It’s a protest. It can only be meaningful if they raise a stink.
Nobody ever got anything changed by peaceful protesting. That is not what happens.
What happens is violent protests, and displays of power and demonstrations. The government eventually bends, then liberals whitewash the whole thing and insist peaceful protest is the only option.
so the Black and gay kids should just quietly take the abuse they receive. but the cops can go snowflake and tear up the place when they get offended. ok, police. got it.
Mrs. O’Connor sounds like the best kind of teacher.
and not just the kids. the absurdity of a black teacher having to educate white cops in her own school about racism, and just hope they listen because the cops have more power than she does… and the police completely missing the object lesson they are creating by that very dynamic. ugh.
The cops know the power dynamic. That’s why they’re cops.
Remember the line from Blade Runner?
“You know the score Deckhard. If you’re not a cop, you’re little people.”
This is nothing out of the ordinary. Cops know that being violent proves they’re not peaceful. They just don’t care. They believe their power is all that is meaningful.
All cops are bastards.
What’s the expression some of you have over there? “A hit dog hollers”?
The one I always go with is “all cops are liars, and their job is to write tickets and arrest people.”
Well now I wanna see all the posters. They sound awesome.
I still need to read the Graphic Novel, though.
Damn public school system indoctrinating our children with their liberal ideas like freedom of speech and peaceful protest by exposing them to what it’s actually like to live under an oppressive authoritarian administration!
/s
Nothing like a dose of actual fascism, to help drive the point of the lesson home.
Thank goodness for the Ms. O’Connor’s of the world, the only (true) adult in this situation who didnt fail these kids with their actions. And a strong second on getting cops out of schools.
Well, actually…
Researches at Harvard University run the NAVCO (Non-violent and Violent Campaigns Outcome) Project which studies violent vs non-violent protests, movements, and revolutions and finds the exact opposite to be true.
“Nonviolent campaigns have a 53% success rate and only about a 20% rate of complete failure. Things are reversed for violent campaigns, which were only successful 23% of the time, and complete failures about 60% of the time. Violent campaigns succeeded partially in about 10% of cases, again comparing unfavorably to nonviolent campaigns, which resulted in partial successes over 20% of the time.”
The only solution to a bad guy with a gun in a school is a bunch of bad cops with guns in a school who also get to harass and intimidate the students while they’re there “protecting” them, but that part’s just icing on the cake.
/s
The words Kent, State, and University spring lightly to mind.
How many violent campaigns started out as non-violent campaigns? How many “violent” campaigns were police riots?
Propaganda of the deed has been discredited for a century, but that does not mean that collective self defence is rejected. And lets not forget that non-violent does not mean law abiding. MLK and Gandhi both broke the law to achieve their goals.
Non-violence is only a tool, one of many at our disposal, and just because we have a hammer it doesn’t mean that everything is a nail.
NAVCO have the Indian Independence movement listed as non-violent, which is a massive over-simplification. Gandhi may have practiced non-violence, but he didn’t speak for everyone.
Also Gandhi stated several times that, while non-violent resistance was superior to violent resistance, violent resistance was superior to no resistance at all:
My nonviolence does admit of people, who cannot or will not be nonviolent, holding and making effective use of arms.
I have been repeating over and over again that he who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honour by non-violently facing death may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor.
Though violence is not lawful, when it is offered in self-defence or for the defence of the defenceless, it is an act of bravery far better than cowardly submission. The latter befits neither man nor woman. Under violence, there are many stages and varieties of bravery. Every man must judge this for himself. No other person can or has the right.
During my first year as a high school art teacher within spitting distance if the former capital of the confederacy, I was called to the principal’s office regarding some publicly-exhibited student work that opposed the bullying of sexual minorities in the school. My admins were afraid that it was offensive. Queer students of mine had seen and responded positively to the work, and sure as hell noticed when it was taken down, staging a mini protest outside the main office. The compromise they struck was that the piece could be hung inside the counseling center (rather than by the locker rooms where the student artist noted a lot of homophobic bullying going on).
I was also asked to get admin permission before exhibiting any artwork “that had any kind of message,” an absurd edict I promptly ignored.
The most galling was my admin tried to couch their censorship in liberalism and hide behind the spectre of angry parents. They told me “We’re in favor of this inclusivity stuff. Diversity? Great. But this artwork is up HERE, but the kids in this school are down HERE,” despite, you know, the work being made BY STUDENTS. Such contempt for the kids in their care.
Perhaps it’s the moose-stache, but that cop looks like a bondage top to me.
