Protesters protest to make the minority view heard

[Elind]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
Just to fuel the inevitable uproar, perhaps the headscarf ban generated more protest because the beheadings were obviously evil, and thus less controversial? Controversy doesn't occur when there is widespread agreement about something. Protesters protest to make the minority and opposite view heard, not to say "we all agree with you!"

I thought this interesting enough to start a thread.

What is it that makes hundreds, thousands, or hundreds of thousands of people (presumably otherswise employed) demonstrate en-mass against one isue (E.G. the USA) or another; yet not do so against every obvious evil on the planet?

Is it the moral conviction about the issue, whatever it may be, or is it the vulnerability of the object that they demonstrate against, or, perhaps, it is the respect for the object they demonstrate against?

Some are clearly objective oriented, like freedom in Eastern Europe. Many are less obvious.

Perhaps it is just the attention and buzz they get from being on TV?

Thoughts?

[Bruce]

squeeky wheel gets the grease

[Gem]

Depends on the situation, but here's how I view it, using the war in iraq.

USA government wants to go to war.
People who are against it feel passionate enough about it, and know that their protest WILL have an effect (although maybe not strong enough to stop the war, as was shown, but had consequences non-the-less). They voice their dissent.

Then there are people who agree witht he USA government to go to war. Now why would you go to the streets and say: "I support the war!" knowing that if you go or not, the government is still going to say "we want to go to war." There were people who demonstrated in favor of the war, but as I recall, they were not as numerous and as occuring enough to be mentionable.

As for motivation, it ranges from the TV buzz to deep feeling like those during the Civil Rights Movement and the protests from Eastern Europe revolutions (both communist and democratic).

Originally posted by Tragicmonkey:
Protesters protest to make the minority and opposite view heard
I disagree with this generalization. Anti war protests in europe clearly reflected a majority in certain countries.

Martin

[BPSCG]

Originally posted by Elind
What is it that makes hundreds, thousands, or hundreds of thousands of people (presumably otherswise employed) demonstrate en-mass against one isue (E.G. the USA) or another; yet not do so against every obvious evil on the planet?
Let's not get so wrapped up in examining their psyches that we ignore the ugly, stinking, snorting 800-pound gorilla in the room: Some of these people hate the U.S. and approve of every obvious evil on the planet.

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by BPSCG
Let's not get so wrapped up in examining their psyches that we ignore the ugly, stinking, snorting 800-pound gorilla in the room: Some of these people hate the U.S. and approve of every obvious evil on the planet.

Kind of like the way the US government decides to invade Iraq under the pretense of being concerned about terrorism or freedom for Iraqi muslims while ignoring Saudi Arabia, which supplied the terrorists for 9/11 and never is to be confused with a free society.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by BPSCG
Let's not get so wrapped up in examining their psyches that we ignore the ugly, stinking, snorting 800-pound gorilla in the room: Some of these people hate the U.S. and approve of every obvious evil on the planet.

Yeah, that's right, Beeps. People who march for abortion rights are obviously big al Qaeda supporters. They don't bring a sign saying otherwise, do they? Lol.

My original point was that people only protest things when the thing in question is the majority view, or already in effect because the majority supports it. There's no point in protesters hitting the streets to demand that the US government stop quartering troops in people's homes: they've already got that forbidden. You won't find (sane) marchers waving placards saying "Everything's Fine!" There's no point to it. If you like how things are, you have nothing to protest.

Another key in protest is that you only protest things that are changeable, and, if you're sensible, things that might change because of your protest. You don't protest earthquakes or AIDS, you protest the lack of funding for AIDS or the recent mishandling of earthquake relief funds. If you get enough publicity (which is the point), you might get more support. With more support, you might get your way, and have the change come to pass. Protests are a venerable part of democracy. True, they get used by morons and fools, but you can't weed out the sensible ones by fiat. Quite a few causes owe much to protesters that were labelled as crazy at the time--suffrage, abolition, labor, etc.