It’s a (rage bait AI ?) video of an old lady trying to cross the street through an ongoing riot. And there are some protestors intentionally blocking her way. After this clip, there is a guy explaining how empty inside those people are.
Credit to jim3692@discuss.online for providing description.
But not having a facebook account grows their base so much larger leading to another victory come election time. I don’t understand how any person thinks that protesting is effective but not letting their views spread online is not.
You get more bang for your buck every single time with online effort. There’s no way to argue you don’t. Facebook is where all the people are who are going to matter in the fight against MAGA. Because so many leftist feel to good for it they left and now the right has this red carpet access to the eyes and ears of every single person who is needed to turn the tides on MAGA.
Like you all repeat this trendy 3% rule about protests. But why has nobody figured out that 3% rule is actually about digital spaces. That’s why it is important. Being able to overwhelm their content with ours is what will turn tides. If my enemy is investing all their effort and resources into something then I better pay attention. That is online content especially facebook.
No to all of that. That’s not how it works, but you do you. It’s okay to agree to disagree.
Yes it is how that works. It’s exactly how that works. It’s why the right invest everything they have on controlling it. This is basic stuff.
The problem here is the thinking that protesting has any effect on them whatsoever.
Protesting is for us. Not them. You cannot speak truth to corruption. They don’t care and aren’t listening. If you think you’re changing their minds, you need to change how you’re thinking- because they don’t mind how they think.
So staying on that platform only serves to generate more revenue for them. Which leads to my original point:
If you still have a Facebook account- you’re supporting their bullshit.
I’m not sure what the purpose of protesting for us means.
Protests carry a significant risk. There are severe financial, medical, legal and career risks. With how things are there is even risk to lives.
What I struggle with understanding is given this risks what is the reward for protesting. If we’re asking others to bare these things, should there not be a due diligence on our part to make sure we did everything we could to ensure these protests are successful.
All protests are not equal. Civil rights protests or Montgomery bus boycotts came with clear measurable goals that protestors knew the risks and rewards. Other protests where shit shows like occupy Wallstreet or many of the Iraq war protests where laws were already locked in and there was no actionable goal.
So what i struggle with here is what do you mean protests are for us because it sounds like you think protests should be more like occupy or the Iraq protests rather than any of the civil rights or bus boycotts.
Facebook is going to make money no matter what. That’s because there are so many people using it. Which is why it’s why everybody but the left use it to raise awareness. I get the moral argument but you still have to be aware of the consequences. Not using Facebook means they spread their message to the average person. If you want any support or success you have to engage and convince that vox populi to support your efforts or your dead in the water before you even started.
So basically, you’re just trying to find any excuse to continue using it.
“Because I want to” is a fine answer, even if it comes from a source of indifference.
No reason you can give will be rational enough to make an argument to continue using Facebook. And; “Facebook is going to make money no matter what” is probably up there with the dumbest of them all.
As far as protesting for us-
It’s a way to join together and have a unified voice and the feeling of solidarity. Anyone thinking that minds will change as a result of it is foolish. However, for those on the fence- it’s a visible and audible presentation of plight at determination.
Which is FAR more successful than Facebook memes.
You’re wrong on a few things here.
There are more than enough reasons to be on Facebook right now depending on what you’re trying to accomplish. Personal feelings about the platform are valid reasons to stay off, but they are not good enough if you also expect people to show up to protests. It is callous to dismiss Facebook as a place to organize and use a unified voice while expecting others to take on risks without making efforts at a lower level that can accomplish the same goals.
Whether people like it or not, memes are far more powerful than protests in the current media environment. We have seen massive protests with hundreds of millions of people in the streets and nothing meaningful came from them. Attitudes did not change. Policy did not change. The same politicians are still in power.
To prove my point look at Howard Dean. His entire national political career was ended by a single meme. One moment, repeated endlessly, reached more people and shaped public opinion more than huge demonstrations that required arrests and injuries ever did.
That is how influence works today. If there are no measurable goals or direction, then protests are just something people do to feel like they participated. Some of us think effort should happen earlier and at lower risk stages before asking people to put their lives on the line. Expecting people to risk losing an eye, being arrested, or worse just to feel symbolically united and then go home is not strategy.
If you want real outcomes, you start where people already are and use the tools that actually move opinion and behavior right now.
Whatever excuse works for you.
Have a good one. I’ll check back in after the next record setting protest and you can let me know how unified you’re feeling.