Protests

by **Octavious** » Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:06 pm

orathaic wrote: ↑
Thu Jan 28, 2021 2:33 pm
Netherlands introduces sensible public health measures

Good news, everyone!

The extreme restrictions of freedom imposed by the Netherlands on its own people, sparking a wave of protests across the country, is soon to be condemned to the dustbin of history by the courts.

This is a great victory for science, justice, and freedom loving people everywhere over policies of fear and control.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56084466

by **Octavious** » Sat Feb 13, 2021 9:05 pm

Nice clip, yes. I assume you have a point to go with it? Putin has no interest in a war with the EU, or indeed any NATO member, because the Yanks still have a military that's worth a damn. Even the EU alone has a decent shout at defeating the Russians in a conventional war, and Paris will use nukes before the Russians step into France. Probably not before then... certainly not for the likes of Estonia, and they'd probably wait for Germany to have given it a good go on the conventional front as well. But, like I say, as long as NATO exists it ain't going to happen.

by **orathaic** » Sat Feb 13, 2021 6:17 pm

https://youtu.be/o861Ka9TtT4

by **Octavious** » Sat Feb 13, 2021 2:11 pm

I hate to point out the obvious, but a full scale war between two nuclear powers is pretty heavy on losses and whether trading is robust or not prior to the conflict makes sod all difference. There will be no direct conflict between Russia and the EU, but if relations continue to deteriorate there will be less incentive for Russia to scale back its election interference, incitement of rebellion, and general cyber attacks. Russia will also be less inclined to consider EU sensibilities in its Middle East and Eastern Europe foreign policy.

The EU has been humiliated by Russia for some time, but it has increased significantly in recent weeks after the painful performance by Josep Borrell on his visit to Moscow. Almost as humiliating as when the EU made an agreement with China only to see them rounding up Hong-Kong democrats as the ink was drying. It would be nice to see the EU take a strong principled stand, but Germany likes Russian money too much and too many EU states are terrified of losing the opportunity to get Russian vaccines. Not to mention that Putin has quite a few admirers in the halls of European power. I suspect that on the 22nd of February EU foreign ministers will meet and feck all of significance will come from it.

by **orathaic** » Fri Feb 12, 2021 6:35 pm

Back on the topic of these protests https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56039075

Is the EU adding more sanctions in protest going to backfire?

We know full well that countries with a robust trading relationship are less likely to risk going to war. So by forcing Russia to cut themselves off, (no longer selling gas to Germany would be a pretty big deal for both sides) this leaves them with less to lose from full scale war/minor skirmishes...

The EU of course is sure to be pleased with the use of soft power to try and push democratic goals in Russia, but will it be effective.

Another protest I missed was the farmers in India (of which they are?millions) seems pretty big, more than all the other protests discussed in this thread combined.

by **orathaic** » Wed Feb 10, 2021 4:40 pm

Fyi: I love the 'janus faced' - we reject wars of conquest; we will wage a war of liberation!

Can't imagine any other 'liberal' power saying the same *cough* Iraq*cough*

by **Jables** » Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:57 pm

Dejan0707 wrote: ↑
Wed Feb 10, 2021 8:24 am
Joke asside, I admire France greatly and their contribution to the development of the human society and human rights. I read many books about French revolution and enjoyed them very much. France was for decades alone in struggle against most of conservative Europe and even though at the end France lost he war changes it brought stayed.

Anyway in my opinion France invented liberal Europe, or at least pointed the way.

Let me throw some quotes at you from Tim Blanning's book The Pursuit of Glory (2007). Blanning is one of the foremost historians of the French revolutionary wars and has published many books on the history of Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries. Note that Blanning is NOT an anti-liberal or right-wing writer by any stretch — he is totally mainstream in the academy, to the point that this book has commonly been assigned as a textbook in university courses on early-modern Europe.

... the Revolution’s political legacy was Janus-faced: on the one side benign libertarian ideology, on the other malignant state terrorism. It would be difficult to say which has proved the more influential.

