2007-03-22 07:59:19 · 16 answers · asked by Adam Smith 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
a violent protest will raise eyebrow's and get peoples attention. but rarely has it ever brought about real change. the government is to big and to powerful. it has lost touch with its people and marches with its own agenda. and what is most disturbing.........the worst has yet to come.
2007-03-22 08:14:13 · answer #1 · answered by "GoSANE" 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes and no, depending on how well the government takes criticism. Aggressive protests can caused the government to be more harsh on the people for that matter but brings about an idea that the policy isn't very popular. Peaceful marches are more mild and certain government may accept it better but others would ignore it.
2007-03-23 08:42:35 · answer #2 · answered by Anime Lover 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Aggressive protests could potentially have the opposite effect. They could polarize the middle towards more conservative positions. Violence is the wrong way to protest in a free society. Moderate people object to violence and by nature take up the opposite side from the perpetrators of aggression, which would make them support government policies that they might otherwise object to.
Which foreign policies are you talking about? Assuming you mean Iraq, no protests of any kind are going to help. Let's be honest. The reason we are there is to protect the supply of oil. Otherwise we would be fighting in other parts of the planet where human rights and nuclear proliferation are really at risk. If you want to change our governments policies in Iraq then you must change the oil equation. The way to do that is to support alternative energies making the cheaper and more available.
2007-03-23 08:37:31 · answer #3 · answered by John A 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No sir. I don't think any protest marches would help.
People just don't care about them, the way they did when people were protesting women's voting in the 1920s or civil rights and the Vietnam War, in the 1960s and 1970s.
And I am learning that many of the soldiers don't want to come home so they cannot lend their weight to your arguments.
I think protest marches serve to show that people are opposed to something, a way to make their voice heard, more than anything.
2007-03-22 18:26:15 · answer #4 · answered by honeysistagirl 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The real question is: What did the american colonists end up doing to their british oppressors?
They had a good lot of peaceful protests. One notable protest was the Declaration of Independence.
The Boston Tea Party was not peaceful but did not result in loss of life. The attacks on the East India Company's employees did, though.
In the end, peaceful and unpeaceful protests were all precursors to open war.
Protests CAN change the minds of politicians, but that depends mostly on the politician, which is why we elect our leaders every so many years. Changing leaders through assassination and revolution because of petty disagreement indicates a failed state.
2007-03-22 17:11:31 · answer #5 · answered by R. Lee 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think in addition to work to petition congress and have some members kicked out of office or the president impeached, protesting is a good thing.
When more and more people protesting in the streets, it makes your sound heard. If it is heard enough, it WILL become an issue. And an issue being around enough WILL start the ideas for change.
Good luck.
2007-03-22 16:16:37 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
nothing will sway the governments action the only thing we can do that might work is to petition congress and have some members kicked out of office or the president impeached. Protesting won't do any good the government already knows the people are mad , the thing is they just don't care. All protesting will do is wind you up in jail for disturbing the peace, disorderly conduct or trespassing.
2007-03-22 15:05:12 · answer #7 · answered by ibyt2692 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No matter what the tone a protest march looks like a bunch of idiots who raided the art supply at a high school and have no life other than carrying a stupid sign and wearing a puff paint T-shirt
2007-03-22 15:02:44 · answer #8 · answered by persiandiva77 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No on both counts. Despite massive protests the US stayed in Vietnam 12 years.
2007-03-22 15:02:25 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, because anytime you use "agression" or violence when protesting, then you detract from your cause. Most people are not going to have sympathy for your cause if they view you as hostile.
Peace always works best, because when the other side uses force or violence, then it makes them look bad and can stregthen your cause. Look at Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr. Do you think they would have accomplished wht they did had they used agressive or violent tactics.
2007-03-22 15:04:50 · answer #10 · answered by evil_paul 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