Rebellion or something.

[LMNO]

Having watched the protests here in Turkey and talking with the people who were in the front lines (and had a back, arms and chest full of bruises to prove it)... both sides of the coin were present. The 70 year old grandmas that were handing food out to protesters weren't trying to be part of a brand (one lady was handing out bread and apologizing because she couldn't carry fruit from her fruit tree to them, because the bag was too heavy for her). Then 80 year old guy that stood in front of a dozen cops calling out "yazıklar olsun" (shame on you, pity on you) wasn't trying to be part of the in-crowd. At the same time, some fool dressed in a cape and a Guy Fawkes mask was walking in the streets, basically daring the cops to go after him.

If you're going to do some Covert Ops in the name of Discordia,
keep your head down, and Keep Your Fucking Mouth Shut.
A mowhawk is as good as a target during Police Action.

The wise spags toss a wrench into the Machine™,
and then walk away.
They strike against Authority, but don't put it on the Internet.
They subvert the paradigm, but don't stick around to watch.
They mindfuck the people, but don't pat themselves on the back.

If two people know a thing, it is not a secret.
Getting away with it means staying away from it.

[Junkenstein]

Having watched the protests here in Turkey and talking with the people who were in the front lines (and had a back, arms and chest full of bruises to prove it)... both sides of the coin were present. The 70 year old grandmas that were handing food out to protesters weren't trying to be part of a brand (one lady was handing out bread and apologizing because she couldn't carry fruit from her fruit tree to them, because the bag was too heavy for her). Then 80 year old guy that stood in front of a dozen cops calling out "yazıklar olsun" (shame on you, pity on you) wasn't trying to be part of the in-crowd. At the same time, some fool dressed in a cape and a Guy Fawkes mask was walking in the streets, basically daring the cops to go after him.

What's the current feeling with people you know? Any solid feel for how it's going to turn out?

[Cain]

Protestors? How many divisions do they have?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Having watched the protests here in Turkey and talking with the people who were in the front lines (and had a back, arms and chest full of bruises to prove it)... both sides of the coin were present. The 70 year old grandmas that were handing food out to protesters weren't trying to be part of a brand (one lady was handing out bread and apologizing because she couldn't carry fruit from her fruit tree to them, because the bag was too heavy for her). Then 80 year old guy that stood in front of a dozen cops calling out "yazıklar olsun" (shame on you, pity on you) wasn't trying to be part of the in-crowd. At the same time, some fool dressed in a cape and a Guy Fawkes mask was walking in the streets, basically daring the cops to go after him.

What's the current feeling with people you know? Any solid feel for how it's going to turn out?

At this point, they're really trying to get outside pressure from the EU and seem to be collecting their power to aim at the elections next year. Enough force was applied a couple weeks ago to quash the public protests, but it seems to have galvanized the group that was content with whining before... in large part because the older generations are telling the younger generation to get the hell off their ass.

Of course, the real problem is the 'majority' when it comes to elections lean conservative... the minority are secular and no one wants to turn the place into Syria. If these people keep it together for the next year, they just might keep Erdogan from becoming President (his term as PM is up). If Erdogan loses office, the AK Party will probably become much more reasonable than it has been in the past few years.

Another interesting thing to watch is next year when all of those 17-18 year old kids go spend their required time in military service, I doubt they'll forget being trounced by their government.

Finally, it has led to a very interesting change in how the secular/urban/generally whitish Turks are talking about the Kurds and other minorities that have been getting the same treatment from the cops for years. Its gone from "Damned Kurds, why can't they just be Turks like the rest of us" to "I see what they've been fighting for". Guys I know a year ago that spit on the ground when they talked about the Kurdish protesters, now show some respect.

How it will end, I don't know. I suppose it will depend on what Erdogan thiinks he can get away with and what the people (and the army) will let him get away with. He was livid over the military coup in Egypt... no doubt because he could easily see himself in the same position.

[Junkenstein]

It will be interesting to see how the military system deals with an influx of protesters. I imagine that generation will be split up as much as possible to avoid cells of solidarity forming. Military indoctrination tends to be quite effective nowadays, but I doubt there's been as much concious resistance to the lifestyle changes than before.

