[rdtsc]

> Occupy didn't result in direct action or changes.

That was my point. It had as goals to limit the influence of corporations on politics, more balanced distribution of income, more and better jobs, bank reforms.

I can see maybe the secondary effects of electing Obama, so agree with that. Interestingly did Obama do much in regard to those issues. There was student dept forgiveness thing, that might be a claim. ACA might be another one. But what about others...can't think of any right off the bat.

> The sheer size of the crowds at the first protest, the Women's March, has had a galvanizing effect.

It was a beautiful thing indeed. It was nice to see others and have that solidarity. If it gets people more involved politically that's even better.

> I think it's arguable the anti-LGBT executive order was scrapped at the last minute because of the sheer size of the instant protests over the immigration ban.

I am behind on my news, what was that anti-LGBT executive order? This is the first time I heard about it.

[xenadu02]

Have you ever really thought about the phrase "the revolution will not be televised"?

More than anything you must fight apathy. Most people are busy and don't have time to pay attention to politics or get involved. Humans are also social creatures; knowing that you aren't the only one - that you aren't some oddball - makes a huge difference.

At some point people start to question their pre-conceived narrative. They stop wanting the status quo. The revolution begins when people's minds are changed. Visible action comes later. Sometimes that "later" is a decade or two when a new generation takes power and decides to do things differently than the generation before. Sometimes that "later" is next week and involves a literal revolution as we think of it.

But you can't say protest doesn't matter. It is the first step in changing hearts and minds.

[rdtsc]

> But you can't say protest doesn't matter. It is the first step in changing hearts and minds.

Well I was trying to say that it doesn't work as it used to compared to the Civil Right Movement, Vietnam War, Women's Liberation. Something is off. Maybe it is just my perception. We saw what happened in Ukraine, Arab Spring and other countries. There it seems to work. Here it seems less so.

> Humans are also social creatures; knowing that you aren't the only one - that you aren't some oddball - makes a huge difference.

That's a good point. I hadn't considered it enough. Just knowing you are not alone is great motivator.

> They stop wanting the status quo.

Interestingly, I think that is what changed the election completely. Both Sanders and Trump supporters, especially their energy and enthusiasm, despite the media blackouts and lack of support from major donors like banks and even whole countries, have shown that people stopped wanting the status quo. Sadly the DNC never stopped to re-evaluate how come a relatively unknown old white male, seemed to have gotten so many votes.

> The revolution begins when people's minds are changed. Visible action comes later.

Well voting produces a visible change not that much later, in historic terms it is rather instantaneous.

> Sometimes that "later" is a decade or two when a new generation takes power and decides to do things differently than the generation before.

Wonder if there is a chance now to form a new party. What happened to Sander's supporters. They were all mostly young, very enthusiastic, it seems like now should be the time to give them a voice and harness that energy.

[RhodaLs]

Protests also help in building awareness. In that regard, Occupy was a huge success. Overnight, people and mainstream media were suddenly talking about class.

Also, I think it planted the seed in a way. There were huge protests around the start of the Iraq War, but those failed in part because they were mostly ignored by the media. Occupy found a way to get the media to pay attention, and used social media outlets as a way to engage people whether or not they showed up in person. The Women's March probably would have been a success if Occupy hadn't occurred, but I think Occupy did a lot in terms of making people in the US think protesting was viable in terms of getting attention, and thus the Women's March, and all the following protests, had a leg up because of it.

Tahrir Square / Arab Spring should also get some credit too, since they created the framework Occupy followed.

Here's a quick link about the LGBT executive order and how it failed:

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/ivanka-trump-jared-kus...

I can't prove it, but I suspect the rapid response of protesters played a factor in shelving the order, based on the large numbers who hit the streets and airports shortly after the immigration ban was announced. The LGBT EO would have produced an even larger response.

At any rate, if you haven't already looked at the Women's March or Indivisible's or Planned Parenthood's sites or Facebook pages, I highly recommend you do. I'm quite impressed and heartened at the ways they're keeping people engaged. Little daily actions that anyone can do such as calling your Senator. Turning the protest highs into concrete action.

[abeyer]

https://www.thenation.com/article/leaked-draft-of-trumps-rel...