Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 29, 2024, 12:54:35 AM

Login with username, password and session length

This anti-Trump's visit protest

Started by garbed_attic, June 25, 2018, 07:39:36 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

garbed_attic

Anyone else going?

My mum informs me that it's pointless... but I think most of the time protest is gestural - a show of support (or the inverse!) rather than something which directly impacts upon policy.

EDIT: Mind you, it's not just my mum who's against it, these are the top-voted comments on Owen Jones' Guardian article about it (though I'm sure some of the voters just really dislike Owen Jones):

QuoteThe more you try to criminalise or "demonise" those that don't agree with the latest iteration of identity politics that you only came up with five minutes ago, the more you expand your definition of "bigotry".

Soon the charge loses all meaning as more and more people look at you in wonder and amazement that you can take yourself so seriously.

QuoteTrumps comes not only as the US President an office we should respect , and as a representative of our friends in the USA, but also as our Guest.
Please show him British manners .

I guess people have super restricted definitions of bigotry if they don't think Trump is a bigot... or else, they just agree with his views and actions, but don't want to openly commit themselves to the fact?

Funcrusher

Did anyone protest against Dubbya coming over here - based on the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan he's had a worse effect on humanity than Trump has by far. And what is the point in protesting against Trump? He won the election, focus on beating him next time.

garbed_attic

Quote from: Funcrusher on June 25, 2018, 07:51:02 PM
Did anyone protest against Dubbya coming over here - based on the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan he's had a worse effect on humanity than Trump has by far. And what is the point in protesting against Trump? He won the election, focus on beating him next time.

I'll continue paying my fees and volunteering for Labour... but there's not much I can do to beat Trump as a British citizen or influence the American election.

Also, there were a lot of protests against the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. I don't think Bush's personal persona (rather than personality) was quite as inextricable from his administration...

jobotic

Yes I'm going.

I'm going to stand in the middle screaming "hypocrites where were you when all the other bad men came here"

Funcrusher

Quote from: gout_pony on June 25, 2018, 08:04:57 PM

Also, there were a lot of protests against the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. I don't think Bush's personal persona (rather than personality) was quite as inextricable from his administration...

I'd say Bush was much more inextricable from his administration - he just did what he was told. Trump is a narcissistic loon who could be doing literally anything from one day to the next. The Republican machinery cranks on regardless of him, except when he makes some crazy demand for whatever reason.

Funcrusher

Quote from: jobotic on June 25, 2018, 08:24:50 PM
Yes I'm going.

I'm going to stand in the middle screaming "hypocrites where were you when all the other bad men came here"

What are you protesting against specifically?


Funcrusher

Quote from: kekse on June 25, 2018, 08:49:08 PM
there was a pretty big protest against the Iraq war iirc

There was, I was there. It wasn't a protest against Bush II being elected.

Zetetic

There were protests when he come over on his visit, but there were far less impressive of course.

I suppose you could see it as a good thing, in itself, to have people being more engaged with mass movements and more open to the power of resistance, disobedience and protest again - after the failure of the Iraq War protest, and the subsequent sense of powerlessness. If you wanted to.

(Edit: If you want, noting that the StW lot insist that the Iraq War protest did help prevent British cack-handed and misdirected intervention in Syria and so on. I'm not sure I'm convinced.)

Funcrusher

Quote from: Zetetic on June 25, 2018, 08:59:36 PM
There were protests when he come over on his visit, but there were far less impressive of course.

I suppose you could see it as a good thing, in itself, to have people being more engaged with mass movements and more open to the power of resistance, disobedience and protest again - after the failure of the Iraq War protest, and the subsequent sense of powerlessness. If you wanted to.

(Edit: If you want, noting that the StW lot insist that the Iraq War protest did help prevent British cack-handed and misdirected intervention in Syria and so on. I'm not sure I'm convinced.)

Protests against something specific are fine. Occupy for example, or Black Lives Matter (although neither were without their problems). 'Donald Trump is a nasty man' doesn't seem all that useful as a protest, and will probably just harden existing divisions. Or maybe I just love Trump, and that's why I don't want to.

Zetetic

Quote from: Funcrusher on June 25, 2018, 09:06:45 PM
'Donald Trump is a nasty man' doesn't seem all that useful as a protest, and will probably just harden existing divisions.
Which has its place, of course.

I've no interest in doing this either, mind you.