Tangent, but a reason I've always been wary of compulsory military service is that you're making someone take up arms. I can't be totally sure that if I shove a gun into a kids hand that they will not point it at me. Being in charge of a country and making everyone do it seems like madness. Then again, the alternative of only arming those who want to join the gang has similar issues. In short, stop giving people guns unless you trust them. And even then, not really.

This:

Finally, it has led to a very interesting change in how the secular/urban/generally whitish Turks are talking about the Kurds and other minorities that have been getting the same treatment from the cops for years. Its gone from "Damned Kurds, why can't they just be Turks like the rest of us" to "I see what they've been fighting for". Guys I know a year ago that spit on the ground when they talked about the Kurdish protesters, now show some respect.

Has resonances of other civil liberties struggles and success. De-facto acceptance eventually becomes legislative acceptance.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

It will be interesting to see how the military system deals with an influx of protesters. I imagine that generation will be split up as much as possible to avoid cells of solidarity forming. Military indoctrination tends to be quite effective nowadays, but I doubt there's been as much concious resistance to the lifestyle changes than before.

Tangent, but a reason I've always been wary of compulsory military service is that you're making someone take up arms. I can't be totally sure that if I shove a gun into a kids hand that they will not point it at me. Being in charge of a country and making everyone do it seems like madness. Then again, the alternative of only arming those who want to join the gang has similar issues. In short, stop giving people guns unless you trust them. And even then, not really.

This:

Finally, it has led to a very interesting change in how the secular/urban/generally whitish Turks are talking about the Kurds and other minorities that have been getting the same treatment from the cops for years. Its gone from "Damned Kurds, why can't they just be Turks like the rest of us" to "I see what they've been fighting for". Guys I know a year ago that spit on the ground when they talked about the Kurdish protesters, now show some respect.

Has resonances of other civil liberties struggles and success. De-facto acceptance eventually becomes legislative acceptance.

Remember though, the military here is very secular and has overthrown the government three times (including a Islamic led government similar to the current one). They're so secular, they won't let you on military property if you have facial hair.

[Cain]

Not so secular they wont work with Al-Qaeda, though.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

This discussion got off the track of my original statement, which was that the Protest Culture™ is largely ineffective in the West. I was not talking about actual protests/riots that have overtaken a number of countries around the planet and resulted in at least some kind of deviation from the established norms in those countries. I was talking specifically about what it means to protest in the West, specifically in America.

And what I was saying was that here, where things are relatively comfortable for most people, protests are pretty harmless to the status quo. Occupy has done absolutely nothing to threaten Big Money, or really even to spread meaningful awareness of the problems caused and exacerbated by the financial industry. Throngs of people in Wisconsin didn't stop Governor Brown from sticking it to unions. In Texas massive protests failed to garner the support of anyone who wasn't already on the protesters' side, or impede the advancement of the draconian laws on their agenda. Anonymous has been known to take a web page offline for a day or two, and seriously annoy a handful Scientologists, but beyond that I'm not sure exactly what it is they're accomplishing.

It isn't that protests are inherently powerless, it's that they are now a known entity and as such the status quo can stay out of their reach. A protest is just a lot of people stinking up a park for a while, as far as anyone in power is concerned. Protests can't last forever, and even if they could, who cares? A permanent street fair isn't going to hurt anything. To be successful, a mass protest must be a display of popular force, not popular sentiment. That doesn't mean rioting or property damage is necessary, but you've got to do more than just show up with a picket sign and chant slogans. Organized civil disobedience is a form of protest that goes a long way toward making a difference, for example.

I'm just saying that as long as there are so many people more interested in identifying themselves as subversive than in actually subverting anything, their squawking is mostly harmless. And any movement that gives people a venue to vent their frustration will be allowed, and even encouraged, so long as that movement remains ineffective at really upsetting the social order. Anonymous manufacturing their most recognizable symbol in a sweatshop isn't the problem, but it's symbolic of a situation where identifying yourself as an agent of change is culturally equivalent to actually being an agent of change.

So you're moving your goalposts again, this time to declare that protesting in the West, specifically, has no effect.

