This is an excellent summary of how the tactic of public protest is supposed to work. Or rather, how it used to.
This century, tho', there are many problems with it that cannot be handwaved away. Some of these are:
1. The overwhelming abundance of surveillance technology brought to bear on suitable public spaces, making them "data traps" for those who'd gather there;
2. The _extensive_ countermeasure "playbook" authorities have developed internationally over the past 60 years; in everything from the legal arena to specialized equipment to the tactical street-level space, to isolate and neutralize public gatherings;
3. The idea of "revolting" through public protest/demonstration is no longer an emotion-shaking event for most citizens of the modern world like it was for their ancestors of the conformist 1950s; today someone somewhere is literally *always* revolting against something, real or imagined, since the 1990s, and society in general is inured to the tactic anymore. Part of that is due to the idea that even certain ersatz, 'AstroTurf' actors have used the tactic pretty regularly over the past 20 years; so an average non-involved observer can't automatically assume that it's an anti-establishment movement out there on the street anymore.
Oh, and 4.
Public protests of any size have been known, in the age of social media, to massively attract various other opportunists; who will work actively to derail or besmirch the cause or side being rallied for; and bc they use attention-getting antics, they often win.
Too often, a public protest against the authorities, in fact, serves them more than anyone; it draws and gathers those who oppose them into a nice convenient area to be surveilled with face-recognition tech, have their phones pinged with IMSI- catchers, and should those authorities wish, to be brutalized and arrested by cops in and out of uniform.
This is the world we live in today. If we are going to effectively oppose our foes, official or unofficial, new tactics must be found to do it.
In my opinion, these are all reasons to take caution while protesting, not to avoid protests. Surveillance is real (people should turn their cellphones off at protests to avoid being located by cops), and every protest I've been to since 2020 has had agent provocateurs. People should take extreme caution.
But, tradeoffs to protests aren't new. The state has already responded to them violently, often with more outright aggression than we see today. That's why I don't think we can forego protests, only understand the risks and proceed with caution.
One of the biggest problems we have, in order to become a fully realized political movement, is "energy allocation". How much we have, and where we can put it to generate the most action and pull the most unconnected people who might agree with us in.
Public, physical protest used to be a good "spending" on that scale, but now it isn't; the times and technologies have changed beyond its former use-value. Organizations and "organizers" still love it too much, bc they get to boss people around and seem like they're being "effective", but over time it doesn't show results here in the imperial core like it once did. The body politic is inured to it, and the apolitical just get mad that you've impeded their struggle to get through the day.
This matters. To be an irritant to power is one thing; but like I said, they've developed a massive playbook against such irritation. To just randomly irritate the community of the powerless is another; and that's counter-productive. Our youngest and freshest minds should be cooking the next set of tactics, not be chained to the antiquated ones of the past.
Those are all good points, but I don't agree the point of protest has been rendered useless. Socialist orgs see influxes after BLM 2020 and similar marches, and I'd argue the pro-reproductive rights protests helped carry the momentum into the referendums red states had on abortion not long after the Dobbs decision.
There's a lot to be gained via thinking outside the box on new ways to organize, but I'd urge caution on writing off protests altogether.
Just curious - What are some tactics you think we should be prioritizing over protests?
They probably won't come from the likes of me; but from people who are "natives" in the technological world we live in now.
My two suggestions, if I must, are "connection" and "strategic absence".
Imagine the "Gaokao"; the all-important Chinese universities' entrance exams that make or blight so many young Chinese folks' futures. I was watching something on those the other night. Like the American SAT, they're considerably less than fair; they're massively complicated and they clearly don't serve the "equality of opportunities" result the society or the young people hope for.
What if the authorities gave the Gaokao, and nobody came to take it?
Yeah, but a general strike is impossible to coordinate. It's too broad; and demands would have to be too vague. You have to hit the regime in one vulnerable spot, specifically; and it can't be something that they can appear strong by resorting to violence to quash. They speak violence fluently, and can control perception of it even better. They have to be seen as flailing about, like a man beset by bees.
Well said, Joe. We Americans have been trained that “your resistance is futile” and “your actions are illegal or at best, ignored.” What we’re told is to vote, Vote, VOTE! Get Out The Vote. GOTV!! Every two or three years. And then our actual votes are stolen, gerrymandered, made illegal.
We must rediscover, reforge the class solidarity of our past that does not just rely on passively voting for the options given to us.
I always think about how Obama said, "Don't boo - vote!" As if public displays of political feelings were meaningless. In reality, they are very powerful (and I would argue helped get him elected).
Thank you for defending the value of protest. The Arab Spring, the truckers of Canada, the farmers of Europe have shown what strength in numbers can achieve. In recent America, we had Occupy Wall Street, the Million Man March, the Woman's March, BLM and Defund the Police (although there is evidence that the last two were well-funded establishment PSYOPs). While successful in notoriety, these did nothing to effect change. Why? I think the problem for America is three-fold: our country's geographic size, our unwillingness to sacrifice for the collective good, and our ever-decreasing attention spans. We may carry a sign for an hour or two but then turn to our friend and say "so where do you want to go for lunch?" In order for protests to effect change, you have to be willing to show up, speak up and most importantly keep the pressure on. You have to be willing to give up your creature comforts, miss work or school, get arrested, go to jail...again think of Civil Rights Movement and Vietnam War protests. This was the last time in my opinion that Americans sacrificed for something more important than themselves.
I agree that protests can't be the end-all. They're a great way to mobilize people into the streets, but that energy needs to keep going. It can't just end there. As for where it should be directed, that's a matter for the moment.
This is an excellent summary of how the tactic of public protest is supposed to work. Or rather, how it used to.