(Blanning, The Pursuit of Glory, 346)

On the French revolutionary wars, consider this. In 1790, the National Assembly decreed:

The French nation renounces the undertaking of any war with a view to making conquests and [declares that] it will never use its forces against the liberty of any other people.

Within two years, the National Assembly nearly unanimously declared war on Prussia and Austria (spring 1792). Blanning writes:

“... [this] was intended to be the most universal war there had ever been, a war for the liberation of all humanity.

(Ibid., 674)

The French Republic inaugurated the practice of Total War and militarizing the entire nation. Here are quotations from the declaration of August 23rd, 1793:

From this moment until that in which our enemies shall have been driven from the territory of the Republic, all Frenchmen are permanently requisitioned for service in the armies.

The young men shall fight; the married men shall forge weapons and transport supplies; the women will make tents and clothes and will serve in the hospitals; the children will make up old linen into lint; the old men will have themselves carried into the public squares to rouse the courage of fighting men, to preach the unity of the Republic and hatred of Kings.

The public buildings shall be turned into barracks, the public squares into munitions factories, the earthen floors shall be treated with lye to extract saltpetre [for the manufacture of gunpowder].

All firearms of suitable calibre shall be turned over to the troops: the interior shall be policed with shotguns and with cold steel.

All saddle horses shall be seized for the cavalry; all draft horses not employed in cultivation will draw the artillery and supply-wagons.

Blanning comments:

This decree is usually referred to as instituting the ‘levée en masse’, but it was much more than that. It was also the first declaration of total war. From now on, until total victory was achieved, every man, woman, child, animal and inanimate object was conscripted for the war effort. ... The result was the conscription of what was probably the largest army ever seen in Europe. ... [T]he best guess of around 800,000. ... Probably of equal importance was the raw aggression that was brought to the conduct of the war by the new regime.

(Blanning, The Pursuit of Glory, 628)

I don't need to say much about the Reign of Terror since it is common knowledge. But check out this tweet by Corinne Gressang (Asst Prof of History, writes on the French Revolution) about NUNS executed for being 'enemies of the republic':
https://twitter.com/macadandy/status/12 ... 1614724098

Blanning on Napoleon's legacy:

For the plain people of Europe, Napoleon’s rule had promised much, delivered little and ended in disillusionment. ... Some benefits they undoubtedly did receive, in the shape of civil equality, careers open to talent, legal reform and the metric system. But against that had to be set an increased and constantly growing burden of taxation, conscription and a government much more tyrannical than anything they had experienced under the old regime. The longer the Napoleonic regime lasted, the more unpopular it became.

(Blanning, The Pursuit of Glory, 668–9)

Finally, Blanning on the legacy of the French Revolution:

The emancipation offered by the Enlightenment had turned out to be a chimera, being merely the exchange of one kind of tyranny for another and opening the gates that led to the totalitarianism and genocide of the twentieth century.

(Ibid., 677)

End transmission.

by **orathaic** » Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:08 pm

I was going to say, the French Revolution started with some Liberal ideas, but it turned into... Well most revolving things return to where they started...

Napoleon became more powerful than a King, declaring himself Emperor before having the people vote to confirm it (the only reason he was deposed and the monarchy restored was because the monarchs of Europe wanted a symbol of the old order - which took another 100 years in Europe to collapse post-WW1) but even before that, the French Revolution was a horrible disaster, the red terror saw some of the worst political violence in french history. It was so bad that they ended up picking a strong-man to effectively lead a military junta. Napoleon's French Empire/Republic may have been more progressive than central Europe's Monarchies, and enlightenment ideas may have spread to the general public, but it isn't something you would ever want your country to go through.

He was nothing more than a little Hitler

More comparable to Cromwell if you ask me!

by **Octavious** » Wed Feb 10, 2021 11:07 am

Liberal Europe my arse. Napoleon made his brother the King of Spain and the atrocities committed by his armies were vile even by the standards of the day. He was nothing more than a little Hitler feathering his own nest by imposing great suffering on others.

