My latest: Protests are pretty much never seen as "civil," or protesters' tactics as socially acceptable, while they're happening. The neatly packaged versions exist only in retrospect.https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/16/us/politics/us-protests-history-george-floyd.html …
-
-
This is from February 1919, when the NWP (the more radical suffragist group) burned Wilson in effigy and NAWSA (the more moderate suffragist group) accused them of undermining the cause. https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1919/02/10/97071928.pdf?pdf_redirect=true&ip=0 …pic.twitter.com/7XUCZMeOMF
Afficher cette discussion -
Old polling data is also revealing. In 1961, 57% of Americans thought sit-ins and the Freedom Rides hurt the cause of integration. In 1964, the year after the March on Washington, 74% percent said mass demonstrations hurt the cause.https://news.gallup.com/vault/246167/protests-seen-harming-civil-rights-movement-60s.aspx …
Afficher cette discussion -
If we look solely at effectiveness, putting moral/philosophical considerations aside, there is no neat, consistent pattern to which types of protest work and which don't. History just doesn't support those narratives.https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/16/us/politics/us-protests-history-george-floyd.html …
Afficher cette discussion -
Much more in the article, including insights from historians and political scientists who study what makes movements effective.https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/16/us/politics/us-protests-history-george-floyd.html …
Afficher cette discussion
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
This is beautiful.
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.