Protesting the conflicts and uses of protesting by Dustyn Goldberg

Bus burning from demonstrations of Violent Protesting

Does disruptive protesting help convey the protesters ideas?

Despite what protesters believe, disruptive Protesting in general has little to no effect on changing the outcomes they disagree with. Firstly, studies or Groundwork gathered and performed by assistant professor at Carnegie Mellon University Abhinav Gupta states,”... disruptive protests on their own aren't as effective at creating change on a broad scale as they were when combined with "evidence-based education." This shows that protests have been proven not to be effective when the protest is not research based, or in other words not supported by facts or research, and disruptive protests are also not as effective as peaceful protests,therefore; despite what protesters believe, protesting in general has little to no effect on changing the outcomes they disagree with. Secondly, according to Erica Chenoweth, a political scientist for The Washington post, “ For the years 1900 to 2006 there has been studies to see how well peaceful protesting, and disruptive protesting has worked in proving their ideas effectively. The graph portrayed that peaceful protesting was 52% effectively in changing outcomes for their ideals, but violent protesting was only 28% effective, and 20% of the time neither form of protests were considered effective.” If the evidence shows that disruptive or violent protesting has only a 28% chance of being effective in portraying their ideals, but peaceful protesting has a significant 52% chance of being effective. Then this means violent protesting is not nearly as effective as peaceful protesting;therefore, Despite what protesters believe, disruptive Protesting in general has little to no effect on changing the outcomes they disagree with.

Protesters being arrested

Should political leaders be able to kick out protesters from their private events?

Political leaders should be able to kick out protesters from their private events, because it removes protesters and potential fulmination the leaders messages. First of all, according to Andrew King an assistant prosecuting attorney in Delaware County, “If protesters were permitted to stay, then a candidate would be subsidizing the protesters’ message and diluting his own”. The evidence shows that if protesters or people disapproving of others beliefs. Were able to stay at the private event then the protesters ideas or statements would become more important than the political leaders message, which would defeat the purpose of the event; therefore, Political leaders should be able to kick out protesters from their private events, because it removes protesters and potential threats to the leaders messages. Second of all, Nadine Strossen, a professor of constitutional law at New York Law School says,”Demonstrators may be ejected only if they substantially hinder other audience members from hearing the speaker, for example by sustained shouting; at that point, the demonstrators themselves undermine other people’s free speech rights.” If the evidence claims that Demonstrators who are limiting other free speech freedoms are allowed to be kicked out of private political events, then the first amendment doesn’t need to be honored, because the first amendment only protects people from the government not the rules of the private institution;therefore,Political leaders should be able to kick out protesters from their private events, because it removes protesters and potential threats to the leaders messages.

This is showing a different protesting method called Mass Demonstration

Disruptive Protesting has been proven to be ineffective in proving their beliefs, are there more effective methods than protesting to prove their beliefs?

Disruptive protesting has been proven to be highly inaccurate in displaying the protesters beliefs, so more effective methods other than protesting are needed to get their point across. First off, Robert F. Kennedy former president of the United States claims, “Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope…building a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.” The evidence shows an alternative method other than protesting that is effective in getting the demonstrators point across. This method is called mass demonstration it utilizes a mass group of people to show the significance of the issue they’re trying to display. This is a more effective method other than protesting, because The former president of The United States, says, that when a lot of people act against a belief they disagree with, the people themselves will be heard, and they’re strong enough to make a significant change no matter how strong the oppression is; therefore, Disruptive protesting has been proven to be highly inaccurate in displaying the protesters beliefs, so more effective methods other than protesting are needed to get their point across.Secondly, The Montgomery Boycott from the years (1955-1956) where the Objective: Lessen racial segregation and inequality for blacks in the American South was successful in the fact that racial segregation was considered unlawful in Alabama, and this event started many civil rights movements in years to come. According to the evidence a different method than protesting was used in American history called silence and stillness. Where the group demonstrating this method do nothing in order to achieve their goal, an example is when Rosa Parks refused to move from her seat on the bus, and it lowered racial segregation in Alabama. This method is more effective than protesting because it has been proven to work more efficiently like the Montgomery bus boycott incident; therefore, Disruptive protesting has been proven to be highly inaccurate in displaying the protesters beliefs, so more effective methods other than protesting are needed to get their point across.

This shows how much faster social media can affect any situation including protesting.

