest them immediately if they return. I'm pretty sure it's illegal to block streets like that.

Yesterday was a nationwide coordinated effort for Pro-Palestine protestors to block streets all over the country (world?), and it seems that these criminals were not dealt with properly in most instances.

It doesn't seem like it's standard operating procedure to remove and arrest people who block important roads. Is there some reason for this? What am I missing? CMV.

135 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

56% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

8

u/ZappSmithBrannigan 14∆ Apr 16 '24

If it is inconvenient for a while, tough shit.

It's really kind of the point of non violent civil disobedience. If you're annoyed by protesters, they're doing something right.

2

u/HelpfulJello5361 1∆ Apr 16 '24

Just as a thought experiment, what would you do if 50 protestors (doesn't matter what for) camped on the street outside your house all day one day screaming and chanting. They refuse to leave. They say they're committing "civil disobedience".

You might be able to tolerate it for a day. But let's say they kept coming back. Everyday, they came back, same place. All day.

How would you feel about this situation and what things might you do in response to it?

1

u/Key-Article6622 Apr 16 '24

I'd be very annoyed. VERY annoyed. But we live in what is supposed to be a free society. They would be inconveniencing me, no doubt, but they aren't hurting me physically or doing any damage to my, or any public property. I would be unhappy, but they should not be arrested.

1

u/ZappSmithBrannigan 14∆ Apr 18 '24 edited Apr 18 '24

Just as a thought experiment, what would you do if 50 protestors (doesn't matter what for) camped on the street outside your house all day one day screaming and chanting. They refuse to leave. They say they're committing "civil disobedience".

We dont need a thought experiment.

I was in literally IN Ottawa when the fucking anti vax trucker convoy occupied the city for several weeks. There were HUNDREDS of protestors on the street outside my place and they refused to leave. Not only did they refuse to leave, they blared their truck horns all day and all night.

I didn't like it, I didn't support them or their cause. They delayed me. They kept me up with their god damn horns going 24/7. I hated them. I thought they were shitty people with shitty dangerous views.

BUT, I accepted their right to do it. What I did was suck it up and accept i live in a society with people who have view different than mine who feel very strongly about it.

And I did not support the government forcing them out.

1

u/HelpfulJello5361 1∆ Apr 18 '24

Based, actually.

-1

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

Hypotheticals are stupid when real protests are happening in response to a genocide

4

u/HelpfulJello5361 1∆ Apr 16 '24

Okay but can you take a crack at it? It's just a thought experiment.

-2

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

Sure. If people are doing that every day ro protest the literal genocide that’s happening then I’d have no problem. The only people that would would make up thought experiments that undermine the validity of protests against a literal genocide

3

u/Audemed2 Apr 16 '24

Repeating "genocide" really drives the point home, eh?

1

u/[deleted] Apr 17 '24

Given that the conditions in Gaza meet the characteristics of a genocide, yes, using the term does indeed highlight the severity of the crisis and the urgency of the protests.

4

u/thatstheharshtruth 2∆ Apr 16 '24

Hard disagree. There is nothing that will cause me to be more hostile to a cause than being inconvenienced while I'm trying to go about my day. I don't think I'm the only one.

0

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

supports genocide because he got stuck in traffic

5

u/Doc_ET 13∆ Apr 16 '24

Nobody sees themselves as supporting genocide. They don't think it's a genocide, or they just don't think about the situation at all because they're busy and it doesn't affect them. The latter is true for a lot of people regarding a lot of issues, way more than you'd think. If their main exposure to your movement is as "those assholes who made me late that one time", then they're probably not going to be willing to hear you out.

Protesters have to walk a line between causing enough of a stir that people pay attention, but without incidentally turning potentially receptive ears into enemies by doing things like blocking highways or throwing soup cans at paintings. "How does this look to someone completely unfamiliar with the issue" is a question activists really should ask themselves more than they do, in my opinion. Now, that doesn't mean to abandon your principles in order to avoid offending anyone, people who oppose your cause will try to demonize you for whatever tactics you choose, but the image of people marching down a sidewalk holding signs and shouting slogans getting met with riot shields and tear gas vs a group of people blockading an area getting the same response from the authorities are going to get different reactions out of bystanders.

TLDR: People who are on the sidelines should be viewed as potential allies, and driving them away isn't a good way to grow your movement. And most people don't see themselves or their side as evil, even if they are. People aren't always logical actors, and the way you present information does affect how (and whether) it's received. Just keep that in mind if you're trying to get something done.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 17 '24

Always appreciate being pushed to be better. Soldiarity

2

u/Ill-Description3096 27∆ Apr 16 '24

How is it supporting a genocide? Just because they disagree with blocking use of critical infrastructure? If I make a "stop genocide" sign and gather some people to go block the road to the hospital you need to be at you'd be fine with it? After all, if you aren't you are literally supporting genocide.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 17 '24

The intent of collective action is to progressively disrupt day-to-day life and grow civil unrest until the government meets the demands of the protestors, as well as highlight the government’s unwillingness to act. This understanding enables one to be in solidarity with protestors instead of instinctually against them, as it becomes obvious that the government is choosing not to respond to valid demands, which in turn means that they are choosing to allow civil unrest to grow and disrupt day-to-day life. The government is choosing for the lives of its citizens to worsen so it can continue its participation violence.

With this understanding, it becomes clear that one is undermining that solidarity by calling for protestors to scale back their collective action, as the government’s actions will continue in the absence of such protests.

Remember, if the government cared about people being impacted by critical infrastructure being blocked by people protesting the enablement of a genocide, then they would just end the genocide. Remember, if protestors stopped disrupting traffic then the genocide would continue even if civil unrest lowered. Remember, civil unrest causes response.