The British people, I’m certain, wouldn’t believe the indecent behaviours of the French after their retreat. I have never seen, nor heard, nor read of such behaviour and am convinced their actions have no equal in world history. You will hear several shocking recounts which should be told to the world at large. They killed all the countryfolk they found. Every day, we found the bodies of women, young and old, who were either stabbed, or shot. Since we were near Condexia, they regularly sent patrols to fetch all girls over the age of 10 to the camp to satisfy the soldiery… Every child we met was in tears, mourning the death of a parent. The houses were systematically burned … They dug up and looted the graves. Two days ago, one of our patrols entered a village where they found 36 corpses, most of whom were in their beds…

Sir Arthur Wellesley, Duke of Wellington

The Cathedral and the sacred lives within were not spared, which made the Spanish look upon us in horror, saying out loud that they would prefer we violated their women than their churches. We did both. The convents had to suffer all that debauchery has invented and the outrages of the soldier given up to himself

Maurice de Tascher, French Officer

by **Dejan0707** » Wed Feb 10, 2021 8:24 am

Who can outperform French people in protests and revolutions? They invented it. :)

Joke asside, I admire France greatly and their contribution to the development of the human society and human rights. I read many books about French revolution and enjoyed them very much. France was for decades alone in struggle against most of conservative Europe and even though at the end France lost he war changes it brought stayed.

I just have one example. During the Napoleonic wars Balkans were divided by Habsburg Monarchy and Ottoman Empire, with strong influence from Russian Empire on various orthodox people (Serbs, Bulgarians, Greeks, Romanians). People on the balkans had little in form of social development and lived simple lives. Without schools, infrastructure, culture centers or even averness of their own language (they called it "our language", it didn't had name). Those fortunate enough learned German, Hungarian or Turkish as a way to break into the Empires higher social classes. Basically all thoee empires did is to take resources from those areas and recruited people to fight their wars, giving them nothing in return.

That was until Napoleon defeated Austria in one of the wars and took large part of the land for France. They called it Illyrian Provinces. In only a few years of rule, from 1809 til 1814 France undertook vast infrastructure build up of the area. People got their schools, roads, church influence was lessened and people seen they can have better lives.

At the end France lost and Illyrian provinces were returned to Austia. But things were not the same anymore. What France build in 5 years were much more then what Austria did for centuries. And Austria realized it cannot return to the days before but more or less tried to follow French example.

Anyway in my opinion France invented liberal Europe, or at least pointed the way.

by **flash2015** » Tue Feb 09, 2021 10:37 pm

I was recently discussing the protests in the Netherlands with a work colleague from there...and mentioned some of the things I saw (e.g. like the pile of burning bikes).

He wasn't impressed, he called them"amateurs"...and suggested the French do riots much better.

by **Octavious** » Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:19 pm

orathaic wrote: ↑
Thu Jan 28, 2021 2:33 pm
Love the comparison there

Netherlands introduces sensible public health measures
Octavious: "More power to the[ protestors]"
America steals children and puts them in cages
Octavious:"left wing thugs"

Sensible public health measures in what sense? The government imposing a national bedtime is a ridiculous over extention of powers with no obvious positive impact on the infection pathway.

Besides which there's a clear and obvious difference between a nation securing its borders against illegal aliens who are there out of choice, and a nation imposing restrictions against its own population who have no choice. And the entire cage description was emotive bollocks designed to generate a response from the public rather than to reflect the reality.

by **orathaic** » Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:06 pm

Also if this kind of protest and social organising didn't work to threaten the status quo, why did the FBI feel the need to assassinate social organisers in the 60s?(see also Cointelpro)

by **orathaic** » Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:00 pm

I have to disagree, because one part of a public show of force is to show your fellow protestors that they are not alone. Together they may feel powerful and rally to do more for their cause... Regardless of whether politicians actually change a policy.