This century, tho', there are many problems with it that cannot be handwaved away. Some of these are:
1. The overwhelming abundance of surveillance technology brought to bear on suitable public spaces, making them "data traps" for those who'd gather there;
2. The _extensive_ countermeasure "playbook" authorities have developed internationally over the past 60 years; in everything from the legal arena to specialized equipment to the tactical street-level space, to isolate and neutralize public gatherings;
3. The idea of "revolting" through public protest/demonstration is no longer an emotion-shaking event for most citizens of the modern world like it was for their ancestors of the conformist 1950s; today someone somewhere is literally *always* revolting against something, real or imagined, since the 1990s, and society in general is inured to the tactic anymore. Part of that is due to the idea that even certain ersatz, 'AstroTurf' actors have used the tactic pretty regularly over the past 20 years; so an average non-involved observer can't automatically assume that it's an anti-establishment movement out there on the street anymore.
Oh, and 4.
Public protests of any size have been known, in the age of social media, to massively attract various other opportunists; who will work actively to derail or besmirch the cause or side being rallied for; and bc they use attention-getting antics, they often win.
Too often, a public protest against the authorities, in fact, serves them more than anyone; it draws and gathers those who oppose them into a nice convenient area to be surveilled with face-recognition tech, have their phones pinged with IMSI- catchers, and should those authorities wish, to be brutalized and arrested by cops in and out of uniform.
This is the world we live in today. If we are going to effectively oppose our foes, official or unofficial, new tactics must be found to do it.
Sorry to be the fly in the soup here.
Don't apologize! You raise good points!
In my opinion, these are all reasons to take caution while protesting, not to avoid protests. Surveillance is real (people should turn their cellphones off at protests to avoid being located by cops), and every protest I've been to since 2020 has had agent provocateurs. People should take extreme caution.
But, tradeoffs to protests aren't new. The state has already responded to them violently, often with more outright aggression than we see today. That's why I don't think we can forego protests, only understand the risks and proceed with caution.
One of the biggest problems we have, in order to become a fully realized political movement, is "energy allocation". How much we have, and where we can put it to generate the most action and pull the most unconnected people who might agree with us in.
Public, physical protest used to be a good "spending" on that scale, but now it isn't; the times and technologies have changed beyond its former use-value. Organizations and "organizers" still love it too much, bc they get to boss people around and seem like they're being "effective", but over time it doesn't show results here in the imperial core like it once did. The body politic is inured to it, and the apolitical just get mad that you've impeded their struggle to get through the day.
This matters. To be an irritant to power is one thing; but like I said, they've developed a massive playbook against such irritation. To just randomly irritate the community of the powerless is another; and that's counter-productive. Our youngest and freshest minds should be cooking the next set of tactics, not be chained to the antiquated ones of the past.
Those are all good points, but I don't agree the point of protest has been rendered useless. Socialist orgs see influxes after BLM 2020 and similar marches, and I'd argue the pro-reproductive rights protests helped carry the momentum into the referendums red states had on abortion not long after the Dobbs decision.
There's a lot to be gained via thinking outside the box on new ways to organize, but I'd urge caution on writing off protests altogether.
Just curious - What are some tactics you think we should be prioritizing over protests?
They probably won't come from the likes of me; but from people who are "natives" in the technological world we live in now.
My two suggestions, if I must, are "connection" and "strategic absence".
Imagine the "Gaokao"; the all-important Chinese universities' entrance exams that make or blight so many young Chinese folks' futures. I was watching something on those the other night. Like the American SAT, they're considerably less than fair; they're massively complicated and they clearly don't serve the "equality of opportunities" result the society or the young people hope for.
What if the authorities gave the Gaokao, and nobody came to take it?
Strategic absence is a great one! It's essentially the theory behind a general strike. Withhold all labor, attention, and presence.
Yeah, but a general strike is impossible to coordinate. It's too broad; and demands would have to be too vague. You have to hit the regime in one vulnerable spot, specifically; and it can't be something that they can appear strong by resorting to violence to quash. They speak violence fluently, and can control perception of it even better. They have to be seen as flailing about, like a man beset by bees.
Well said, Joe. We Americans have been trained that “your resistance is futile” and “your actions are illegal or at best, ignored.” What we’re told is to vote, Vote, VOTE! Get Out The Vote. GOTV!! Every two or three years. And then our actual votes are stolen, gerrymandered, made illegal.
We must rediscover, reforge the class solidarity of our past that does not just rely on passively voting for the options given to us.
I always think about how Obama said, "Don't boo - vote!" As if public displays of political feelings were meaningless. In reality, they are very powerful (and I would argue helped get him elected).
Super interesting read. I hadn't thought of how protest is tied to the threat of revolt - a cool take that will stick with me while I protest
Thank you for defending the value of protest. The Arab Spring, the truckers of Canada, the farmers of Europe have shown what strength in numbers can achieve. In recent America, we had Occupy Wall Street, the Million Man March, the Woman's March, BLM and Defund the Police (although there is evidence that the last two were well-funded establishment PSYOPs). While successful in notoriety, these did nothing to effect change. Why? I think the problem for America is three-fold: our country's geographic size, our unwillingness to sacrifice for the collective good, and our ever-decreasing attention spans. We may carry a sign for an hour or two but then turn to our friend and say "so where do you want to go for lunch?" In order for protests to effect change, you have to be willing to show up, speak up and most importantly keep the pressure on. You have to be willing to give up your creature comforts, miss work or school, get arrested, go to jail...again think of Civil Rights Movement and Vietnam War protests. This was the last time in my opinion that Americans sacrificed for something more important than themselves.
I agree that protests can't be the end-all. They're a great way to mobilize people into the streets, but that energy needs to keep going. It can't just end there. As for where it should be directed, that's a matter for the moment.