G8/G20 June 2010 Protest Watch

[vonGarvin]

Whose to say it is not productive?

:rofl:

 

[aesop081]

Whose to say it is not productive?

Are the meeting going to be cancelled ?

Are decisions at those meetings going to be affected ?

Will public opinion be swayed ?

It is not productive.

If it is about getting your message across, protesters need better PR. If you watch the news, the only message that get across is "we break stuff and then complain about the cops".

 

[mellian]

Obviously did not read my post that got merged into this thread to show how else it can be productive.

While they may not succeed that into those points, there are other reasons these big protests still happen. Not to repeat myself, here is some good reasons:

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/historyprofiles/tp/Why-Protest.htm

 

[aesop081]

Obviously did not read my post that got merged into this thread to show how else it can be productive.

I read it.

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/historyprofiles/tp/Why-Protest.htm

1. Protest events increase the visibility of the cause.

It sure does. If the cause is breaking windows and stuff......

2. Protest events demonstrate power.

Ok, i can buy that one. I highly doubt that any protest at the G8/20 will demonstrate anything however.

3. Protest events promote a sense of solidarity.

Right...it takes massive protests to accomplish that. Seems to me that this point makes it more like the protest as an end in itself rather than a means of change.

4. Protest events build activist relationships.

Knowing full-well that your little social get-togethers attract a "minority" of agitators, surely there must be better ways to network while creating some better PR for yourself.

5. Protest events energize participants.

And here i thought it was about issues.......

 

[mellian]

May not agree, but many others do not. Discredit them as much as you like base on the actions of few, but remember that the same can be done for other groups and organizations as all unfortunately have their bad apples too.

 

[aesop081]

base on the actions of few,

So the solution is to keep holding events that constantly attract "a few" , drowns the issues and creates bad PR for the cause ?

The morning after the meetings are over, the public wont even remember what the protesters were saying, just that it took a whole lots of tear gas to stop them from destroying the place.

Thats if they even listened to the message at all. When you protest everything, you tend to get tuned out.

 

[George Wallace]

1. Protest events increase the visibility of the cause.

2. Protest events demonstrate power.

3. Protest events promote a sense of solidarity.

4. Protest events build activist relationships.

5. Protest events energize participants.

What I don't understand is why these groups need to protest?  If it wasn't for their complete apathy during Municipal, Provincial and National Elections, the greatest means available in this society to lodge a legitimate complaint in a legitimized forum for protest, then there would be no need for these forms of protest and their potential for violence and distruction.

If these people would exercise their democratic rights to vote and elected the people that they seriously thought could champion their causes, then we wouldn't have the riff raff causing problems for the rest of us at these events.

How come these supposed champions of all these fringe causes haven't figured out that when they don't exercise their franchise to vote in Municiple, Provincial, and Federal Elections, they really haven't any legitimate reason to complain.  Apathy on their part is no reason to use violence to champion a cause they were not dedicated enough to fight for come election time.  Why should we pay attention to them, if they can't be bothered to use legitimate means?  It speaks volumes as to who they are.

 

[aesop081]

It speaks volumes as to who they are.

Exactly. It is no longer about the issues but about protesting in itself. These groups are so bent on protesting against the establishment that they completely ignore to possibility of being part of it and effecting change from within.

Its no as sexy, doesnt get your face on TV and doesnt help the "community organizer" and " social activist" CVs.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Based on the actions of a few?

Look up some pictures.  Mpst of them have people either destroying shit or mixing it up with cops.
A few people being idiots and everyone else around them snapping pictures.

Protesting the environment?

Trying to set another human being on fire?

Protest ninjas

He's going to protst the use of hardwood in police battons, compared to the more humane softwood versions. Also, high dentist prices.

Protesting under qualified haircutters.

One guy being an idiot, everyone egging him on taking pictures. It's about the ISSUES, obviously.

About to buy stocks in Tylenol.

You hit the cop and I'll take a picture of him hitting you back and we'll edit a youtube video and tag it police brutality.

This will help the economy-namely vehicle repair shops.

Makes a great point.

Sound advice.  Cancel Debt, I think bono mentioned that too. People should also work for free, kinda like the federation on startrek.

Proving a point.

Worse still, he fell on his keys.

Has very important issues.  Don't worry, you can just photo shop a funny caption in after.

Protests aren't about issues, it's protesters making it about themselves.

 

[aesop081]

One guy being an idiot, everyone egging him on taking pictures. It's about the ISSUES, obviously.

Yup.......Why should the peaceful majority stop the "few" who detract from their message eh ?

IIRC, we've been down that road with mellian before  :

 

[The Bread Guy]

May not agree, but many others do not. Discredit them as much as you like base on the actions of few, but remember that the same can be done for other groups and organizations as all unfortunately have their bad apples too.