How has social media affected how people protest? Does social media make protesting a better way to accomplish groups beliefs at a faster rate?

Social media has affected how people protest because it allows people to convey their opinions at a faster rate, and to see what type of people agree with their ideas. social media is a more efficient, and faster way to accomplish different groups beliefs.

Firstly, sociologist Zeynep Tufekci says,”...the fact that these tools make it so much easier to find like-minded individuals and organize them is a positive thing, because it allows a movement to grow and become effective much more rapidly, and to adapt to a changing environment.” The evidence shows that social media is a great tool for connecting people with the same beliefs at a faster rate, which is beneficial in making effective change because if more people that believe the same thing can gather faster then more change can occur quickly; therefore, Social media has affected how people protest because it allows people to convey their opinions at a faster rate, and to see what type of people agree with their ideas. Social media is a more efficient, and faster way to accomplish different groups beliefs. Secondly, Philip Howard, associate professor for communication at the University of Washington found data that says,” During the week before Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak's resignation, for example, the total rate of tweets from Egypt — and around the world — about political change in that country ballooned from 2,300 a day to 230,000 a day. Videos featuring protest and political commentary went viral – the top 23 videos received nearly 5.5 million views. The amount of content produced online by opposition groups, in Facebook and political blogs, increased dramatically.” The facts show that the amount of tweets, and social media in general caused the Egyptian President to Resign from his political position, which means that social media is more effective in letting opposition groups get their way, because mass numbers of tweets, videos, and blog posts could be posted in one day causing huge amounts of criticism to occur at a faster rate;therefore, Social media has affected how people protest because it allows people to convey their opinions at a faster rate, and to see what type of people agree with their ideas. social media is a more efficient, and faster way to accomplish different groups beliefs.

The video's relevance is it's a video about protesting the Dakota pipeline, and it shows the protesters using disruptive methods to try, and get their way, but the video portrays them as bad people, even though the video supports democracy, and is for protesting.

This is Gandhi he and successful leaders such as, Martin Luther King will lead the way for successful future protests.

If protesting is proven to be ineffective in displaying the protesters messages, what lengths will they go to in the future to get their point across?

Protesting has been proven to be ineffective in displaying protesters messages, so the lengths the protesters will go to get their message across will depend highly on what form of protesting works the best. First of all, The Birmingham campaign of 1963, showed that nonviolent methods such as, sit-ins or marches with the aim to get arrested, so the city's jails would overflow, and put pressure on police forces. This evidence or event in history showed the effectiveness of using nonviolent tactics. These tactics ultimately led to the removal of segregated businesses across the Alabama city. Nonviolent tactics will be used more frequently in the future because of their success; therefore, Protesting has been proven to be ineffective in displaying protesters messages, so the lengths the protesters will go to get their message across will depend highly on what form of protesting works the best. Second of all, Malcolm Coxall author of Civil disobedience A practical Guide Claims, “ Jumping into a protest campaign without working out the protest objectives and appropriate strategies is almost certainly a formula for failure." This evidence proves that protests that haven’t been well thought out are almost guaranteed to fail or have no influence, because only certain strategies, and tactics will work for different situations; therefore, Protesting has been proven to be ineffective in displaying protesters messages, so the lengths the protesters will go to get their message across will depend highly on what form of protesting works the best. In this case it was proven that just jumping in, and protesting doesn’t work, so great lengths, and more effective strategies from the past are needed for protesting to be effective in the future.

Glossary:

Convey:To communicate their opinions

Mass demonstration: Is a form of protesting that uses a lot of people to get their point across

Oppression: a cruel or unjust power inflicting it's influence

Groundwork: the beginning or start of a larger project

Fulmination: Violent demonstration or act Ex: that protest was a huge fulmination

Credits:

Created with images by wonderferret - "Protest" • C64-92 - "Violent Protest in Santiago de Chile" • Better Than Bacon - "Moscow protesters arrested" • Studio Incendo - "Hong Kong 7.1 Rally "We stand united against China"" • HealthGauge - "Twitter app for iPhone 5 with search for #hfcs" • massmarrier - "Park Guardian"

Made with Adobe Slate

Make your words and images move.

Get Slate

Report Abuse

If you feel that this video content violates the Adobe Terms of Use, you may report this content by filling out this quick form.

To report a Copyright Violation, please follow Section 17 in the Terms of Use.