Schaetzel suggested that Floyd died of high levels of catecholamines, a neurohormone associated with the flight-or-fight response, or Takotsubo myocarditis, a heart condition caused by intense emotional or physical experiences.
Schaetzel suggested that Floyd died of high levels of catecholamines, a neurohormone associated with the flight-or-fight response, or Takotsubo myocarditis, a heart condition caused by intense emotional or physical experiences.
I am not from the US, so I might be out of league here, but haven’t recent US protest movements been somewhat ineffectual?
In a global context, successful protests movements tend to take active measures; blockading of transport and key commercial zones, organisation on a level that makes security forces ask themselves uncomfortable questions.
To be fair, such movements also tend to have very strange support (be it broad based or high approval amongst a very large minority).
It is not my intention to be defeatist or overly critical, just some thoughts. I could be wrong.
Sadly, yes. U.S. protest movements are generally not enough to make change. It takes a massive swing in public opinion before politicians consider doing something about it. Protesting helps, but it usually isn’t enough. It took more than protesting to end the Vietnam War. Americans were majority in favour of it at the height of the protesting. And even when it started getting unpopular with the majority, Nixon didn’t do anything about it until it benefitted him.
The only case I can think of where protesting (mostly) was enough- if you include the protests that did get violent and were deemed riots- is the civil rights movement. Even then, it took Kennedy getting assassinated for Johnson to put it through as a part of Kennedy’s legacy. Was Kennedy ever going to push a civil rights act through? Was it all political hot air? We’ll never know.
With the US civil rights movement it’s worth considering the international context too. The cold war was was it’s early phase of intensity and it was difficult for US to compete in terms of soft power with formal discrimination laws. The world was undergoing intense decolonisation during that period.
That being said, I don’t support a defeatist view of the viability of protest. But you do need clear goals and a sufficiently large core group of people willing to take risks.
I wasn’t trying to be defeatist. That’s why I said they were not enough. More than protesting has to be done. In the American political system, that means a shitload of lobbying and networking to get to the ears of the people who need to hear it. Plus doing whatever you can to get the media on your side. The media turning on Nixon (and vice-versa) was a big help in turning people against Vietnam. There was a real “if the president says so, it’s okay” attitude before that.