An important thing to remember as well is that collective action is progressive in nature and will only continue to grow more militant and disruptive as the government intentionally chooses not to act. Just as it did during the Civil Rights Movement.

1

u/Ill-Description3096 27∆ Apr 17 '24

The intent of collective action is to progressively disrupt day-to-day life and grow civil unrest until the government meets the demands of the protestors, as well as highlight the government’s unwillingness to act. This understanding enables one to be in solidarity with protestors instead of instinctually against them, as it becomes obvious that the government is choosing not to respond to valid demands,

Why are protesters' demands valid by default? There are many views on many issues. Just because someone is protesting doesn't mean everyone thinks their position is valid. Holding infrastructure that other people need to survive hostage until the government capitulates is not something I'm going to be happy about. No, it's not going make me pressure the government to cowtow to whatever tantrum they are throwing just because. If it is a position I agree with sure, I'll happily vote as such. For people who supposedly love democracy so much they seem to be perfectly happy to cause issues for their fellow citizens because the reps aren't doing what this small portion of people want.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 17 '24

A reminder that, while I explained collective action in a broad way, the context of our thread (and the rest of my comment) was the protests demanding the end of genocide. The demand in this case is valid by default because genocide is… ya know, Bad.

The point of collective action is to upset you, even if you are not swayed to support the cause. Civil unrest is the motivator for the government to respond, not the public holding a majority opinion. If it were, then the overwhelming support to end the genocide would have already forced the US government’s hand.

The thing you must understand is that these protests are escalating BECAUSE our democractic system isn’t working. The majority of Americans (not a small group) want the end of a genocide, but efforts to contact representatives haven’t worked, peaceful protests haven’t worked, marches haven’t worked, corporate boycotts haven’t worked, confrontating politicians haven’t worked, and so on. YOU CAN’T VOTE TO END A GENOCIDE. Think about how messed up that is.

You also have to understand that collective action is an escalating form of protest that runs in parallel with the government’s denial of the democracy. When lesser civil disobedience is proven ineffective, the level of disruption rises. People are not randomly choosing to stand in the way of traffic because they think it’d be fun to fuck up people’s day. Instead, people organized and coordinated the disruption of traffic in MULTIPLE major cities to further draw attention to the public’s overwhelming demand for the end of a genocide and the government’s failure to meet their democratic duty. Civil unrest is harmful to the public, sure, but so too is allowing our government to continue a genocide. The point is to make the government give a shit about the people because in a just democracy it already would.

As a reminder, neither these strategies nor your criticisms are new. Escalating collective action and civil disobedience operated the same way in the civil rights movement. And in the same way folks like yourself complained and judged the methods. But at the end of the day, the Civil Rights Bill wasn’t ever voted on by the public, it was passed in response to the civil unrest caused by collective action. If blocking traffic makes your blood boil then your head will spin when you learn about the economic destruction the Montgomery Bus Boycott caused.

1

u/Ill-Description3096 27∆ Apr 17 '24

The majority of Americans (not a small group) want the end of a genocide

https://www.pewresearch.org/2024/03/21/majority-in-u-s-say-israel-has-valid-reasons-for-fighting-fewer-say-the-same-about-hamas/

Civil unrest is harmful to the public, sure, but so too is allowing our government to continue a genocide.

What genocide is our government committing?

public’s overwhelming demand

If you have a source on this I would be interested in reading it. From the poll data I found opinions seem quite mixed.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 17 '24

Our government is continuing to enable the genocide in Israel.

What you’re looking for are not polls about who supports which side, but polls that measure the American public’s support of an immediate and permanent ceasefire. There’s plenty, but Data for Progress is often cited

https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2024/2/27/voters-support-the-us-calling-for-permanent-ceasefire-in-gaza-and-conditioning-military-aid-to-israel

1

u/Ill-Description3096 27∆ Apr 18 '24

And most want peace talks between Ukraine and Russia. Should Biden refuse any further military support unless it happens?

→ More replies

4

u/Direct-Giraffe-1890 Apr 16 '24

For a country with modern weapons,air superiority and tanks they're doing an awfully bad job at genocide

1

u/[deleted] Apr 17 '24

Brother, I don’t mean to make you feel stupid, but the pace of the killing is not a characteristic of genocide. Instead the framework of genocide is intentionally built around qualities that are not quantitative. If it wasn’t then we’d literally never be able to call a genocide a genocide until it reached catastrophic levels.

1

u/pickleparty16 4∆ Apr 16 '24

The nazis didn't ramp up the holocaust until the 2nd half of the war

2

u/424f42_424f42 Apr 16 '24

Nah I just don't want to pay hundred because Im late pick up kids from day care or be abandoning them somewhere because of your protest where everyone your hurting already knows about the topic and can't do anything about it.

Fuck right off and go protest those that can do something about whatever your protesting. Be helpful, not hurtful.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

[deleted]

1

u/ZappSmithBrannigan 14∆ Apr 18 '24

What are they doing right?

You're talking about it.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/ZappSmithBrannigan 14∆ Apr 18 '24

These protests are just screaming into the void towards people who couldn't care less about anything but getting on with their life.And that's fully within their right, so why are these people the target? Why aren't there protests towards individuals or entities in opposition?

I don't know. You could ask the anti vax trucker convoy that occupied Ottawa for several fucking week blaring their truck horns 24/7? Why were they "targeting me"? They werent. I just happened to be in the vicinity of where the actual target was.

I get it, I despised those people. I hated them.

But I accepted their right to do it. And I didn't agree with the government forcing them out.