True, but most groups wield sanctions against the baddest apples, or clearly condemn the actions of the bad apples.  Other than these statements:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/94123/post-937069.html#msg937069
and fourth link here:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/94123/post-936457.html#msg936457
I'm not seeing a whole lot of rejection of the tactic of firebombing - a lot of "yeah, it may be seen as bad, but the other side's worse" and some "who knows if it wasn't agent provocateurs", but not much "this is wrong" or "this should not be done".

 

[vonGarvin]

Here's my submission ;D

 

[mariomike]

Here's my submission ;D

Comes complete with a great face palm by the policeman on the right.

 

[mellian]

So the solution is to keep holding events that constantly attract "a few" , drowns the issues and creates bad PR for the cause ?

That is like saying we should disband the Canadian Forces because of a few murders and rapists.

The morning after the meetings are over, the public wont even remember what the protesters were saying, just that it took a whole lots of tear gas to stop them from destroying the place.

Thats if they even listened to the message at all. When you protest everything, you tend to get tuned out.

There is a lot of things the public tunes out in general, a long with the media, yet the world still turns.

 

[mellian]

What I don't understand is why these groups need to protest?  If it wasn't for their complete apathy during Municipal, Provincial and National Elections, the greatest means available in this society to lodge a legitimate complaint in a legitimized forum for protest, then there would be no need for these forms of protest and their potential for violence and distruction.

If these people would exercise their democratic rights to vote and elected the people that they seriously thought could champion their causes, then we wouldn't have the riff raff causing problems for the rest of us at these events.

How come these supposed champions of all these fringe causes haven't figured out that when they don't exercise their franchise to vote in Municiple, Provincial, and Federal Elections, they really haven't any legitimate reason to complain.  Apathy on their part is no reason to use violence to champion a cause they were not dedicated enough to fight for come election time.  Why should we pay attention to them, if they can't be bothered to use legitimate means?  It speaks volumes as to who they are.

Many among do vote, just not all of these are to NDP. Then there is beliefs that their vote will not make any difference for various reasons such as greedy/corrupt/rich/upper class politicians, the entire system is broken, more party focus than individuals, mainstream media tend to focus more on mainstream political parties than the small ones, and so on. Elections does not work for the people, hence seek alternatives.

 

[mellian]

Based on the actions of a few?

Look up some pictures.  Mpst of them have people either destroying crap or mixing it up with cops.
A few people being idiots and everyone else around them snapping pictures.

Of course you will get lot more photos and media attention on the violent few. While all these are taken, there are hundreds and thousands more further away demonstrating and marching peacefully. Yay for media manipulation and human nature to pay attention more to violence and where the 'action' is at.

Heck, people hear more about the these violent few and riot cops then do the G8/20 meetings themselves too. Ask the average joe on the street and they remember more the protests and police than what the summits are about.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Did we not batter this particular expired equine into soup right around the same time last year?

 

[The Bread Guy]

This from toronto.mediacoop.ca - highlights mine:

The RCMP-led Integrated Security Unit (ISU) of the G20 is refusing to rule out the use of Agent Provocateurs to get protesters to commit illegal acts, the Toronto Media Co-op has learned.

( .... )

During a phone interview with the Media Co-op, Constable Meghan Gray with the TPS G20 Planning Team responsible for Public Affairs, Communications & Community Relations, was also asked directly whether Agent Provocateurs would be used.

Toronto Media Co-op: Can you confirm or deny that you will be using agent provocateurs? Do you think they are illegal?

Meaghan Gray: “Like [my co-worker], George Tucker, those are operational issues, I can’t speak to that.”

TMC: “A source from the RCMP has told me their use is illegal. Are you saying you can’t rule out an illegal activity will be used?”

Gray: “Well…I’d have to ask someone else about that….I’ll get somebody to get back to you.”

Gray responded via e-mail 2 hours later.

“I have spoken with my colleagues on the Public Affairs Team and as I
 stated, with respect to your questions regarding Agents Provocateurs, the
 Integrated Security Unit for the G8-G20 Summits will not discuss
 operational details,” she wrote.

Though Gray stated that “all police efforts will be lawful”, this is not the first time that an ISU for a summit has been asked about Agent Provocateurs. Nor is it the first time they have refused to respond ....

 

[Loachman]

Ask the average joe on the street and they remember more the protests and police than what the summits are about.

Just as they remember more about the protests and police than what the protests are about.

Perhaps if the protest groups took better steps to prevent the violent few from destroying property that other people worked very hard for, everybody would be happier - especially the property-owners.

A handful of people may actually remember what the protest groups' messages were as well.

 

[Loachman]

That is like saying we should disband the Canadian Forces because of a few murders and rapists.

No, it is not.

For one, the organizational purposes are completely different, and secondly, the CF takes responsibility for the actions of its members, which the protest movement clearly does not.

Any CF member who commits a crime will be investigated, arrested, charged, tried, convicted, and punished in either the military or civilian justice systems as appropriate. I have yet to see a protest group turn a violent thug in their midst in to the police for suitable and proper treatment.