"property is more important than human lives."
-This guy
CileTheSane
joined 2 years ago
-complains about people being uniformed.
-Does nothing to inform them.
Are the tariffs "definitely happening this time" until Canada promises to do something they already agreed to again?
Your ~~second paragraph~~ first sentence is just your ~~first paragraph of question~~ last post rephrased as confident conclusions with absolutely no facts or information ~~inbetween.~~ in either. It’s weird, man. ~~Is this AI?~~ Why am I held to a different standard than you? That’s not how it works.
It feels like an idea born straight out of a boardroom meeting to lessen the effects of protests
Ah, but "get yourself kicked out of stores", something the only mildly annoys the workers and doesn't affect the owners at all, THAT will have the billionaires shaking in their boots!
This entire thread is you trying to lessen then effects of protests. If I'm misunderstanding you then try taking the boot out of your mouth before speaking.
So not purchasing from a store for a day isn't going to affect the store, but getting yourself kicked out of the store for not wearing shoes will?
Your saying not making purchases for a day will have no effect, but your counter suggestion will have no greater impact on the store but require a greater buy-in from the people taking part.
I'll try to spell it out again: this is the lowest possible bar to get people to take part. If successful, it shows everyone how many people are willing to take at least some action, which makes it easier to organize more meaningful action in the future.
everyone could go out that day and intentionally get trespassed from a store they don't like. Not as a group, individually throughout the day. It doesn't have to be violent or even illegal, just break policy - go in without wearing shoes or something.
"How exactly do you gauge the effects? Because just gauging the support and nothing else feels like the literal definition of performative action."
It's a warning. If you can get enough people to do it for 1 day to cause an impact, then you can do it for 2 days, then 3...
It's a first step to gauge the amount of support for the cause. If you can't convince people not to purchase things for just one day your sure as fuck not going to be able to convince them to not go to work.
If you support a boycott or general strike then I hope you're willing to do the bare minimum of not making purchases on one specific day even if you think it isn't going to much.
It demonstrates organization and support. If a significant number of people make no purchases on one day it shows a lot of support for the cause and it's a warning that there are enough people paying attention that it can get much worse.
Conversely, if you can't even get people to stop buying things for 1 day what are the chances you can have a successful strike or boycott?
It's a first step, it's not the last one.
Baby learned a new word and it's eager to show it off.
That seems to be your suggestion
Explain how your eagerness to kill someone for spray painting a car is different from saying property is more important than human lives.