Oh, spare me that rhetroric. Protestors in the 90s and especially the 2000s felt just as disenfranchised. That's how you end up protesting in the first place. And those were the nice ones. The stories my parents could tell you about the 60s and 70s.

It's not like "don't be an idiot" is a struggle only now. I was in protests back in a different millenium where the smart ones were already standing in front of cops and bank windows to stop the idiots from throwing rocks at them and spoiling the whole thing.

The despondent "you just don't get it" online discourse is pretty new, though.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

You get it. I saw some bad shit at the Oil Wars and Occupy protests.

It’s all one action. We need to keep it together for the clarity of message. Even more now in some states where one bad actor won’t just end a protest, but get everyone charged.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

And beyond getting charged it's the optics. I am from a place where you're less likely to get shot by police and where serious charges are not likely to come from protesting (at least back then, it has gotten worse). But even then the marching orders were that if cops charge or disrupt the protest that's good optics, if the protestors riot unprompted that's bad optics, which should be pretty straightforward to understand.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Absolutely. The people you need to reach are outside of the movement. Performative radicalism is immediately discredited by your target audience, and only praised by those who are already supporters of the cause.