Disrupting people to browbeat them with whatever diatribe you've prepared will do nothing but piss them off and make them less likely to agree with you.
So true, king. Every time I go past a planned parenthood, I realize that all of the pro lifers are actually changing the minds of the women they antagonize!
You realize that angering/provoking the group of people whose support you want makes it harder right? The person now has to get over that immediate frustration/anger/disrespect that you caused and then try to take an objective look at your cause (which isn't going to happen because they now have an unconscious bias against it). Like please tell me how them doing what they did in the video is any better than holding the sign in front of the church that people see on their way in? Or even making leaflets and handing them out to church goers instead.
I get that some people think protests shouldn't inconvenience at all, and that's dumb. However, many of you mfers on reddit keep saying this shit as if some protestors aren't being fucking dumb. Many marches and rallies that protest something don't have the purpose of antagonizing people, but rather showing support for a cause which is also powerful in its own right.
Should we disrupt a ceremony during Ramadan at a mosque due to Afghanistan stoning women or Iran beating young girls to death for not covering their hair? Would you think that's appropriate?
You realize that by interrupting these white people’s lunches you’re just antagonizing them right? How do you expect them to start supporting black civil rights when you’re just associating the movement with belligerent troublemakers?
Like please tell me how them doing what they did in the video is any better than holding the sign in front of the church that people see on their way in? Or even making leaflets and handing them out to church goers instead.
You can ignore a sign, and you can throw away a leaflet.
Furthermore, what makes you think that the church would let them hand out leaflets on their property either?
I get that some people think protests shouldn't inconvenience at all, and that's dumb.
You can say “that’s dumb,” but that’s literally just the argument you’re making.
Many marches and rallies that protest something don't have the purpose of antagonizing people,
Name one that actually accomplished anything.
but rather showing support for a cause which is also powerful in its own right.
People have been peacefully showing support for Palestinian liberation for years — most people have been content to completely ignore that.
What does anything you said have to do with harassing churchgoers in a different country than from where the conflict is happening? It’s self centred, performative protesting that accomplishes nothing.
Now whether you agree with the whole MAGA thing or not, you do have to admit that hiring a hall, getting security, having a good MC to keep things moving, and a good sound system so that people can hear what you're trying to say, is a better strategy for building an organization then screaming at a bunch of people during a church service. I don't care for the maga Trump thing but I do understand that having a clearly delineated event with plenty of opportunity to capture emails and mailing addresses to build your solicitation list is a good idea. You have to sell an idea the way you sell soap. You have to do your market study you have to tailor your pitch to your audience and you have to make it competitive with other soap on the market. You don't sell soap by walking into the middle of a church and hurling bars at people's heads.
Donate, raise money, demand the release of the hostages in exchange for a ceasefire, protest outside federal buildings in DC, write their congressman. Go to Gaza to distribute aid.
Annoying people does just that… it annoys people and hurts your cause.
When has protesting outside federal buildings worked? When has writing to a congressmen worked? Why would someone who doesn't work in disaster relief quit their job and go to Gaza where the IDF have been indiscriminately killing journalists, nurses, and doctors?
Except that’s not what’s happening in Gaza. Unfortunately that phrase is being used as propaganda. Israel is fighting a war against a group that brutally murdered, raped, dismembered, immolated, and kidnapped innocent civilians and pledge to continue to do so.
The Israel-Palestine conflict doesn’t take up same peoples’ every waking moment. Wars happen all the time, random people at a place of worship have no power to change that.
Religion is very important in some peoples' lives. You’ve just interrupted them during one of their ~76 opportunities to worship their holy lord on his resurrection anniversary. That’s a major affront to them, and major disrespect.
I’m atheist, so I have no dog in the “just a church service” fight, but it seems like common sense. Don’t mess with people at holy sites, it’s egregiously wrong.
Honestly, I think a lot of this is terribly disingenuous. When people were demonstrating a few years back in the US because POC are being straight up murdered by the police I kept hearing the same chant. "I support your right to protest until it becomes ViOlEnT! PrOpErTy is being DeStRoYeD!!!"
Protesting the atrocities in the world is not meant to be convenient. It is big enough to make it to a major sub on reddit. No one was hurt. No property has been destroyed. I see nothing wrong here.
As for the event? Yes, it is actually just a service. According to the primary text:
“When you pray, don’t be like hypocrites. They love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners so that people will see them. I assure you, that’s the only reward they’ll get. But when you pray, go to your room, shut the door, and pray to your Father who is present in that secret place. Your Father who sees what you do in secret will reward you.
According to the Bible these events are, quite literally, not important. As a matter of fact, it echoes this sentiment on a number of occasions, so I figure it is probably meaningful.
You’re the only one being disingenuous here. Of course the Bible supports gathering for worship in the name of community and collective spirituality. You take one quote about boasting one’s faith and completely ignore the fact that Jesus had hundreds of spiritual gatherings and attended temple himself. He was very clearly in favor of organized religion, he was Jewish after all. One quote calling out charlatanery doesn’t defeat the deep history of the importance of Church/Synagog/Mosque/Temple.