And you're choosing to ignore the many, many examples I posted of cultural and political change that were brought on through protest and activism why, exactly?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

This discussion got off the track of my original statement, which was that the Protest Culture™ is largely ineffective in the West. I was not talking about actual protests/riots that have overtaken a number of countries around the planet and resulted in at least some kind of deviation from the established norms in those countries. I was talking specifically about what it means to protest in the West, specifically in America.

Again, do you think the right for Gays to marry just happened?  Or the right for them to not have the shit kicked out of them with a wink and a nod from the legal system just appeared?

That's one example.  I can name a lot of others.

No, but I'm not convinced it was protests that got that done. Protests were part of it, maybe, but I think most of the progress in that area specifically came from a cultural shift at the lowest levels. The LGBTQ community was portrayed positively in media on a large scale; gays began to tell their stories and share their experiences and come out of the closet in larger numbers; almost everyone in the country can say they have a gay friend, relative, or coworker. It wasn't Gay Pride parades or picket signs that changed America's mind, it was forcing people to account for the way they personally treated others that caused a huge shift in popular sentiment.

You seem to be wilfully overlooking the fact that the cultural shift happened in the first place because of queers refusing to stay hidden, ie. protesting. Are you familiar with the Stonewall Riots?

I am incredulous that you don't think protests, Pride parades, etc. were influential in shifting general public attitudes to gays towards acceptance. Absolutely just WTF.

I think you are digging in your heels, and the thing is, not only are you wrong, you are documentably, demonstrably wrong.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Having watched the protests here in Turkey and talking with the people who were in the front lines (and had a back, arms and chest full of bruises to prove it)... both sides of the coin were present. The 70 year old grandmas that were handing food out to protesters weren't trying to be part of a brand (one lady was handing out bread and apologizing because she couldn't carry fruit from her fruit tree to them, because the bag was too heavy for her). Then 80 year old guy that stood in front of a dozen cops calling out "yazıklar olsun" (shame on you, pity on you) wasn't trying to be part of the in-crowd. At the same time, some fool dressed in a cape and a Guy Fawkes mask was walking in the streets, basically daring the cops to go after him.

Sometimes it only takes one person behaving outrageously to inspire a thousand people to act.

We usually call them "martyrs".

[tyrannosaurus vex]

This discussion got off the track of my original statement, which was that the Protest Culture™ is largely ineffective in the West. I was not talking about actual protests/riots that have overtaken a number of countries around the planet and resulted in at least some kind of deviation from the established norms in those countries. I was talking specifically about what it means to protest in the West, specifically in America.

And what I was saying was that here, where things are relatively comfortable for most people, protests are pretty harmless to the status quo. Occupy has done absolutely nothing to threaten Big Money, or really even to spread meaningful awareness of the problems caused and exacerbated by the financial industry. Throngs of people in Wisconsin didn't stop Governor Brown from sticking it to unions. In Texas massive protests failed to garner the support of anyone who wasn't already on the protesters' side, or impede the advancement of the draconian laws on their agenda. Anonymous has been known to take a web page offline for a day or two, and seriously annoy a handful Scientologists, but beyond that I'm not sure exactly what it is they're accomplishing.

It isn't that protests are inherently powerless, it's that they are now a known entity and as such the status quo can stay out of their reach. A protest is just a lot of people stinking up a park for a while, as far as anyone in power is concerned. Protests can't last forever, and even if they could, who cares? A permanent street fair isn't going to hurt anything. To be successful, a mass protest must be a display of popular force, not popular sentiment. That doesn't mean rioting or property damage is necessary, but you've got to do more than just show up with a picket sign and chant slogans. Organized civil disobedience is a form of protest that goes a long way toward making a difference, for example.

I'm just saying that as long as there are so many people more interested in identifying themselves as subversive than in actually subverting anything, their squawking is mostly harmless. And any movement that gives people a venue to vent their frustration will be allowed, and even encouraged, so long as that movement remains ineffective at really upsetting the social order. Anonymous manufacturing their most recognizable symbol in a sweatshop isn't the problem, but it's symbolic of a situation where identifying yourself as an agent of change is culturally equivalent to actually being an agent of change.

