Very fair questions and it helps illustrate something I wanted to touch on. Usually everyone protesting thinks their cause is just. Now if this type of protesting prevented the Holocaust nearly everyone would say it was worth it. But this logic is a double edged sword. If you go to the right crowd they might have thought the same protest would have been worth it if it got Trump blocked/removed from being president. So where do we draw the line on this tactic?
With the Truckers this thing has evolved and gotten so large, its hard to control a protest once this happens. So a few truckers laying on their horns can make it a problem for all the rest of the truckers. You are right, it doesn't have to be all or nothing, hence my comments that I support the truckers but I think the choice to honk horns was not a wise one for their cause.
Your logic is lacking.
How can anyone say the Holocaust was prevented by protests if the protests prevented the Holocaust? The fact that the Holocaust didn't happen would diminish the protests' reason to happen.
I work in IT. The better i do my job, the fewer problems occur. When they do occur, remedial processes get us back up and running in almost no time.
So, the less downtime experienced, the more my value to the organization is questioned. Why do we need him if the system is never down?
So, no Holocaust equates to "what good was the protest?"
As for a few truckers ruining to protest by laying down on their horns, how do you know it's not government offering to pay disrupters to make the rest of the protestors look (and sound) bad?
Happens in every protest involving government. Ever read/see
Les Miserables? It's an age-old tactic to infiltrate and spy on "rebels." It's also common to behave in ways that discredit the rebels from within their ranks.