At some point the reason for the protest is going to start to lose meaning.

That’s wishful thinking on your part, but of course as someone who supports tyrannical governments it’s not a surprising position for you to take because you don’t understand the first thing about human nature.

The more skulls they crack, the harder the people will push back.

Hypothetical "evidence" is not evidence.

I can think of 1000 things the state does that could result in destroyed homes, car crashes, and a number of other tragedies in which people can die.

How about the horrible traffic situation here?  How many have died enroute to the ER because the ambulance was delayed both going the the sick/injured's place and to the hospital?  Anyone holding the state accountable for poor traffic management and road planning?

Anyone can play "what if", but that's not an actual argument when the rights of individuals are being trampled.

Evidence of what?
I am giving you an example of a scenario that could sway the support of these truckers. It isn't like I am coming up with crazy hypotheticals.

Optics matter for a protest and waiting for something bad to happen because you don't want to play what-if considerations is reckless for the cause of a protest. If a building burned down because trucks wouldn't/couldn't let through a fire truck then it is already too late. Truckers can't just say "we will come up with a plan to not let this happen again" and everyone will be happy with them again.

We have entire groups in the military dedicated to "what-if" scenarios. You telling me truckers can't bother to consider what if their blockade lead to a loss of support for their cause?

Now that trucks have been impounded and protesters/truckers have been arrested, who is going to deliver the
goods?

This makes me wonder, what if they had simply stopped delivering goods altogether? Their actions wouldn't be as immediate but would still be felt by everyone without the problems caused by completely blocking the road that are alienating some to their cause. They could also point at the government and say "I want to deliver goods but Trudeau won't let me."

Every cause has a right side and a wrong side. One needs to learn that. Then it makes certain protest ok.

Like if roads blocked to protest what the nazis were doing to the jews.

The way the US people treated blacks in the jim crow days.

The way women were not allowed to vote.

Or if the roads were blocked going against all the above, i guess theyre right too. 2 rights make a right.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Who attends protests without thinking their cause is on the right side? Everyone thinks their cause is right otherwise they wouldn't attend.

Vaccination requirements are bad (in my opinion) and I don't know if they are unconstitutional under Canadian law so I can't weigh in on the legality of them, but I wouldn't compare vaccination requirements to the Holocaust.

Note that my objection to the truck rally is a strategic and tactical one, not a moral one.

That’s wishful thinking on your part, but of course as someone who supports tyrannical governments it’s not a surprising position for you to take because you don’t understand the first thing about human nature.

The more skulls they crack, the harder the people will push back.

Your comment is irrelevant to my point. I am talking about protest decisions by the truckers, not a reaction to control tactics used by law enforcement against them.

And you can try to troll me with your false statements about supporting tyrannical governments but I am not biting. Furthermore your reply seems to indicate I understand human nature much better than you.

Protests are a hallmark of a democracy. But, being a troublemaker or obstructionist is problematic. Sometimes, the heavy handed technique works, as in the crushing of the Tiananmen Square protest, or the firing of over 10,000 air traffic controllers by Reagan (1981).  In the extreme, a losing side can be subjected to a Carthaginian peace, where the losers get exterminated. People need to be careful of their actions, since extremism on one side can lead to irrevocable actions on the opposing side. Ancient societies used banishment to rid themselves of undesirables. I might go for temporary exile of troublemakers, including BLM arsonists, blockaders, Occupy Wall Street anarchists, etc. A year's confinement in Siberia or Nunavet could be a good, and memorable experience.

Protests are a hallmark of a democracy. But, being a troublemaker or obstructionist is problematic. Sometimes, the heavy handed technique works, as in the crushing of the Tiananmen Square protest, or the firing of over 10,000 air traffic controllers by Reagan (1981).  In the extreme, a losing side can be subjected to a Carthaginian peace, where the losers get exterminated. People need to be careful of their actions, since extremism on one side can lead to irrevocable actions on the opposing side. Ancient societies used banishment to rid themselves of undesirables. I might go for temporary exile of troublemakers, including BLM arsonists, blockaders, Occupy Wall Street anarchists, etc. A year's confinement in Siberia or Nunavet could be a good, and memorable experience..

How about we send you to Siberia, comrade? Your opinions definitely seem to be a holdover from the USSR

Furthermore your reply seems to indicate I understand human nature much better than you.

Speaking about not understanding human nature and the consequences of supporting incompetent tyrants, there’s a reason your beloved petulant boy king flipped on his iron fist initiative. OOPS!

Protests are a hallmark of a democracy. But, being a troublemaker or obstructionist is problematic. Sometimes, the heavy handed technique works, as in the crushing of the Tiananmen Square protest, or the firing of over 10,000 air traffic controllers by Reagan (1981).  In the extreme, a losing side can be subjected to a Carthaginian peace, where the losers get exterminated. People need to be careful of their actions, since extremism on one side can lead to irrevocable actions on the opposing side. Ancient societies used banishment to rid themselves of undesirables. I might go for temporary exile of troublemakers, including BLM arsonists, blockaders, Occupy Wall Street anarchists, etc. A year's confinement in Siberia or Nunavet could be a good, and memorable experience.

cool story, bro

How about we send you to Siberia, comrade? Your opinions definitely seem to be a holdover from the USSR

This might be an older pic of him, and I'm gonna assume in Siberia. Because that would be the relevance of posting the pic.

This might be an older pic of him, and I'm gonna assume in Siberia. Because that would be the relevance of posting the pic.

I just don’t understand why anyone who knows anything about the gulags would want to create them. The people who were sending others for decades of torture were just as likely to get sent their themselves.

