You must log in or register to comment.
I like this new format where we scan photocopies of posts.
Could you fax it to me?
When you get it, could you take a picture of it on a wooden table, and send it to me by email as a low quality JPEG?
I can only do bitmap, I’m afraid
Yeah this is looking pretty deep-fried. I presume to elude repost bots?
Make Memes Analog Again!
Was this faxed to lemmy?
Aaah, the 2000s. Such Rare Auld Times.
Haha, what is this from?
Found it on knowyourmeme just now but this has been around for ages. Think I first saw it on 9gag around 2010 😅
Retvrn to tradition - The New Internet will be a vast network of fax machines, each whirring and grinding and printing all day, every day.
COME AT ME NOW AI SLOP!
Have the AIs fax-DoS the health insurance companies with nonsense Luigi memes
deleted by creator
pigeoned
I didn’t know that this is the perfect way to enjoy memes. Posted to Twitter, screenshotted, discussed further in Tumblr, printed out, faxed, scanned, and then posted to Lemmy.
Just use a fax to email service FFS
Bottomfeeder unite 🐟🐟🐟
I can understand that people don’t like riots.
What really shits me is when people are opposed to completely non-violent disruptive protests. Street marches, die-ins, gluing yourself to statues, throwing non-destructive liquids onto monuments, etc. If you put your mild inconvenience or sense of propriety ahead of a cause, that’s clearly not a cause you believe in, so stop blaming the protestors for your lack of support.
Not all protest is good protest. Criticizing the form of protests is valid.
Block a random highway and all you’re going to do is get people mad at your cause for making them late for work. Those people could be future allies that are getting driven away.
What’s a more effective protest, people holding signs handing out cookies, or people holding signs squirting passersby with water pistols?
The point of protests is to make the issue more palatable to deal with than the protests.
Being completely demure and effecting nobody is a bad protest. Make the consequences measurable.
I often think that when people talk about peaceful protest, they use the broadness and ambiguity of the word “”“peaceful”“” to clamp down on any actual protest. The civil rights movement was non-violent, and if non-violence is your standard for peaceful, than it’s peaceful. Conservatives however see anything illegal happening in a protest, and even though there was lack of violence, will say “they did something illegal, therefore it isn’t peaceful”. Civil disobedience, that is illegally not following an unjust law, must be practiced for non-violent protest to be effective. Over the years conservatives have managed to make it seem as if the civil rights movement won by just passively picketing buildings.
By the way, It’s a matter of semantics sure, but sometimes, semantics can be very important, especially if you want to make a very specific point.
Yeah it primes the minds of the conservative base to blindly accept that protesters = civilly disobedient = doing illegal stuff = criminal = bad other = subhuman barely worth your contempt.
Ikr
Pissing people off does not make your cause palatable. Especially when there is no obvious correlation between what you’re doing to piss them off and the goal you mean to achieve.
You wear your name well.
Not even going to attempt to defend your point?
By Inconveniencing people, there is a fighting chance to break the status quo.
Inconvenience force people to take a stance for or against, and a movement can start.
History has shown that over and over, and any person arguing against that is simply ill informed.
Thus my comment that you wear your name well. The junk food of a stand.
Ruining a piece of art does not force people to do something about Global Warming. The reason everyone shits on activist types is because these stunts are clearly cries for attention and the supposed cause is just an excuse for college kids whose parents gave them money instead of love.
I’m not saying effect nobody, I’m saying that the right people need to be effected. Effect the wrong people and you just make enemies.
Sorry when you can get criminally charged for trespass, the “right people” can buy themselves a big moat of real estate to insulate from protests. Sometimes the people they work with, services, and customers need to be inconvenienced.
If you can’t empathise with people protesting, and you just get angry at them, maybe do some self reflection on why you can’t look at the bigger picture and not take things personally.
deleted by creator
Sometimes the people they work with, services, and customers need to be inconvenienced.
Thats what I’m advocating for. Targeted disruption is necessary. Indiscriminate disruption is harmful to a cause.
If your cause is so just that random people automatically empathize with your protestors as soon as they are aware of the protestors, no matter how much the protestors make their day worse, then what’s the point of disruption?
