> He goes way too far though

that's what activist have to do to shake people

Gareth321 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I have heard this claim before but I find it unconvincing. I have given up support of movements for which activists have acted cruelly or otherwise immorally. Obviously one person doesn't represent a movement, but if I only ever see immoral people leading a movement, that will form a basis for my opinion of the movement.

My observation of these activists is usually that they seek attention at any cost. They will hurt people to achieve that attention. Worse, I don't even think it's about the movement. They just want the attention personally. Others in the movement tacitly condone this behaviour.

I think the most frustrating part of this is that they claim it's to raise awareness. Who among us has not heard of global warming? Who has not heard of data privacy? The reality is that they're not getting the public support they desire because people just don't agree with their goals or beliefs, not because the public is "unaware."

▲

ngruhn an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not if it's detrimental to their cause. E.g. the just-stop-oil people have only garnered haters. A successful case might be Luigi Mangione.

	▲	joe_mamba 2 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		>A successful case might be Luigi Mangione. Sorry, but how was murder successful? Did it achieve the effect that everyone is getting cheaper healthcare now? OR, on the contrary it only achieved that CEOs are now getting more anonymity and private security, while the plebs are getting more invasive law enforcement tracking like Palantir and Flock shoved up their ass to prevent them from doing something like that again?

▲

kakacik an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Attacking families is firmly across the line and looks like crazy man's personal vendetta. Who can vouch he won't go further and ie won't kidnap a kid to achieve his goals.

No wonder he gets raided, at one point it becomes a topic about protecting one's family, left or right, moral or crook doesn't matter anymore.

Its not activist anymore in any meaningful sense, just a fanatic.

▲

raverbashing 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I'll take "Actions that will backfire and you come across as the villain" for $100 Alex

▲

elsjaako an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I don't know about this case, so I can only speak in general.

A lot of times people that say this don't make a strong case that some theoretical more moderate protest would be effective. There is just a feeling that if they personally feel offended by the actions of the protester then it's probably a bad thing.

In reality it's often more complicated. I know some people that are involved with controversial protests, and the effectiveness of their actions is definitely something they think about. It can't be too extreme, that will put people off like you say. But often there is conversations like in this thread, "this protester goes too far, but they do have a point". This moves the Overton window in the desired direction.

The goal isn't too make you like the protester, it's to make you think about the issues.

	▲	raverbashing an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Yes I totally agree, and there are nuances and details But it's easy to push to one side or another

▲

l23k4 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Worked for the IRA. Working for Hamas. Working for the Islamic Republic.

Cowards would have you believe otherwise, but force is sometimes the only way to get what you want.

It really doesn't matter if you come across as the villain as long as you impose great enough costs for not delivering your desired reality.

▲

SukadarBukadar an hour ago | parent | next [-]

How is force working for Hamas? The shift in general sentiment towards Israel came from Israel's blatant disregard for civilian life and from their apartheid politics being put in spotlight. Hamas are still regarded as terrorist savages by everyone sane and their Oct 7 attack served as an excuse for Israel to set them back and hunt them regardless of collateral casualties, terrorizing their compatriots

▲

Gibbon1 19 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

You seem to think the conflict will be decided by the vibes and sentiments of people who don't matter.

	▲	SukadarBukadar 5 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Why would you think so? The conflict will most likely be decided by Israel (and by extension USA) having the biggest influence both globally and locally, and the biggest guns, but there is no misconception about it, so I decided not to add it.

▲

walletdrainer an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> How is force working for Hamas?

Brilliantly. It coaxed an Israeli overreaction which has led to basically the entirety of the rest of the world turning against Israel.

> Hamas are still regarded as terrorist savages by everyone sane

Why would Hamas care? They remain firmly in control of Gaza, while their cause is winning hearts and minds globally.

	▲	SukadarBukadar 38 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Noone is responsible for others' (overre)actions. So if you think justice for Palestinian civilians is their cause, it's not them who are responsible for it winning hearts and minds globally
	▲	raverbashing 44 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		While there are useful idiots in any situation (especially inside the UN), the level of sympathy for them - while was never high is going down steadly

▲

ACCount37 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

2 out of 3 for "bombed to shit". I wouldn't call that "working".

I'm not sure if Iran's regime has the staying power, but Hamas sure doesn't seem to be in a good shape lately.

▲

l23k4 an hour ago | parent [-]

> but Hamas sure doesn't seem to be in a good shape lately.

And who do you see on track to displace Hamas? After years and years of conflict and being "bombed to shit", they're as entrenched as ever while their enemy declines much faster.

Israel is getting to a point where it has no friends left in the world, where the average European youth thinks nuking Israel and turning into a glass parking lot would probably be a net positive. Jews are starting to be broadly despised again thanks to Israeli policy, something that would have been unimaginable just a few years ago.

Hamas operatives lead shitty lives in the Gaza strip as they have for decades, but they certainly aren't losing control.

Over the course of a few years, Hamas managed to turn wearing a star of David in big EU cities into a dangerous political statement. And we're supposed to believe that they're not winning?

▲

SukadarBukadar an hour ago | parent [-]

There are two actors and you're mixing up who is responsible for which outcome. I explained in more detail in another comment

	▲	walletdrainer an hour ago \| parent [-]
		There's no credit due for correctly reading your adversary? Obviously the Israelis could have just kept their mask on, but Hamas was clearly correct in their calculation that they wouldn't.

▲

raverbashing an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The level of general sympathy for one of those (and their level of success) is much higher than for the others

Maybe because they were actively avoiding civilian targets

And even then mostly because a lot of people were supportive of their cause even if they were against their methods

▲

walletdrainer an hour ago | parent [-]

>And even then mostly because a lot of people were supportive of their cause even if they were against their methods

But IRA didn't win because those people supported their cause, IRA won despite those people being against their methods.

It was the force they used which directly led to the GFA, without the bombs and the killing the British would never have surrendered.

▲

erentz 17 minutes ago | parent [-]

How can we know the IRA “won”? The country changed a hell of a lot over the course of the Troubles and by the time of the GFA in 1998 I don’t see how it is so clear that the reforms wouldn’t have also been achieved via other peaceful and democratic means.

	▲	walletdrainer 13 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> How can we know the IRA “won”? In signing the GFA, the UK effectively gave up on it's sovereignty over NI. That was never going to happen through "peaceful and democratic means"

▲

watwut an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

The final victory of Islamic Republic was after they did NOT used force against west, but when America and Israel started idiotic war, bragged about using force and then promptly lost.

This was quite literally the case of "actions backfire" situation.