Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Rpanich t1_j6fg1kl wrote

So you now understand why it’s important that protestors do things that harm the economy so that they are not ignored by politicians?

1

slide_into_my_BM t1_j6gz5ng wrote

Blocking a road for a few hours isn’t hurting the economy in any meaningful way. It’s just angering the people you need to have on your side and giving your detractors a lot of ammunition to use against your cause.

Public perception is the entire point here. If you lose the public then it doesn’t really matter what you disrupt.

If disrupting things alone worked, why haven’t animal rights activists ever made any meaningful progress? They block trucks from entering slaughter houses and cause disruptions at restaurants or clothing stores. That’s definitely causing an economic effect so why haven’t politicians done anything?

1

Rpanich t1_j6i6dc8 wrote

> That’s definitely causing an economic effect so why haven’t politicians done anything?

Wait, are you now changing your argument to “politicians don’t care about the economy”?

Didn’t we just decide that politicians DO care about the economy?

1

slide_into_my_BM t1_j6ia8ec wrote

I never said politicians care about the economy. I said politicians care about whatever their constituents care about

0

Rpanich t1_j6iakw2 wrote

So if politicians care about the economy because voters care about the economy, then what do you mean by this?

> That’s definitely causing an economic effect so why haven’t politicians done anything?

1

slide_into_my_BM t1_j6ibkpd wrote

If the reasons politicians made public policy were based on economic reasons, why haven’t we seen any major changes to the meat industry?

Protestors block roads to slaughter houses, disrupt operations at factory farms, and routinely engage in actions that screw up the daily operations of restaurants that sell meat or stores that sell animal products.

Why does that economic disruption fail but you think the same kind of disruption on a road would work?

0

Rpanich t1_j6ie45k wrote

So if you are saying that economic disruption will work, but it has not worked yet, is the thing that you are calling for larger scale economic disruptions?

0

slide_into_my_BM t1_j6in25i wrote

I’m saying you need to get the voting populace on your side.

>Why does that economic disruption fail but you think the same kind of disruption on a road would work?

Care to answer?

0

Rpanich t1_j6iqakr wrote

> Why does that economic disruption fail

Well, according to your logic, because it wasn’t a sufficient amount?

Or are you saying that politicians don’t care about economic disruption?

What are you calling for?

Because it sounds like you either don’t believe that politicians care about the economy, or that you want protestors to do larger economic disruptions.

0

slide_into_my_BM t1_j6j844n wrote

So you’re only going to answer by asking questions, gotcha.

0

Rpanich t1_j6j8u9p wrote

I’ve simply been asking you to clarify your first message, which seemed to be sarcastically saying that politicians don’t care about the economy, and then turning heel and then claiming you were earnestly claiming that when faced with evidence; which is strange because if so, you seem to be arguing against yourself.

Can you simply clarify your statement and state your stance clearly?

0

slide_into_my_BM t1_j6jbpxh wrote

Where do you think the line between causing economic consequences with a protest and turning the voting group against you lies?

0

Rpanich t1_j6jc794 wrote

Are we answering questions by asking questions now?

−1

slide_into_my_BM t1_j6jk3mz wrote

It’s easy to argue a point when you don’t have one

1

Rpanich t1_j6jm80k wrote

Uh yeah, which is why I called you out on trying to save face when being met with evidence.

The point I made was: voters care about the economy, and that you need to clarify your argument, which you have refused to do.

I’ll rebut your argument once you make one, but so far all I’ve done is fact check you while you tried to save face/ avoided making a clear argument.

−1