I think you might be misunderstanding my comments or maybe I’m misunderstanding yours because I am very lost.
I added the “protests aren’t totally useless” thing as a way to combat defensiveness after I replied to the top level comment comparing recent US protests (such as No Kings) to the protests shown in the meme. It’s absurd to compare the two, and not because of the violence that occurs at them. The reason the type of action shown in the image can be impactful is because there have specific goals and targets in contrast to what amount to an awareness campaign or parade.
The goals are to put pressure on the government by causing disruption, which is not necessarily done with the matches/riots but with other acts.
Speaking in general, the french tend to do rallies and protests in combination with strikes. So the protest is to draw attention to the strike or is populated by the strikers and their supporters. It is the strike that applies pressure. Occupying some area that disrupts normal business is another common tactic.
The yellow vest movement blocked roads and fuel depots, which was a direct action to disrupt access to fuel and the movement of vehicles. Their (initial) grievance was high fuel costs. They also organized to block tollbooths on 20 roads and blocked airport runways, all disrupting commerce.
With the current student protests occupations (sit ins), walk outs and blockages are being used. These are paired with teach-ins and more theatrical type street demonstrations to raise awareness.
In contrast, a protest like the No Kings protests are (generally) not taking people away from their jobs and are in pre approved routes and locations which cause minimal disruption to the daily lives of others and the function of the state.
This is what I mean when I say it’s important to look closely at why these movements are successful. Rolling walkouts or strikes wouldn’t necessarily attract violence from the state but would disrupt the systems that allow the state to continue doing what they are doing.
Arcanepotato@crazypeople.online 22 hours ago
I think you might be misunderstanding my comments or maybe I’m misunderstanding yours because I am very lost.
I added the “protests aren’t totally useless” thing as a way to combat defensiveness after I replied to the top level comment comparing recent US protests (such as No Kings) to the protests shown in the meme. It’s absurd to compare the two, and not because of the violence that occurs at them. The reason the type of action shown in the image can be impactful is because there have specific goals and targets in contrast to what amount to an awareness campaign or parade.
umbrella@lemmy.ml 9 hours ago
what specific goals though?
Arcanepotato@crazypeople.online 8 hours ago
The goals are to put pressure on the government by causing disruption, which is not necessarily done with the matches/riots but with other acts.
Speaking in general, the french tend to do rallies and protests in combination with strikes. So the protest is to draw attention to the strike or is populated by the strikers and their supporters. It is the strike that applies pressure. Occupying some area that disrupts normal business is another common tactic.
The yellow vest movement blocked roads and fuel depots, which was a direct action to disrupt access to fuel and the movement of vehicles. Their (initial) grievance was high fuel costs. They also organized to block tollbooths on 20 roads and blocked airport runways, all disrupting commerce.
With the current student protests occupations (sit ins), walk outs and blockages are being used. These are paired with teach-ins and more theatrical type street demonstrations to raise awareness.
In contrast, a protest like the No Kings protests are (generally) not taking people away from their jobs and are in pre approved routes and locations which cause minimal disruption to the daily lives of others and the function of the state.
This is what I mean when I say it’s important to look closely at why these movements are successful. Rolling walkouts or strikes wouldn’t necessarily attract violence from the state but would disrupt the systems that allow the state to continue doing what they are doing.