I just don’t understand why anyone who knows anything about the gulags would want to create them. The people who were sending others for decades of torture were just as likely to get sent their themselves.

Same as the injectors. The people naming and shaming others for refusing a BIOLOGICAL PROCEDURE will be just as likely subjected to SOMETHING SIMILAR in the future, be it injections, pills, or even outright mandatory surgery.

Evidence of what?
I am giving you an example of a scenario that could sway the support of these truckers. It isn't like I am coming up with crazy hypotheticals.

Optics matter for a protest and waiting for something bad to happen because you don't want to play what-if considerations is reckless for the cause of a protest. If a building burned down because trucks wouldn't/couldn't let through a fire truck then it is already too late. Truckers can't just say "we will come up with a plan to not let this happen again" and everyone will be happy with them again.

We have entire groups in the military dedicated to "what-if" scenarios. You telling me truckers can't bother to consider what if their blockade lead to a loss of support for their cause?

You're saying everyone needs to put the same effort into planning their protests as military doctrine planners and researchers?

What planet are you on?  You really ought to stop using anything military-related in your comments since you don't have the experience or facts to properly apply those concepts.

How many protest planners have first aid kits, water stations, and "lost & found" baskets?  How many pay for ambulances and fire trucks to be on standby in their protest area?  How many have cafeterias set up to feed the protestors?

Protests are not like marathons and other public events.  They are voluntary, and any consequences of being there are accepted as part of the risk of attending.

As for public services being able to reach non-participants in need, that can happen with any large event -- imagine the traffic after a sporting event, political rally (Obama's or Trump's, not Biden's or Clinton's!), a fireworks show on the 4th of July,  or even after a popular concert lets out.   Often the local LE send patrol cars to help direct the traffic and keep it moving.  Seems like that's where the responsibility lies -- local officials with the resources and duty to protect the public at large.

So, don't blame the protestors if something they could not predict happens.  They can't be expected to plan for every contingency and hypothetical and have procedures and resources stationed in the area to handle them IF they even occur.  These are not an organized government-funded entity with training and a mandate to protect life and public safety.  They are TRUCKERS.

Some jurisdictions require a permit for public gatherings, including protests.  The permits lay out requirements, many of which might address some concerns you have such as blocking streets.  Sounds good, except we saw where Dem-run cities ignored the permit requirements for Leftist organizations, but charged money for, and even in some instances REVOKED permits, for Right-leaning causes.

It's ridiculous to expect people to protest with permits if the people issuing them favor some protests and not others.

Nice video on the people's convoy
Any of you old timers remember Convoy, the song/movie?

American Truckers Convoy

https://rumble.com/vw1a26-american-trucker-convoy-u.s.-government-is-anti-democratic-not-representati.html

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

Nice video on the people's convoy
Any of you old timers remember Convoy, the song/movie?

#RubberDuck

You're saying everyone needs to put the same effort into planning their protests as military doctrine planners and researchers?

Nope, of course not. Are you saying that a movement should not give any consideration to how its choices will affect their cause?

How many protest planners have first aid kits, water stations, and "lost & found" baskets?  How many pay for ambulances and fire trucks to be on standby in their protest area?  How many have cafeterias set up to feed the protestors? Protests are not like marathons and other public events.  They are voluntary, and any consequences of being there are accepted as part of the risk of attending.

As for public services being able to reach non-participants in need, that can happen with any large event -- imagine the traffic after a sporting event, political rally (Obama's or Trump's, not Biden's or Clinton's!), a fireworks show on the 4th of July,  or even after a popular concert lets out.   Often the local LE send patrol cars to help direct the traffic and keep it moving.  Seems like that's where the responsibility lies -- local officials with the resources and duty to protect the public at large.

So, don't blame the protestors if something they could not predict happens.  They can't be expected to plan for every contingency and hypothetical and have procedures and resources stationed in the area to handle them IF they even occur.  These are not an organized government-funded entity with training and a mandate to protect life and public safety.  They are TRUCKERS.

Some jurisdictions require a permit for public gatherings, including protests.  The permits lay out requirements, many of which might address some concerns you have such as blocking streets.  Sounds good, except we saw where Dem-run cities ignored the permit requirements for Leftist organizations, but charged money for, and even in some instances REVOKED permits, for Right-leaning causes.

It's ridiculous to expect people to protest with permits if the people issuing them favor some protests and not others.

You seem to be sidestepping my point that a movement/cause needs to consider its protest choices. Otherwise it can hut the cause more than it helps.

Nope, of course not. Are you saying that a movement should not give any consideration to how its choices will affect their cause?


You seem to be sidestepping my point that a movement/cause needs to consider its protest choices. Otherwise it can hut the cause more than it helps.

Your point is ambiguous and hypothetical.  There are limits to what anyone involved in a "movement" can control, and in what they can plan.  Most of these protests are not planned in detail.  They set a time and place, advertise for supporters to show up, and maybe help get the signs made.  They may work on the messaging, but for those on the Left, half the time they don't have anything they are protesting "FOR", only against.

You seem to believe protests are organized, have a centralized leadership, and have a moral mandate to protect the public.

I guess blocking a few roadways and blowing some air horns are irresponsible, unlike those BLM protests that caused billions in property damage, dozens  of assaults and even murders.

Where did you get your standard operating procedures for protests?  Making them up as you go like most other opinions you post?

Nope, of course not. Are you saying that a movement should not give any consideration to how its choices will affect their cause?


You seem to be sidestepping my point that a movement/cause needs to consider its protest choices. Otherwise it can hut the cause more than it helps.

Classic Concern Troll