Random Thoughts (Political Edition)

[Dr_Grip]

Whatever floats your boat, the point still stands however.

Sadly, history disagrees.

Some major reforms have been implemented by those in power simply because they felt that displeasure expressed by people without power might be a threat to their power base, so displeasure had to be calmed. See Bismarck's social reforms as the most prominent example from German history.

 

[Cellos88GT]

Sadly, history disagrees.

Some major reforms have been implemented by those in power simply because they felt that displeasure expressed by people without power might be a threat to their power base, so displeasure had to be calmed. See Bismarck's social reforms as the most prominent example from German history.

Sadly it doesn't....

For example:

The Protestant Reformation a wide collective protest led by many leaders who wrote about their arguments to gain support. One could also look at the American Revolution and how its leaders brought upon its success. Martin Luther King Jr., another example, led one of the most organized and peaceful protests of all time.

Success in protests comes from organization, leadership, and well defined goals. The NATO protesters exhibit none of those traits.

 

[narf]

Sadly it doesn't....

You can't use counter-examples to disprove existence claims.

 

[Cellos88GT]

You can't use counter-examples to disprove existence claims.

You can't engage yourself into an argument by only reading the last two posts of discourse.

 

[narf]

Sigh.

Person A claims "Some people are male."
Person B responds "No, I know female people!"

Does that disprove the claim?

 

[Dr_Grip]

You can't engage yourself into an argument by only reading the last two posts of discourse.

He is right, though. The fact that organized protests with clear goals and strong leaders (none of which applies to the protestant revolution, but that's beside the point) have been successful does not prove that this is the only form of protest that can be successful, especially given that I provided a counterexample.

 

[Cellos88GT]

Here's another reason why organization within a protest is nice; you reduce the number of miscreants that end up tainting and voiding your cause.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-anarchists-20120522,0,5423459.story

Sigh.

Person A claims "Some people are male."
Person B responds "No, I know female people!"

Does that disprove the claim?

Except that's not how the argument went. It was more like this:

Person A: You're wrong because of W.
Person B: No, not when you have X, Y, and Z.

 

[argatoga]

As already mentioned the February Revolution wasn't organized and it resulted in the collapse of the government.

 

[Cellos88GT]

As already mentioned the February Revolution wasn't organized and it resulted in the collapse of the government.

Yeah and look how that worked out.

 

[Dr_Grip]

Yeah and look how that worked out.

That does not mean it did not work first place. Claiming that nothing good can come out of an unorganized protests is different from saying an unorganized protest can't succeed. See Bismarck above for a counterexample to your new claim.

Moving on to more interesting aspects: What do you all think about the recent adoption of the RtoP doctrine by the United Nations? Can it be seen as part of the purpose-seeking of NATO after the cold war?

 

[Cellos88GT]

That does not mean it did not work first place.

Fair enough but it does show it's inherent long-term dangers.

 

[argatoga]

Yeah and look how that worked out.

Logic does not make.

 

[narf]

Except that's not how the argument went. It was more like this:

Person A: You're wrong because of W.
Person B: No, not when you have X, Y, and Z.

No matter how many female people you know, some people are male.

 

[Dr_Grip]

Fair enough but it does show it's inherent long-term dangers.

Edit C&P:
Claiming that nothing good can come out of an unorganized protest is different from saying an unorganized protest can't succeed. See Bismarck above for a counterexample to your new claim.

 

[Cellos88GT]

Edit C&P:
Claiming that nothing good can come out of an unorganized protest is different from saying an unorganized protest can't succeed. See Bismarck above for a counterexample to your new claim.

The thing is I never said anything about "success", in the post you originally quoted I listed two conditions that I felt were necessary to foster change. One of which was the need to attract others, since as it's been shown with your and argatoga's examples, power comes in numbers. In both of those examples, you had a very large number of people that saw eye to eye (even though it was at a very crude level).

In the case of the NATO protests you have people protesting for a wide range of issues, there isn't one focus. This makes it rather difficult to attract others to your cause and it makes it difficult for the world leaders their protesting against to understand what it is that needs to be understood.

 

[narf]

The thing is I never said anything about "success"

On this very page:

Sadly it doesn't....

For example:

The Protestant Reformation a wide collective protest led by many leaders who wrote about their arguments to gain support. One could also look at the American Revolution and how its leaders brought upon its success. Martin Luther King Jr., another example, led one of the most organized and peaceful protests of all time.

Success in protests comes from organization, leadership, and well defined goals. The NATO protesters exhibit none of those traits.

 

[Cellos88GT]

On this very page:

Prior to that, I didn't.

 

[narf]

Prior to that, I didn't.

I fear our definitions of "never" may be incompatible.

 

[Cellos88GT]

I was focusing on the idea of long-term success for those specific protests which is a separate point.

I did not mention anything about success in my original point which is the post that Dr. Grip originally had issue with.

Nice try though.

 

[nomix]

As already mentioned the February Revolution wasn't organized and it resulted in the collapse of the government.

And to prove Cellos point, the October revolution was highly organized, and it did work.

Yeah and look how that worked out.

Irrelevant, it threw away one of the most powerful autocrats of history. We can't imagine the power the Tsar had over life and death, he had as much power over life and death as Mao. He didn't excersise that power as much, but it still says a lot that a completely unorganized effort could topple him.

Fair enough but it does show it's inherent long-term dangers.

Which is irrelevant to the point you've made time and time again.

Prior to that, I didn't.

Your statements have uniformily been interpreted that way by several people. When that happens to me, I usually find it's time to stop the music and try to reiterate my point more clearly to avoid confusion. Not doing that will only make you appear like an arrogant sod in the long run.