Also, being seen in public means some politicians will take notice - they will either oppose you, or support you, depending on which they think will win them more votes (as flash mentioned Trump doing).

But the goal of protesting isn't to change policy, it is to invigorate your supporters, even to attract more fringe hangers on who might be converted into hardcore advocates... If you get national news coverage because of violence, that may harm the recruitment, but there will always be some who think violence is acceptable for that particular cause (see also: Jan 6th).

But here is the important thing. Nobody was ever given their rights by sitting quietly at home or asking nicely, these movements are built from the ground up until the status quo is forced to concede (and then politicians stand at the front of the mob and claim to have been vital to achieving this very important milestone... Again, in the hopes that the mob will all vote for them next time).

This is the only way to change things, unless you already have immense power. And those who live in a society which grants them immense power don't often want to change things.

by **flash2015** » Thu Jan 28, 2021 6:28 pm

orathaic wrote: ↑
Thu Jan 28, 2021 4:36 pm

Matticus13 wrote: ↑
Thu Jan 28, 2021 4:29 pm
Getting out in the streets, and yelling about perceived/actual injustice does very little to move the needle. Violence does even less.

Organizers these days suck.
Tell that to every violent protest which established a new country.

There is a long record of disruptive protests effecting change. Look at working class history, people power has often forced change. It just happens we don't tell stories about these successes.

France has farmers slowly driving their tractors to Paris causing country wide gridlock... Because disruptive doesn't necessarily mean violent.

Protests are a dime a dozen. There are so many protests occurring so often their chance of actually achieving anything is tiny.

And once any violence/property destruction occurs/other bad behaviour occurs, the protest can actually hurt the cause rather than help. Civil unrest especially can either help authoritarians obtain power or help them keep it.

Protests which have no specific achievable end goal are worse than useless. If you go to any of the so-called "left wing" protests in the US you will find that everyone has a different goal. It isn't at all clear what the protestors in Portland and Seattle are asking for at all.

I would argue that the only reason that Trump was even in the hunt in November was the unrelenting protests that occurred since May, especially the ones in Portland and Seattle (CHAZ/CHOP was awful). It allowed him to play the authoritarian card...he would be the "strong man" that would bring it under control and democrats were "far-leftists/communists etc." inciting the riots (forgetting of course he was already in charge and was completely impotent). Catchphrases like "defund the police" were easily converted into "democrats want to make you unsafe". Thank goodness democrats scraped through with a win anyway but with the COVID debacle it shouldn't have been close.

by **orathaic** » Thu Jan 28, 2021 6:11 pm

@micha, it demonstrates what the politicians could have promised to win these votes. Abstaining does less.

by **cormorant** » Thu Jan 28, 2021 4:57 pm

Matticus13 wrote: ↑
Thu Jan 28, 2021 4:29 pm
Getting out in the streets, and yelling about perceived/actual injustice does very little to move the needle. Violence does even less.

Organizers these days suck.

Voting for 3rd party candidates in a referendum on whether the US remains a democracy does what though?

by **orathaic** » Thu Jan 28, 2021 4:36 pm

Matticus13 wrote: ↑
Thu Jan 28, 2021 4:29 pm
Getting out in the streets, and yelling about perceived/actual injustice does very little to move the needle. Violence does even less.

Organizers these days suck.

Tell that to every violent protest which established a new country.

There is a long record of disruptive protests effecting change. Look at working class history, people power has often forced change. It just happens we don't tell stories about these successes.

France has farmers slowly driving their tractors to Paris causing country wide gridlock... Because disruptive doesn't necessarily mean violent.

by **Matticus13** » Thu Jan 28, 2021 4:29 pm

Getting out in the streets, and yelling about perceived/actual injustice does very little to move the needle. Violence does even less.

Organizers these days suck.

by **flash2015** » Thu Jan 28, 2021 4:07 pm

People give free pass to bad behaviour if they agree with the protestors' cause. News at 11.

Protests

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests

Re: Protests