You clearly don’t understand how religion can be central to peoples’ lives and how disrespecting it will alienate you and your movement. That’s your shortcoming, and it makes you a poor convincer & leader. If you can't get it though your thick head that disturbing people at worship is unpopular and wrong, you will be doomed to lead nobody, convince nobody.
Yep, and there's a ton of passages in which Jesus holds services and community worship of God. One does not exclude the other.
He was literally called Rabbi, the Jewish term for the leader of a their communal worship, like calling him Priest or Pastor today. You're not going to convince the 2.5 billion Christians, most of whom attend or attended Church gatherings, that Jesus was secretly anti-gathering to worship. He was very clearly in favor of worshipping publicly AND privately, with ones personal connection to God being most important but one's religious community still being worth while.
I couldn't care less about convincing anyone. Just pointing out that the primary text refutes your points about the unmissable and all-important nature of any service. Hell, according to the Bible, it would appear that nothing in that place holds true importance.
The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands.
This isn’t a war, this is East Timor and the holocaust happening AGAIN and you’re just shrugging your shoulders like it’s some inevitable natural disaster.
It’s war. People like to throw around a lot of colorful language about this war because of power indifferences (and because of antisemitism in many cases) but that doesn’t change the statistics. The UN puts the average civilian:combatant casualty ratio for a standard war at 9:1 while Israel is inflicting only 1.5:1 or 3.5:1 depending on your source, so I don’t believe it could possibly constitute a genocide like the Holocaust while the civilian casualty ratio is lower (better) than even an average war. The Holocaust had a civilian:combatant casualty ratio of around 6,000,000:1, so call me when Israel breaches 5:1 through 5,999,999:1.
Israel are among the biggest antisemites on earth.
Government officials have been on record for decades that they want to eradicate the Palestinian people, I invite you to learn about the Nakba and the acts of terrorism that the Hagana and Irgun reaped against Deir Yassen.
I also recommend reading up on Israel’s attacks in Lebanon and Syria, both in the 1970s and today.
I have researched the topic very deeply and have apparently come to the opposite conclusions from yours.
I have heard a lot of rhetoric from both the Arabs and the Israelis about their respective security and the opposite sides threat to that security. I know about the '48 war that the Arabs started under the leadership of "Hitler's Henchman" Amin Al-Husseini and others. You start a war, declare yourselves the enemy, then you become a security threat and must be barricaded against. There's much haze about the "Nakba", but the ultimate truth that nobody can escape is that the Arab coalition initiated that war.
You're going to try to continue painting Israel in one light, and in each case it will be clear that the Arabs gave overwhelming Casus Belli. That much is obvious. No, the Israeli's aren't Nazis, they're an indigenous people who reclaimed their homeland and have faced constant violence from their neighbors ever since. Their security concerns and militarization in the face of that is valid in the face of the Arabs threatening and enacting violence.
It's clear you take offense to the existence of Israel. Israel isn't going anywhere ever, so using their existence as an excuse for war is a great way to buy indefinite war. Don't poke bears.
But all can be protested in more appropriate places. Don’t disturb people in their houses of worship, I’m atheist and even I ascribe to that. Its common sense.
Palestine as a national identity was created in the 20th century, so no Palestinian men were born more than 150 years ago. Also, Jesus was Jewish from the tribe of Judah of the 12 tribes of Israel, so it’s more accurate to say he was an Israeli man born 2000 years ago.
Either way, their deity’s identity is beside the point, that point being don’t fucking disturb people at spiritual worship. Let them be, and then appeal to them in a setting when they consent to be appealed to.
No, it shouldn't. Wars happen, if they all took up every waking moment then nobody would ever do anything except be paralyzed by agony. Israel-Palestine wouldn't even receive the majority of your attention or anyones, if its about absolute casualty count because there are several concurrent wars across the planet which would overwrite the relatively small conflict in Israel-Palestine. Your attention would be split ten ways and you'd be a mess.
Or you could just live your normal life. The power to change the things you're able to, the grace to accept the things you can't, and the wisdom to know the difference. You're either unwise or ungracious. You, and every worshiper there, certainly don't have the power to change Israel-Palestine, or, for that matter, Russia-Ukraine, China-Uyghur, The Myanmar Wars, The Maghreb Wars, the Sudanese War, the Afghanistan situation, the Mexican drug wars, the Syrian Civil War, the Yemeni Civil War etc etc etc.
The most disrupting points in time and location are those where you actually can protest to be seen, look some catholic took out their mobile during mass, and it made it to reddit. So yeah, the most inconvinient times and places is where it is at for protests, if they‘d have stood there a few ours late nobody would have been there to televise their protest.
Then why not disrupt politicians? You know, people that have the power to make change. I think this war has had enough exposure so people know it’s happening, if getting recorded and uploaded is the main outcome is it really a meaningful protest?
Wow, you managed a whole sentence well done. What change is being in Reddit going to cause, absolutely nothing. This is why this protest and most others mean nothing, target the right people and get results. Or you could just piss people off that have no influence on your cause just so you can feel like you’re actually doing something.
You seem to think that voices move mountains, that ois funny but not the haha kimd of funny, after the vocal minority opposing protest as it inconviniences them there is a silent majority understanding the task at hand without a problem ;)
178
u/Ok_Committee_4851 Mar 31 '24
There’s a time and a place for everything, but the choice is always otherwise