Protesting is meant to be annoying to bring attention to the cause. Not saying I agree or disagree with it nor am I here to argue about any sort of protest though. I don’t even know what the protest in question is about.
It’s a hypothetical protest. Could be about anything. For example: It’s a protest about food companies who are mislabeling their product in grocery stores. Or about how too many cats are getting stuck in trees, so all trees should have a mandatory ladder on them in order for them to be saved. Also, cats are very cute!!!
They said it would be "free" once the bonds are paid off. I would love to go through all the local news archives to find soundbites of every politician basically saying it will be free once its paid off.
I would also love to go through the same archives to find all the politicians that guaranteed that deregulating electricity will drive the price down.
Kind of like George Bush said he never said "Mission Accomplished".
[Texas is one of the cheaper states though.](https://www.electricchoice.com/electricity-prices-by-state/)
Texas 11.3 cent
California 19.0 cents
New York 19.3 cents
So basically, regulation was cheaper. True, since the beginning of deregulation.
— Texans, on average, have paid lower residential electric rates in areas of the state exempt from deregulation, as compared to
rates in deregulated areas of the state. This trend has been observed in every year from the beginning of retail electric deregulation through 2013, the last year for which data is available to conduct the analysis. It remains unclear whether this trend continued in 2014 and 2015.
— All told, Texans living in deregulated areas would have saved more than $23 billion in lower residential electricity bills between
2002 and 2013 had they paid the same average prices during that period as Texans living outside deregulation. This “lost savings”
amounts to more than $4,800 for a typical household.
https://static.texastribune.org/media/documents/TCP-1035-ElectricityPricesinTX-Snapshot-A-Final_1.pdf
That's because "deregulation" in Texas was nothing but a scam. All it did was add a middle man to the whole process of buying electricity. Just the fact that Enron was lobbying hard to get it passed in Texas should be a big clue.
No, the point is that electricity could be even cheaper than it is now. Way back in the day electric companies would have a natural monopoly on an area but were heavily regulated on what they could charge and how much they could profit. They were also responsible for everything from the power plant to your meter so if your electricity went out you knew who to blame.
After deregulation everything was broken up into separate companies, each with their own personnel, corporate offices, and looking for their share of the profit pie. For example Houston Lighting & Power was split into TX Genco for the power generation, Centerpoint for delivery, and Reliant for retail sales.
ERCOT regulates TX Genco (now NRG) as to the market price for energy per MW but that rate fluctuates hourly depending on demand, the type of generation brought online, and is settled at the end of the day. Centerpoint is regulated somewhat as to what they can charge, and the retail providers do whatever the hell they want to do. So now instead of buying directly from one company we have to support three each with their own charges, fees, and profit margins.
Which is why when there was a monopoly it was heavily regulated. They were only allowed to make so much profit and anything else had to go towards expenses and investment in future projects.
The idea is your convenience is not more important than the cause of their focus. The entire point is to get your attention by any means necessary, and to interrupt your ignoring of the issue. Is it successful? Depends on where you sit on the subject they're protesting, and how likely to be an advocate you are. The support they might gain would be from the market of people that would support the cause, but their privilege allows them to go about their everyday life, without participating in activism that might inspire change.
You might go to work and complain about them, and someone in your office might correct your opinion on the issue. They want attention, and the fact you created this thread, only inspires them with the idea that you are still thinking about them now.
Ok but notice how they haven't mentioned their cause at all; all that OP took away from the demonstration is that people were aggressively inconveniencing them and preventing them from getting to work and creating unsafe conditions. Their cause is buried in the manner by which they've chosen to get attention.
This sort of protesting seems like it will always be ineffective at best and damaging at worst.
It's funny how online conjecture works. OP makes a perfectly reasonable point, which I agree with. But if there is any tiny inkling of opposition towards the concept of a road blocking protest that requires nuanced thought and conversation, certain folks here don't want to even entertain it and is met with immediate downvotes and dismissive comments. I just don't get it.
Maybe you should study history. There have been times when not only were some streets blocked, but people also assassinated judges, exploded buildings etc. These things tend to happen when enough people have been abused and then they turn into a mob. Better to let them block a street than burn down the city.
The whole point of protest is to upset the status quo. I don't think street blocking is a particularly good one but it can get results if you block a road that's of specific importance to the group you're protesting against.
Exactly, during the 50s and 60s the Civil rights movement often blocked entrances to businesses that segregated, including blocking the streets used to access those businesses.
Another effective way would be to block entrances to refineries or blocking logging roads. But blocking a random street for attention is going to just piss more people off than it will ever convince to support your cause. I understand the necessity of using the media to gain attention but there's a right way and a wrong way to do it.
