Protests Move From the Streets To YouTube
weighn writes "One factor driving the move of political statements to YouTube, and away from old-style street protest, is that on the Internet the chances of being personally associated with a protest are lower. Mounting your political message online is also safer in countries where taking part in a protest can result in your death or injury at the hands of your country's army. We've seen how street protests and online polls alike are being shunted aside and ignored. What is the future for the common person who yearns to be heard?"
Aussies can use YouTube to protest against the lack of decent broadband. Very... slowly...
l ies
http://whirlpool.net.au/article.cfm/1715?show=rep
If you are living in Germany you can actually hire a protestor to do the dirty work for you - in case online protesting isn't your thing and you don't want to be there yourself, for whatever reason.
Surely the whole point of having a street protest is that it is visible to everyone, and can't be ignored. If you manage to get into a good fight with the police then all the better, because then you're likely to be seen on the TV news.
But if you simply put a video on YouTube, then everyone can simply ignore it. In fact, most politicians are probably unaware of the existence of YouTube. How does that advance your cause?
There is no news coverage by traditional media (papers, tv) of demonstrative acts on the internet. Right now, the best way to make yourself heard is still organising something in the streets. The internet is only helpful to get people to sign petitions and to organise live demonstrations. Of course, politicians are still going to ignore you. A confrontation with the police is really a good thing, because more people will sympathise with you.
assignment != equality != identity
Here in France as the presidential elections are coming near, the two main candidates, Ségolène Royal and Nicolas Sarkozy, have more than their fair share of partisan and protest videos on YouTube.
In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
On February 15 2003 the largest global protest ever took place in hundreds of place around the planet. It was against the war on Iraq. They were ignored by politicians. Democracy is dead.
The only thing that i can see to get real change is to have a global general strike. Kick out the politicians everywhere. Institute democracy again. But lets do something different this time. Let's create a system that hasn't been tried before. One where we all have a say.
Theres lots of talk about democracy, but for most people, most of their days are spent at work where there is no democracy. Work is a dictatorship. I'm all for workplace democracy. Non-hierachical collectives running things.
When we have a system where our only say is to elect a so called representative every few years, we should expect to be ignored.
It's time we took back the power we all have. The power found in co-operation.
Time to overthrow these corrupt corporate bastards.
We're here, we're buffering,
We don't want any more suffering!
At first glance I thought this was the most inane headline I've seen since Discover put "Why Kids Today Love Big Brother" on their cover for a story about MySpace and the loss of privacy a few months back. But if this is just reporting a trend, that is really sad.
I've been saying for a few years now that the only effective protest is a French-style protest where people walk off their jobs to clog the streets and a lot of those jobs are in transport and services so the economy is significantly crippled. Then power notices. Without even knowing the guy, I think I can almost guarantee you that George Bush doesn't give a rat's ass what you say about him on YouTube.
You can go to the internet for _information_ when the Mainstream Media won't give it to you. But _protest_ on the internet? That's just a few million people in the electronic forest baying at the moon. Didn't Nietzsche say something about real men and snarling dogs? Let's kill the fashion of 21st Century Schizoid Boy and get back to actually doing stuff. (Yes, I'm implying, like, back in the _real_ world.)
Oh, it's a change, is it? When American voters fed up with big government and voted in a Republican in 2000, they didn't get the change they wanted. And since the 2006 midterms, when American voters fed up with war, paranoia, and moralism in government voted in Democrats, they haven't gotten that changed. And when American voters in 1892 realized the Republicrats weren't helping them and voted for the Populists, they didn't change anything. Et cetera, et cetera, and others. Voting doesn't do shit except allow you to complain without people saying "you didn't vote, don't complain."
ResidntGeek
Once upon a time, protestors gladly risked (even baited) arrest to make themselves martyrs for their cause. They were willing to sit in jail and scrifice their time to bring attention to their movement.
Today most protestors seem to do everything they can to protect their anonymity. Being arrested is simply an intolerable inconvenience these days. Self-sacrifice is something to be avoided, not celebrated.
Ironic, amusing, and sad at the same time.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
Umm, isn't the whole point of a public protest to show your dedication to a cause?
Oh no, I really believe in anti-globilization, but don't want to run the risk of catching a fire-hose or breathing some teargas... So I'll send a tersely worded internet petition to all my like-minded cowardly friends. That'll teach those nasty corporations that I can't be bullied.
There is value in standing up for something in spite of the danger of being beaten, imprisoned, or killed. There have been anonymous protests for ever e.g. roman graffiti, only problem is that it hasn't ever accomplished anything - unless I missed the chapter where Rome was sacked by anonymous graffiti artists. If you won't risk your skin it must not really be a cause worth fighting for. That is what makes the Rosa Parks, George Washington, John Hancock, and Mahatma Ghandi such icons. They believed in something strongly enough to publicly buck the system.
unless I missed the chapter where Rome was sacked by anonymous graffiti artists.
Does the name "Vandals" ring any bells?
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)