Clearly they’re just waiting to be made aware of your cause, just say hi and they’ll join you. You’ve already won, go forth and make changes with your broad support of the population.
Ok let me expand that list
the people they work with, services, and customers, their neighbors, the people in their voting district, the people in their country, the people in trading partner countries need to be inconvenienced
Sometimes you need to put pressure progressively up the chain into more wide reaching efforts. It’s not like a highway blockade is day 1, other things were tried and ignored.
what’s the point of disruption?
To force people ignoring the issue to engage with it. People who are fine with status quo and ignoring the issue now have to deal with it. Either they’re going to be people who agree to some degree with the protestors and will be more voices saying “just give them what they want FFS so this distribution can end” or they oppose the protestors at which point why would the protestors be upset that they have been disrupted?
You do realise that you’re literally being the person that’s being made fun of in the OP, right? Do you think the suffragettes, the anti-apartheid campaigners, or American civil rights campaigners never impacted anyone other than those with direct power to fix things? As Martin Luther King Jr said:
I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Councilor or the Ku Klux Klanner but the White moderate who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice.
People love trotting that quote out, don’t they? They hide behind it, defending their ineffective protests and their unwillingness to improve. Any criticism and here we go, it’s time to blame “the White moderate”.
They think that gay rights started and ended with the Stonewall riots, ignoring how veterans of the Civil Rights movement taught the gays when and how to protest effectively. Protesting is a skill, and ignorance of that skill harms the cause.
Sorry, no.
Our enemies have been consolidating power and influence for over 40 years. We do not have the time to nicely convince everyone that ‘our side has cookies’
It is either get with it or get the fuck out of the way. Anyone with a brain recognizes that fact.
So you think squirting people with water pistols is more effective? It was an either/or question.
Or maybe a different, historical hypothesis?
You’re a Roman Senator, trying to gain support for election. Do you
a) give bread to plebians with your name carved into the crust or
b) have your personal guard beat anyone that doesn’t promise to vote for you?
Historically uhhh b
Voter intimidation was such a problem that it led to the invention of the secret ballot.
So yes, violence is more effective.
Inconveniences like being stuck in traffic are not violence. Grow up.
Butbutntu turnrurntjrbbut but I will be stuck in traffic!?! Did you think about me when making your comment?
What’s a more effective protest, people holding signs handing out cookies, or people holding signs squirting passersby with water pistols?
Really depends on how hot it is outside
Why does this look like it’s been photocopied more times than my geography teachers lesson plan?
Looks like someone’s been praxising.
deleted by creator
If you feel:
☑️ So empty
☑️ So used up
☑️ So let down
☑️ So angry
☑️ So ripped off
☑️ So stepped on
☑️ So filthy
☑️ So dirty
☑️ So fucked up
☑️ So walked on
☑️ So painful
☑️ So pissed off
You’re not the only one, so let’s start a riot!
Love me some Three Days Grace
Why does he look like Notch? 😨
You know why
Some dorks in this thread are the perfect example of who potential protesters need to ignore.
I brought up “truckers blocking highways and important intersections” to my very good (but desperately clueless) friend. Violence free, requires few bodies, historically effective.
He said “but what about the people they inconvenience?”
I’m like dude. Inconvenience to power is. the. point.
I love him but he’s a fool, guy thinks protests are people smiling and holding clever signs.
Sad thing is he’s representative of a lot of people.
They’ll be happy when things are better but idgaf about asking their advice. They don’t read history, the closest theyll get to a protest is the news coverage, and they’ll never be satisfied with less than some impossible dream of a “immaculate
conceptionprotestation”So like, fuck em
Not to sound elitist, but most people are ill-informed from what I observed. They mean well, but they form their views and opinions from sources that aren’t great. It doesn’t help either that we are inundated by pleasures from all sorts of media, which distracts us from paying attention to what matters more.
During the lifetime of great revolutionaries, the oppressing classes constantly hounded them, received their theories with the most savage malice, the most furious hatred and the most unscrupulous campaigns of lies and slander. After their death, attempts are made to convert them into harmless icons, to canonize them, so to say, and to hallow their names to a certain extent for the “consolation” of the oppressed classes and with the object of duping the latter, while at the same time robbing the revolutionary theory of its substance, blunting its revolutionary edge and vulgarizing it.