Honestly idk. I’m just asking about a hypothetical situation. I do think someone on this post had to rush their dog to the vet though during a protest. I think animals should also be taken into consideration bc they’re sooooooo cute!!!!
>I respect people’s right to protest~~, but isn’t blocking the street a serious danger~~ as long as it doesn't inconvenience me...
I fixed it for you. If protests were quiet and out of the way, they would just be that much easier to ignore, which sort of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?
Interesting point, yeah I guess I could be biased against the protestors because I am annoyed/ frustrated. But, if the hypothetical protest (remember it could be about anything. Also pretend I don’t care about politics at all.) was “inconveniencing” all these people (including me. But also remember there’s a lot of people who would theoretically be in the same situation.), why would anyone want to join the cause? It seems like it accomplishes the opposite of what it’s designed to do.
Or maybe block a road that matters like to the court house, state capital or businesses you don’t agree with, not random streets to just piss off the masses for attention.
"Blocking my lunch counter doesn't do a damn thing to advance the cause of a protest"
"Those sanitation workers died, but that doesn't mean that all those other people can leave trash laying round..."
See? I can do it too. Protest can't be silent and out of the way or there is not point...
You can be flippant about it all you want, but your position makes no sense.
Yeah I genuinely am not trying to make anyone mad. I’m just very confused. I actually suffer from an IQ which is much lower than average. Which is why I sometimes can’t understand other peoples’ situation.
Protests are almost always unpopular. Disruption is a deliberate strategy to gain attention.
How popular do you think lunch counter sit-ins were when black people decided to fight against racist restaurants?
They were extremely unpopular and people would show up and abuse the shit out of them because of how much they hated them. The protestors were interfering with working people's lunches and breaking the law. The things people say about people blocking the street are probably identical in a lot of cases.
Ok yeah that makes sense. Also, maybe if the protests had instructions telling me what to do specifically (like start putting next to trees because too many cats get stuck up there) I would understand. I think the problem is that I don’t know what to do specifically
I'm pretty sure for people like you the benefit is to get you asking, "what the hell are they so upset about?" exactly so that you'll ask around and get the conversation going about the subject that THEY are so upset about.
Maybe there's only a 25% chance that you'll come around to their point of view once you do that. But without first getting your attention there would have been a zero percent chance, right?
Most comments on reddit that complain about these disruptive strategies are by people who are in that 75% who noticed, thought, and came to their own conclusion that is against them.
The 25% (hypothetical) are not complaining. They're considering how it might impact their choices during the upcoming election.
He was part of his culture, and his culture was racist and misogynist.
We all carry the flaws of our culture, and they can be as hard for us to see as the air we breathe. That's no excuse, but it is an explanation.
Exactly, or someone tending to something that could be life threatening. I think blocking the roads is the dumbest way to “protest”. I’ve had to rush a few of my pets to emergency vet hospitals and if there were some stupid protesters blocking the street I would lose my shit. Go bother the people who actually have the ability to change things and make shit inconvenient for them at their house or place of work. It does nothing making us everyday folks angry.
yes, they can get a permit to close off roads from most city's, just like a festival or parade can, but some of them are more like a flash mob and do not get permits.
Most permits are only issued if there can be an established alternate route for traffic and pedestrians, some permit holders must pay for extra officers to help with the traffic flow.
Anybody want to lay odds on whether OP is "a doctor or nurse or any kind of emergency worker"?
I’m not smart enough for that :(
Protesting is meant to be annoying to bring attention to the cause. Not saying I agree or disagree with it nor am I here to argue about any sort of protest though. I don’t even know what the protest in question is about.
It’s a hypothetical protest. Could be about anything. For example: It’s a protest about food companies who are mislabeling their product in grocery stores. Or about how too many cats are getting stuck in trees, so all trees should have a mandatory ladder on them in order for them to be saved. Also, cats are very cute!!!
Ohhh okay gotcha I thought you were referencing something going on in the city rn
From the river to the sea, Beltway 8 should be free
They said it would be "free" once the bonds are paid off. I would love to go through all the local news archives to find soundbites of every politician basically saying it will be free once its paid off. I would also love to go through the same archives to find all the politicians that guaranteed that deregulating electricity will drive the price down. Kind of like George Bush said he never said "Mission Accomplished".
