• Mastengwe@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Freedom of speech is not freedom to harass others and interrupt traffic.

    This is a good thing.

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s literally what it is but who would look to history when install they can rely on how they feel.

      There is no effective protest without violence and property destruction, I invite you to find a single historical example otherwise.

        • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Bad example. There was tons of violence related to this boycott. There is always violence in a U.S. protest because conservatives insist upon it.

          From Wikipedia:

          King’s and Abernathy’s houses were firebombed, as were four black Baptist churches. Boycotters were often physically attacked.

          Two days after the inauguration of desegregated seating, someone fired a shotgun through the front door of Martin Luther King’s home. A day later, on Christmas Eve, white men attacked a black teenager as she exited a bus. Four days after that, two buses were fired upon by snipers. In one sniper incident, a pregnant woman was shot in both legs. On January 10, 1957, bombs destroyed five black churches and the home of Reverend Robert S. Graetz

      • Mastengwe@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Doesn’t that speak volumes about us? We’ve become a “two wrongs” society. And I don’t think we’ll ever change, sadly.

      • PlantDadManGuy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That US soldier who self immolated a few weeks ago to protest the genocide in Gaza was pretty effective. Oh wait, no it’s still happening. And I guess self harm is still violence. Either way I agree with you.

      • Mastengwe@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you can’t get your message to others without being an asshole about it- you need to maybe remove yourself from any situation that involves others.

        • BreakDecks@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you were around for the civil rights era, I know exactly what side of the sit-in movement you would be on.

        • DillyDaily@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          But what if your message is “can we all get along together please?” the other persons message is litteraly “you don’t deserve a vote, you don’t deserve equal rights, you don’t even deserve to drink the same water as me, you are not even legally a person, this is the law, get out of my face nigge* before the lynch mob arrives, because I won’t stop them”

          How are you supposed to remove yourself from that situation when that situation is brought onto you, and there’s no way to simply negotiate or compromise because the two “opinions” are diametrically opposed.

          If someone’s boot is on another person’s throat, I honestly don’t care if I sound like an asshole as I tell them to move their fucking boot. I’d rather be an asshole on the right side of history than a coward who was just following orders.

          • Mastengwe@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            The problem is, you’re not being an asshole to the people that deserve you being an asshole to. You’re being an asshole to innocent people that have nothing to do with your issue.

            Don’t block traffic because you’re pissed about social issues.