So you're moving your goalposts again, this time to declare that protesting in the West, specifically, has no effect.

And you're choosing to ignore the many, many examples I posted of cultural and political change that were brought on through protest and activism why, exactly?

Not moving goalposts. You're the one who decided I was talking about protests worldwide when from the beginning that was not the case. I was specifically talking about protesters in the West being more concerned with joining a subculture than actually protesting anything.

This discussion got off the track of my original statement, which was that the Protest Culture™ is largely ineffective in the West. I was not talking about actual protests/riots that have overtaken a number of countries around the planet and resulted in at least some kind of deviation from the established norms in those countries. I was talking specifically about what it means to protest in the West, specifically in America.

Again, do you think the right for Gays to marry just happened?  Or the right for them to not have the shit kicked out of them with a wink and a nod from the legal system just appeared?

That's one example.  I can name a lot of others.

No, but I'm not convinced it was protests that got that done. Protests were part of it, maybe, but I think most of the progress in that area specifically came from a cultural shift at the lowest levels. The LGBTQ community was portrayed positively in media on a large scale; gays began to tell their stories and share their experiences and come out of the closet in larger numbers; almost everyone in the country can say they have a gay friend, relative, or coworker. It wasn't Gay Pride parades or picket signs that changed America's mind, it was forcing people to account for the way they personally treated others that caused a huge shift in popular sentiment.

You seem to be wilfully overlooking the fact that the cultural shift happened in the first place because of queers refusing to stay hidden, ie. protesting. Are you familiar with the Stonewall Riots?

I am incredulous that you don't think protests, Pride parades, etc. were influential in shifting general public attitudes to gays towards acceptance. Absolutely just WTF.

I think you are digging in your heels, and the thing is, not only are you wrong, you are documentably, demonstrably wrong.

The Stonewall Riots and pride parades weren't and aren't inconsequential, they're just not the most important or most influential source of the changing popular perception of gays. Those attitudes didn't even start changing until 20 years after the Stonewall Riots, and while they have changed as a result of LGBTQ people protesting, it was protest in the truest sense of the word: refusing to be the subject of abuse and mistreatment by the system; acts of civil disobedience and firmly claiming and defending one's dignity. This is not the sense of protesting I'm talking about and I think I've repeated that quite a few times. I'm not talking about civil disobedience, I'm talking about showing up at a rally to wave a flag or chant something instead of actually doing anything, and the tendency to accept that kind of frivolous "protest" as all that really needs to happen to instigate change.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Those attitudes didn't even start to change until 20 years later? Where do you read your history?

Protests are an instrumental method for engendering change. You can redefine and redefine and redefine and dig your heels in all you want, it doesn't change that fact.

[Doktor Howl]

Not moving goalposts. You're the one who decided I was talking about protests worldwide when from the beginning that was not the case. I was specifically talking about protesters in the West being more concerned with joining a subculture than actually protesting anything.

That's been the case for half a century, and the protests still worked.  Hipsters on parade and effective demonstrations are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

The hipster strutting, IMO, does reduce the impact, but does not eliminate it.

Also, you are asking for purity of purpose with regard to primates, if you think about it.  That never ends well.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Not moving goalposts. You're the one who decided I was talking about protests worldwide when from the beginning that was not the case. I was specifically talking about protesters in the West being more concerned with joining a subculture than actually protesting anything.

That's been the case for half a century, and the protests still worked.  Hipsters on parade and effective demonstrations are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

The hipster strutting, IMO, does reduce the impact, but does not eliminate it.

Also, you are asking for purity of purpose with regard to primates, if you think about it.  That never ends well.

If they'd all just do it my way, they wouldn't have all the problems associated with being individuals.

[LMNO]

But check it-- for social change, hipsters adopting the protest means that the issue is NORMALISED. The idea of a hipster adopting gay rights prior to 1969 is hard to imagine. When hipsters adopt a protest, that protest has become SAFE. And when it is SAFE and NORMAL, it's only a small step towards acceptance.

So hipster adaptation of protest is a bellwether of change in the larger society.