Well Yeah, have you seen the Bob Marley Biopic? Whitewashing is precisely why his music is seen as stoner-feel-good-vibes and not the fiery protest music it was. He’s closer to the Black Panthers then he ever was to Cheech and Chong. But that’s not the reality they want you to accept.
I have not but I may look into it
Whitewashing is precisely why his music is seen as stoner-feel-good-vibes and not the fiery protest music it was.
Well, I’d say that has more to do with music sensibility. His music used slow tempo, heavy and steady beats, was bass-driven, and melodic vocals. That isn’t angry music for a western audience. Going back centuries, angry western music is fast paced, unsteady rhythms, big changes in volume, discordant sounds and lots of high frequencies.
It’s not whitewashing. It would be very hard to make an angry protest song set to a waltz beat too. The medium is the message, and the medium of steady droning beats is calmness not anger.
Yes. A quite recent example from Germany:
Letzte Generation (Last Generation) a group of climate activists which glued themselves onto streets, usually carefully planned, organized and communicated with emergency services (such that ambulances can pass). They just got all of the hate and achieved not really much.
Then there were some farmers who were unhappy about governmental advances to reduce or remove the “agricultural diesel” subsidies. They’ve blocked highway entrace ramps with burning car tyres and dung, went really hardcore compared to the Letzte Generation, and finally got what they wanted.
The issue with peaceful protests is that they usually don’t go far enough.
In your example, the farmers went two steps further and it made the difference.
Having the support of major news media and the lobby arm of Big Agriculture (who partially incited the riots) surely helped more than their methods.
Absolutely, so people that don’t have that should inconvenience people more.
Maybe the farmers just had an “easier” goal. Just remove the taxes again but the last generation wanted to stop climate change which isn’t just done with one small step…
It’s not civil disobedience when the other side isn’t being civil.
People are dying from treatable or preventable illness, suffering from homelessness, and suffering from food insecurity. These are all forms of violence.
deleted by creator
Until now, whenever I point out that any and all societies are fundamentals based on the capacity of violence, people got uncomfortable and/or denied it.
Sweeties, people got murdered so that you could have a democracy* because that gives the power to the people** as they have the most capacity of violence, so they need to be appeased.
Sidenote: the eu, the UN and so on are also existing to appease enough of us to reduce violence as it is a shared interest.
I don’t mind riots, so long as it’s targeted in some way, and not just the random breaking down of privately owned small businesses (which hurts no-one at the top).
Riots are grenades. You don’t get to precisely target what gets broken and what doesn’t.
A certain percentage of any group doesn’t give a fuck about the movement and just likes being assholes.
Either rioters police their own or they will be judged as equal to the worst of them, because that’s all people will be shown on TV.
Hahaha mandem thinks there’s still going to be small businesses in the future
This is the same as any major conflict. People want to try to work thing out without violence. The times that does happen are unremarkable. The times it doesn’t happen, we can judge later weather it was the right thing to do.
When was there a time where people were fighting for basic human rights and in retrospect, it wasn’t considered the right thing to do?
I mean, saying that it’s a fight for “basic human rights” is a positional statement within the context of the time when the fight is needed. There are white supremacists (as individuals, not as a rule) out there who genuinely feel as though their rights are being “infringed” upon by anyone who’s skin lacks a perfectly porcelain pallor. In America at present, it’s being (disingenuously) claimed that squashing trans people is in the interest of the rights of women and children. Those pushing that agenda don’t believe that, but many of the followers do. If trans people are eradicated, it would be framed as a win for basic rights in the future.
More than that though, you’ve applied context to the poster above your that isn’t present in their original post, nor in the OP. Limiting the point to “basic human rights” has sort of set up the claim “all historical fights involving justified topics were justified.”
On the one hand, I suppose that depends on who is defining “basic human rights.” I’m pretty sure the Trump Convoys would claim that’s what they were doing.
On the other hand, the question was on riots, not on rights. Not all riots are justified.
“Why Civil Resistance Works” is a good book about why civil disobedience is the most effective means of resisting a regime. It’s not an easy read, but it’s still great info.