Zetetic

In fact there's probably something to be said against any protest that can 1) be easily ignored (as really almost all protests can if the target isn't stupid) and 2) aims to achieve something in particular - since the outcome there seems inevitable.

(Edit: Which isn't to knock where 1 doesn't hold, since it gives protestors an opportunity to demonstrate moral superiority to the wider public in the face of provocation. Non-violent protest in the CRM and all that.)


Protests as a costly-signalling exercise to promote group cohesion and harden one's own identity - which perhaps gout_pony gestures towards in his post - might make more logical sense.

Old Nehamkin

Quote from: Funcrusher on June 25, 2018, 09:06:45 PM
Protests against something specific are fine. Occupy for example, or Black Lives Matter (although neither were without their problems). 'Donald Trump is a nasty man' doesn't seem all that useful as a protest, and will probably just harden existing divisions. Or maybe I just love Trump, and that's why I don't want to.

What if it's less 'Donald Trump is a nasty man' and more 'Donald Trump uses his platform to appease white supremacists and promote ethno nationalism?' Because I think the latter is very much worth speaking out about tbh.

Danger Man

Quote from: gout_pony on June 25, 2018, 07:39:36 PM
Anyone else going?

I'll be at the back holding the "Thank you for not being Obama" sign

pigamus

I'll be behind him holding a "Travelled down the road and back again" sign

Funcrusher

Quote from: Zetetic on June 25, 2018, 09:13:42 PM
In fact there's probably something to be said against any protest that can 1) be easily ignored (as really almost all protests can if the target isn't stupid) and 2) aims to achieve something in particular - since the outcome there seems inevitable.

(Edit: Which isn't to knock where 1 doesn't hold, since it gives protestors an opportunity to demonstrate moral superiority to the wider public in the face of provocation. Non-violent protest in the CRM and all that.)


It's fine to protest and be ignored if your protest is worthwhile. Demonstrating moral superiority is self indulgent and pointless surely? Customer Relationship Management?


Quote from: Zetetic on June 25, 2018, 09:13:42 PM

Protests as a costly-signalling exercise to promote group cohesion and harden one's own identity - which perhaps gout_pony gestures towards in his post - might make more logical sense.

Cohering and hardening the identity is useful for the group, but are the group useful to anyone else?

Zetetic

Quote from: Funcrusher on June 25, 2018, 09:28:38 PM
It's fine to protest and be ignored if your protest is worthwhile.
It's not very 'useful' though - see the Iraq War. You don't achieve what you want, and feel helpless afterwards.

(Edit: I suppose it's useful for the status quo, insofar as it sucks up energy and replaces it with apathy.)

QuoteDemonstrating moral superiority is self indulgent and pointless surely?
No, it's exceptionally useful if you're a minority (or otherwise disempowered group) trying to convince the public-at-large both that you're not threatening and that your cause is moral.

QuoteCustomer Relationship Management?
Civil Rights Movement. There are other examples that (often alongside violent resistance, mind you) used non-violent protest in the face of aggression in this way, if you'd prefer.

QuoteCohering and hardening the identity is useful for the group, but are the group useful to anyone else?
AAAAAAHHH

Sebastian Cobb

I'm for it if all it does is cause the people that enable his visit some difficulty.

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: Zetetic on June 25, 2018, 08:59:36 PM
There were protests when he come over on his visit, but there were far less impressive of course.

Yeah, I thought there was. Here we go: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7455206.stm

Also

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/tatchell-charged-for-arrest-of-mugabe-1126636.html

and

Peter Tatchell attempts citizens arrest on Indonesian President SBY.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jevJbMQKBKE

You've not really thought this one through, Funcrusher.

Funcrusher

Quote from: Old Nehamkin on June 25, 2018, 09:20:30 PM
What if it's less 'Donald Trump is a nasty man' and more 'Donald Trump uses his platform to appease white supremacists and promote ethno nationalism?' Because I think the latter is very much worth speaking out about tbh.

Can anyone really say that Trump has any kind of coherent ideology that one can oppose? He's an unstable narcissist who is in office partly because his opponents ran a flawed candidate, partly because his complete lack of substance allowed him to say whatever any audience wanted to hear when campaigning and partly because standards of living for average Americans are tanking, Democrats have failed to address this and Trump tapped in to this dissatisfaction. Waving a placard changes none of this.