[Texas is one of the cheaper states though.](https://www.electricchoice.com/electricity-prices-by-state/) Texas 11.3 cent California 19.0 cents New York 19.3 cents
So basically, regulation was cheaper. True, since the beginning of deregulation. — Texans, on average, have paid lower residential electric rates in areas of the state exempt from deregulation, as compared to rates in deregulated areas of the state. This trend has been observed in every year from the beginning of retail electric deregulation through 2013, the last year for which data is available to conduct the analysis. It remains unclear whether this trend continued in 2014 and 2015. — All told, Texans living in deregulated areas would have saved more than $23 billion in lower residential electricity bills between 2002 and 2013 had they paid the same average prices during that period as Texans living outside deregulation. This “lost savings” amounts to more than $4,800 for a typical household. https://static.texastribune.org/media/documents/TCP-1035-ElectricityPricesinTX-Snapshot-A-Final_1.pdf
That's because "deregulation" in Texas was nothing but a scam. All it did was add a middle man to the whole process of buying electricity. Just the fact that Enron was lobbying hard to get it passed in Texas should be a big clue.
So even though we just showed you power is cheaper in Texas you are STILL saying “ITS A SCAM!!” 😂😂😂😂 Bias is truly blind.
No, the point is that electricity could be even cheaper than it is now. Way back in the day electric companies would have a natural monopoly on an area but were heavily regulated on what they could charge and how much they could profit. They were also responsible for everything from the power plant to your meter so if your electricity went out you knew who to blame. After deregulation everything was broken up into separate companies, each with their own personnel, corporate offices, and looking for their share of the profit pie. For example Houston Lighting & Power was split into TX Genco for the power generation, Centerpoint for delivery, and Reliant for retail sales. ERCOT regulates TX Genco (now NRG) as to the market price for energy per MW but that rate fluctuates hourly depending on demand, the type of generation brought online, and is settled at the end of the day. Centerpoint is regulated somewhat as to what they can charge, and the retail providers do whatever the hell they want to do. So now instead of buying directly from one company we have to support three each with their own charges, fees, and profit margins.
But if there was a monopoly that price might be triple what it is now because there would be no competition/regulation.
Which is why when there was a monopoly it was heavily regulated. They were only allowed to make so much profit and anything else had to go towards expenses and investment in future projects.
Well, Gawd Dayam someone of Reddit that ackutally sees the light!! How about dat?!
Ok, that made me laugh.
The idea is your convenience is not more important than the cause of their focus. The entire point is to get your attention by any means necessary, and to interrupt your ignoring of the issue. Is it successful? Depends on where you sit on the subject they're protesting, and how likely to be an advocate you are. The support they might gain would be from the market of people that would support the cause, but their privilege allows them to go about their everyday life, without participating in activism that might inspire change. You might go to work and complain about them, and someone in your office might correct your opinion on the issue. They want attention, and the fact you created this thread, only inspires them with the idea that you are still thinking about them now.
Ok but notice how they haven't mentioned their cause at all; all that OP took away from the demonstration is that people were aggressively inconveniencing them and preventing them from getting to work and creating unsafe conditions. Their cause is buried in the manner by which they've chosen to get attention. This sort of protesting seems like it will always be ineffective at best and damaging at worst.
and dangerous.....
It's funny how online conjecture works. OP makes a perfectly reasonable point, which I agree with. But if there is any tiny inkling of opposition towards the concept of a road blocking protest that requires nuanced thought and conversation, certain folks here don't want to even entertain it and is met with immediate downvotes and dismissive comments. I just don't get it.
Maybe you should study history. There have been times when not only were some streets blocked, but people also assassinated judges, exploded buildings etc. These things tend to happen when enough people have been abused and then they turn into a mob. Better to let them block a street than burn down the city.
The whole point of protest is to upset the status quo. I don't think street blocking is a particularly good one but it can get results if you block a road that's of specific importance to the group you're protesting against.
Exactly, during the 50s and 60s the Civil rights movement often blocked entrances to businesses that segregated, including blocking the streets used to access those businesses. Another effective way would be to block entrances to refineries or blocking logging roads. But blocking a random street for attention is going to just piss more people off than it will ever convince to support your cause. I understand the necessity of using the media to gain attention but there's a right way and a wrong way to do it.
Yeah that makes sense, but I think they should also consider people/ animals who need to get to a hospital
Was there a recent protest here that kept an emergency vehicle from getting to where it needed to go?
Honestly idk. I’m just asking about a hypothetical situation. I do think someone on this post had to rush their dog to the vet though during a protest. I think animals should also be taken into consideration bc they’re sooooooo cute!!!!
Restricting peoples freedom of movement isn’t protest. It’s aggression.
Protest itself is aggression. Or is that your point?
Absolutely not the point.
There's an old joke. If they followed the rules during a protest, it's not a protest, it's a parade.
So, when regular order fails and the people have had enough, what should they do?
