I was wondering if they marched out of step due to the length of the parade and basically not wanting to ask too much of the military service members other than that they show up and look presentable.
This is something which likely interfered with existing schedules and planned events. Basically, don’t make it any harder than it has to be.
Republicans in Red states are already planning to use the protests against Democrats, no doubt highlighting those burning Waymos (were there no Teslas around?). Elias Canetti said that mobs are drawn to fire, which may explain why some demonstrations end in burning cars and trash, but our media certainly glom onto any flames, to the benefit of Republican politicians. Our little local protest had volunteer marshals de-escalating interactions with the lone confrontational counter protesters. Control of crowds so they don’t become mobs will determine the success of future antifascist protests.
Chenoweth has walked back from the idea that if 3.5% of the population of a country engage in peaceful protest, there will be significant change in a country's society. Her research that produced the 3.5% figure was done in 3rd World countries in the Global South. Now she emphasizes the importance of non-violent protests as more successful than violent ones in bringing about change, citing the civil rights protests in America in the 1960s.
But the influence of the media (when there were only three national networks) coupled with the bravery, eloquence, and charisma of Dr Martin Luther King Jr had a profound influence on changing public opinion. Were 3.5% of the US population in the streets to make that happen? No.
Today, invoking 3.5% of the American population as the talisman that would bring about change is useful for those whose profession is organizing protests. But as that would involve 12 million people showing up for a one-day protest (not 1 million people showing up 12 times), it seems extremely unlikely.
A major readon is our sources of news have expanded to the point where their programming reflects their target audience; Fox & MSNBC are twins in that way.
And where's the charismatic leader? It's not Bernie Sanders, whose home state of Vermont is 90% white!
Bringing about significant change in our highly developed country would require massive numbers of votes on Election Day. Protests can influence public opinion, but votes are paramount.
Finally, in the late 1960s, a group of British elites wanted to overthrow Prime Minister Harold Wilson, a suspected communist. Season 3, Episode 5 of The Crown dramatizes this. Listen to Lord Mountbatten explain why a British coup would be very difficult (ii's also would be in America), however, Mountbatten believes the Queen's cooperation SouldSeas make it happen (spoiler alert: she says No).
I was wondering if they marched out of step due to the length of the parade and basically not wanting to ask too much of the military service members other than that they show up and look presentable.
This is something which likely interfered with existing schedules and planned events. Basically, don’t make it any harder than it has to be.
Republicans in Red states are already planning to use the protests against Democrats, no doubt highlighting those burning Waymos (were there no Teslas around?). Elias Canetti said that mobs are drawn to fire, which may explain why some demonstrations end in burning cars and trash, but our media certainly glom onto any flames, to the benefit of Republican politicians. Our little local protest had volunteer marshals de-escalating interactions with the lone confrontational counter protesters. Control of crowds so they don’t become mobs will determine the success of future antifascist protests.
Chenoweth has walked back from the idea that if 3.5% of the population of a country engage in peaceful protest, there will be significant change in a country's society. Her research that produced the 3.5% figure was done in 3rd World countries in the Global South. Now she emphasizes the importance of non-violent protests as more successful than violent ones in bringing about change, citing the civil rights protests in America in the 1960s.
But the influence of the media (when there were only three national networks) coupled with the bravery, eloquence, and charisma of Dr Martin Luther King Jr had a profound influence on changing public opinion. Were 3.5% of the US population in the streets to make that happen? No.
Today, invoking 3.5% of the American population as the talisman that would bring about change is useful for those whose profession is organizing protests. But as that would involve 12 million people showing up for a one-day protest (not 1 million people showing up 12 times), it seems extremely unlikely.
A major readon is our sources of news have expanded to the point where their programming reflects their target audience; Fox & MSNBC are twins in that way.
And where's the charismatic leader? It's not Bernie Sanders, whose home state of Vermont is 90% white!
Bringing about significant change in our highly developed country would require massive numbers of votes on Election Day. Protests can influence public opinion, but votes are paramount.
Finally, in the late 1960s, a group of British elites wanted to overthrow Prime Minister Harold Wilson, a suspected communist. Season 3, Episode 5 of The Crown dramatizes this. Listen to Lord Mountbatten explain why a British coup would be very difficult (ii's also would be in America), however, Mountbatten believes the Queen's cooperation SouldSeas make it happen (spoiler alert: she says No).
See: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pi68RUUkoRI