After reflection i suppose you’re right. The outcomes are different, one car in my way on the freeway is there to protest, the other car in my way on the freeway is there to AFL. Very different outcomes there… *
^*Maybe we should ban all cars but mine? Am I crazy, or would that solve my problem?^
I suppose totally different messages being sent though: one is, ‘i care about this thing and you’re also gona have to for a bit’; the other is, ‘i care about this thing and you’re gona need to wait’. Theres a nuance there.
Sadly there is one unavoidable outcome :) MUZZA DOESN’T MAKE HIS COURT APPEARANCE!! The judge. is. ropeable…
Saying that traffic caused by an afl game is in any way the same to highways and roads being abruptly blockaded by protesters shows you’re not here for an actual discussion.
Of course i’m not. I am satirising. Because your suggestion, and the implications of which, are ridiculous from the outset. The only sane response is to satirise the idea in the vain hope that through the equivalences drawn the ideas own ridiculousness is laid bare. In a bit of a ‘the emperor has no clothes’ kind of moment.
Have a good day mate. Lets protect freedom together in our own ways.
… in the corner; out the way; down the street; where it can’t be heard… etc it doesn’t matter the caveat.
The suggestion that other people shouldn’t have to deal with protestors on the road, because “they’re in the way”. Well shit, the AFL is in my way! And they’re playing for a good half a year or more as well. Point is, certain things people do, especially on our roads, are gonna annoy others.
Or protest where it affects the people you’re protesting to get attention of - at parliament, at the government offices, etc. Not where you’re just pissing regular people off and hurting your own cause.
Sydney Town Hall was a poor choice or a good choice then? To you.
Look, we’re in protest positioning and tactics here. Its essential for the scope of ways to protest be necessarily broad, to allow for the creativity that often accompanies effective protests. You seem to be arguing for a quite narrow definition of allowable/effective protest, and we’re just going to have to agree to disagree.
Just stop oil with the paint in the museums et al; Rosa Parks on the bus; Japanese Bus drivers refusing money; Palestine Action Group over the harbour bridge. They’re all acceptable and creative forms of protest to me. Whether they’re effective isn’t the point, the point is we have a society built to accept and accomodate the fact that humanity isn’t a monolith.
The outcome isn’t the same though.
After reflection i suppose you’re right. The outcomes are different, one car in my way on the freeway is there to protest, the other car in my way on the freeway is there to AFL. Very different outcomes there… *
^*Maybe we should ban all cars but mine? Am I crazy, or would that solve my problem?^
I suppose totally different messages being sent though: one is, ‘i care about this thing and you’re also gona have to for a bit’; the other is, ‘i care about this thing and you’re gona need to wait’. Theres a nuance there.
Sadly there is one unavoidable outcome :) MUZZA DOESN’T MAKE HIS COURT APPEARANCE!! The judge. is. ropeable…
Saying that traffic caused by an afl game is in any way the same to highways and roads being abruptly blockaded by protesters shows you’re not here for an actual discussion.
Uh oh… rumbled. ;)
Of course i’m not. I am satirising. Because your suggestion, and the implications of which, are ridiculous from the outset. The only sane response is to satirise the idea in the vain hope that through the equivalences drawn the ideas own ridiculousness is laid bare. In a bit of a ‘the emperor has no clothes’ kind of moment.
Have a good day mate. Lets protect freedom together in our own ways.
My suggestion? Of letting people protest?
… in the corner; out the way; down the street; where it can’t be heard… etc it doesn’t matter the caveat.
The suggestion that other people shouldn’t have to deal with protestors on the road, because “they’re in the way”. Well shit, the AFL is in my way! And they’re playing for a good half a year or more as well. Point is, certain things people do, especially on our roads, are gonna annoy others.
Or protest where it affects the people you’re protesting to get attention of - at parliament, at the government offices, etc. Not where you’re just pissing regular people off and hurting your own cause.
Sydney Town Hall was a poor choice or a good choice then? To you.
Look, we’re in protest positioning and tactics here. Its essential for the scope of ways to protest be necessarily broad, to allow for the creativity that often accompanies effective protests. You seem to be arguing for a quite narrow definition of allowable/effective protest, and we’re just going to have to agree to disagree.
Just stop oil with the paint in the museums et al; Rosa Parks on the bus; Japanese Bus drivers refusing money; Palestine Action Group over the harbour bridge. They’re all acceptable and creative forms of protest to me. Whether they’re effective isn’t the point, the point is we have a society built to accept and accomodate the fact that humanity isn’t a monolith.