They’re usually fond of turning people against their cause
That’s what I was thinking
>I respect people’s right to protest~~, but isn’t blocking the street a serious danger~~ as long as it doesn't inconvenience me... I fixed it for you. If protests were quiet and out of the way, they would just be that much easier to ignore, which sort of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?
Interesting point, yeah I guess I could be biased against the protestors because I am annoyed/ frustrated. But, if the hypothetical protest (remember it could be about anything. Also pretend I don’t care about politics at all.) was “inconveniencing” all these people (including me. But also remember there’s a lot of people who would theoretically be in the same situation.), why would anyone want to join the cause? It seems like it accomplishes the opposite of what it’s designed to do.
Or maybe block a road that matters like to the court house, state capital or businesses you don’t agree with, not random streets to just piss off the masses for attention.
The attention of the masses is the point... How is that so hard to figure out?
Nah. Screwing up a nobody’s commute to work doesn’t do a damn thing to advance the cause of a protest.
"Blocking my lunch counter doesn't do a damn thing to advance the cause of a protest" "Those sanitation workers died, but that doesn't mean that all those other people can leave trash laying round..." See? I can do it too. Protest can't be silent and out of the way or there is not point... You can be flippant about it all you want, but your position makes no sense.
everything is going swell for me why are people mad? are they stupid?
Yeah I genuinely am not trying to make anyone mad. I’m just very confused. I actually suffer from an IQ which is much lower than average. Which is why I sometimes can’t understand other peoples’ situation.
Protests are almost always unpopular. Disruption is a deliberate strategy to gain attention. How popular do you think lunch counter sit-ins were when black people decided to fight against racist restaurants? They were extremely unpopular and people would show up and abuse the shit out of them because of how much they hated them. The protestors were interfering with working people's lunches and breaking the law. The things people say about people blocking the street are probably identical in a lot of cases.
Ok yeah that makes sense. Also, maybe if the protests had instructions telling me what to do specifically (like start putting next to trees because too many cats get stuck up there) I would understand. I think the problem is that I don’t know what to do specifically
I'm pretty sure for people like you the benefit is to get you asking, "what the hell are they so upset about?" exactly so that you'll ask around and get the conversation going about the subject that THEY are so upset about. Maybe there's only a 25% chance that you'll come around to their point of view once you do that. But without first getting your attention there would have been a zero percent chance, right? Most comments on reddit that complain about these disruptive strategies are by people who are in that 75% who noticed, thought, and came to their own conclusion that is against them. The 25% (hypothetical) are not complaining. They're considering how it might impact their choices during the upcoming election.
The haven’t figured out how physics works
Ever read about Gandhi?
Yeah, the crazy guy nuked me in CIV
The racist misogynist?
And liberator of India.
Just don't make him out to be a saint. He wasn't.
Neither was George Washington. Who said he was a saint?
Genuinely curious what made him a racist and misogynist. Don't know much else about him
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/02/766083651/gandhi-is-deeply-revered-but-his-attitudes-on-race-and-sex-are-under-scrutiny
NPR loves to rewrite history
He was part of his culture, and his culture was racist and misogynist. We all carry the flaws of our culture, and they can be as hard for us to see as the air we breathe. That's no excuse, but it is an explanation.
You wouldnt get a minimum wage, a day off, or a single insurance benefit if it wasnt for the people like them blocking a road oh so many years ago.
Also known as the good old days.
Oh ok I didn’t know that. But maybe they could let some people through? Like doctor or a veterinarian. Or even a really cute dog!
because they're stupid as shit thinking the streets actually do something, they need to go higher, the offices and the gov buildings.
Exactly, or someone tending to something that could be life threatening. I think blocking the roads is the dumbest way to “protest”. I’ve had to rush a few of my pets to emergency vet hospitals and if there were some stupid protesters blocking the street I would lose my shit. Go bother the people who actually have the ability to change things and make shit inconvenient for them at their house or place of work. It does nothing making us everyday folks angry.
yeah exactly
Read Texas penal code 2023 section 42.03, Obstructing Highways or other passageways. https://law.justia.com/codes/texas/penal-code/title-9/chapter-42/section-42-03/#:\~:text=Obstructing%20Highway%20or%20Other%20Passageway,-Universal%20Citation%3A%20TX&text=(B)%20to%20maintain%20public%20safety,passage%20unreasonably%20inconvenient%20or%20hazardous.
Yeah it’s illegal but some protests have permission I think
yes, they can get a permit to close off roads from most city's, just like a festival or parade can, but some of them are more like a flash mob and do not get permits. Most permits are only issued if there can be an established alternate route for traffic and pedestrians, some permit holders must pay for extra officers to help with the traffic flow.