Funcrusher

Quote from: Johnny Yesno on June 25, 2018, 09:38:44 PM


You've not really thought this one through, Funcrusher.

Au contraire, it is you have not thought this through.

Sebastian Cobb

Quote from: Funcrusher on June 25, 2018, 09:39:01 PM
Can anyone really say that Trump has any kind of coherent ideology that one can oppose? He's an unstable narcissist who is in office partly because his opponents ran a flawed candidate, partly because his complete lack of substance allowed him to say whatever any audience wanted to hear when campaigning and partly because standards of living for average Americans are tanking, Democrats have failed to address this and Trump tapped in to this dissatisfaction. Waving a placard changes none of this.

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/2018/06/warning-signs-donald-trump-nazi

Funcrusher

Quote from: Zetetic on June 25, 2018, 09:33:59 PM
It's not very 'useful' though - see the Iraq War. You don't achieve what you want, and feel helpless afterwards.

(Edit: I suppose it's useful for the status quo, insofar as it sucks up energy and replaces it with apathy.)


Bear in mind that when the protest took place the invasion of Iraq hadn't actually happened.

Quote from: Zetetic on June 25, 2018, 09:33:59 PM

No, it's exceptionally useful if you're a minority (or otherwise disempowered group) trying to convince the public-at-large both that you're not threatening and that your cause is moral.


I disagree that convincing the public is a likely outcome. And just reinforcing one's own moral righteousness is too often an end in itself.

Funcrusher

Quote from: Zetetic on June 25, 2018, 09:33:59 PM

Civil Rights Movement. There are other examples that (often alongside violent resistance, mind you) used non-violent protest in the face of aggression in this way, if you'd prefer.


Yes, I understand non-violent resistance. But is there a clear idea of what is being resisted - which there was in the civil rights movement, which did amass public support because their cause was valid and well defined.

Quote from: Zetetic on June 25, 2018, 09:33:59 PM

AAAAAAHHH

Yeah, i'm just a character or something. I'm disagreeing with you because I think you're wrong. That's it, really.

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: Funcrusher on June 25, 2018, 09:51:53 PM
And just reinforcing one's own moral righteousness is too often an end in itself.

It's the same with tedious floating-above-it-all whybotherism. RRR.

Zetetic

#25
Quote from: Funcrusher on June 25, 2018, 09:58:29 PM
Yes, I understand non-violent resistance. But is there a clear idea of what is being resisted - which there was in the civil rights movement, which did amass public support because their cause was valid and well defined.
Those things are important for convincing other people but they're not enough. (Edit: And this is something you can get at empirically, to an extent.)

Protesting in the face of aggression, however, serves to shift others opinions and - importantly for many such movements - demonstrates that you're trustworthy.

Edit: I'm not terribly happy this is the case, to be clear, but I think that (broadly) democratic governments have become much more accomplished at dealing with minority viewpoints they dislike - however valid from an ethical or even legal perspective - simply by not giving them the oxygen of a violent response. It's much better for them to ignore people.

Quote
Yeah, i'm just a character or something. I'm disagreeing with you because I think you're wrong. That's it, really.
I don't know what constructive response you might imagine was possible to that. "No, gout_pony should rot in hell, the useless cunt."?

Zetetic

Quote from: Funcrusher on June 25, 2018, 09:51:53 PM
Bear in mind that when the protest took place the invasion of Iraq hadn't actually happened.
And then it did. Is this meant to convince me of the efficacy of the protest?

manticore

Quote from: Zetetic on June 25, 2018, 09:33:59 PM
It's not very 'useful' though - see the Iraq War. You don't achieve what you want, and feel helpless afterwards.

We didn't know that for sure though, did we? I thought on balance it was worth a go, for all the problems of protest as media Spectacle done for the sake of its own publicity. There was an outside chance it could have tilted the balance against Blair, I thought.

Zetetic

Quote from: manticore on June 25, 2018, 10:05:48 PM
We didn't know that for sure though, did we?
Not until afterwards, no, and then you could be fairly sure when the invasion of Iraq happened, which promoted - I suggest - a feeling of powerlessness and engendered a belief in the pointlessness of mass action.

I'm suggesting that things that help people overcome that are, all else being equal, a good thing.

Funcrusher

Quote from: Zetetic on June 25, 2018, 10:03:20 PM
And then it did. Is this meant to convince me of the efficacy of the protest?

So you're saying it was pointless to try?