[portaouflop]

> But being disruptive so that you piss people off is a way to not get more people onto your side of your movement. It is a way to inhibit further involvement of the public towards your side.

While I agree to some extent with your comment, I think there is some nuance needed. For a movement to succeed you need to be disruptive and piss some people off. It just depends in what way disruptive and who you piss off.

For example take the women’s rights movements. Were they disruptive and did poss a lot of people off? Hell yeah they did. Did they ultimately succeed and get the public opinion on their side. Also yes.

Another (horrifying) example is the nazi movement. They were extremely disruptive and pissed off a ton of people when they were still an extreme fringe group. Precisely because of that they became very successful.

There are many more examples like that. A protest movement needs to be disruptive to some extent to be successful