frame

Are Protests the Most Effective Method to Bring About Change in Society?

Opening Argument

Are Protests the Most Effective Method to Bring About Change in Society?

Here are articles from differing perspectives on this topic:


So, do you think that formal protests in the streets, ect. are the most effective way (or effective in any way) of brining about change in society?  Or, rather, would it be more efficient to end "PC" behavior and have "everyday conversations" about the issues with people that you come into social contact with, post more blogs, other writing/video formats posted online or in person, lectures/talks, ect.?  Is it more that people are not challenged on their beliefs in everyday life and that doing this would be the best way to bring about change in society rather than isolated protests in streets that (although large ones receive media coverage) is more or less "preaching to the quire" or otherwise overly confrontational?  Also, are street protests designed to be fundamentally emotional, illogical, and rather irrational with chanting's and mantras recited en masse?  Is this a proper mechanism for which to persuade others that do not see nor agree with your perspective?  Also, doesn't the risk of street protest (i.e. going to jail) seem far higher than "everyday conversation" even if those conversations may be highly uncomfortable?

Thoughts?
yolostidebillpassedjoecavalry
  1. Are Protests the Most Effective Method to Bring About Change in Society?

    10 votes
    1. Yes
      50.00%
    2. No
      50.00%

Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
44%
Margin

Details +


Status: Open Debate


Arguments

  • No, peaceful protests can be effective, but violent protests are not.
  • someone234someone234 154 Pts
    edited December 2017
    Changes in society are brought on by a multitude of factors all coming together. Protesting is almost always one of them if the change is major but for minor changes, protests actually help the government to portray those advocating the minor change as aggressive and therefore keep moderates/centrists/neutrals at bay in terms of voting for the change.

    So, in short, if the change is feasible to achieve without protesting then protesting only increases the negative view moderates would have of that side. On the other hand, if it seems such a huge change that a real "us vs them" aggressive mentality is inevitable then protesting is necessary and good and most certainly a part of the beginning of forming a real opposition to the status quo.
    xMathFanx
    I come to debate, I stay to troll,
    I leave to think, I return to brawl.
  • I agree! 
    It does make change in society!  o:)
  • edited December 2017
    Chances in society can be done by contacting your congressman or congresswoman instead of protesting and possibly causing violence.
  • No, peaceful protests are fine, but violent protests can not happen.
    DebateIslander and a DebateIsland.com lover. 
  • No, peaceful protests are fine, but violent protests can not happen.
    This is true in most cases, but do you think there can be specific instances where a protest gets violent because the people they were protesting against started the brawl? For instance, if I am protesting outside WholeFoods for selling products that don't meet health codes and they come out and pepper spray me, do I have a right to fight back or let the police deal with the incident later, despite all harm that I might have sustained?
  • MikeMike 63 Pts

    Historically, any attempt to contrive “the Most Effective Method to Bring About Change in Society” resulted in a trail of blood. There are social dynamics however, they are conservative in nature driven in an evolutionary fashion, and like most evolutions; the dynamic is slow, and for good reason.     

    Imagine an “effective method” was found, where today one group decides to change society, and tomorrow another group does its thing, while those in-between are spinning in confusion.   

    Such desires to change society is not new to humanity. From history, protest or violence is in part, a function of social evolution. That is, there are dynamic channels of freedom in conflict with dynamic channels of resistance, at times leading to violence. This is predicated on the “constructal law” (a unification theory of evolution within thermodynamics) and states, “For a flow system to persist in time (to live), it must evolve freely such that it provides greater access to its currents.”

    The evolution of culture is the flow of good ideas, and/or philosophical persuasion, to provide greater access to the currents of social harmony via our “unalienable Rights.” Because the evolution of technology, the globe is becoming an effective local neighborhood; and therefore, the “melting pot” of culture is inevitable in units of generational time; hence, cultural globalism. 

  • Mike said:

    Historically, any attempt to contrive “the Most Effective Method to Bring About Change in Society” resulted in a trail of blood. There are social dynamics however, they are conservative in nature driven in an evolutionary fashion, and like most evolutions; the dynamic is slow, and for good reason.     

    Imagine an “effective method” was found, where today one group decides to change society, and tomorrow another group does its thing, while those in-between are spinning in confusion.   

    Such desires to change society is not new to humanity. From history, protest or violence is in part, a function of social evolution. That is, there are dynamic channels of freedom in conflict with dynamic channels of resistance, at times leading to violence. This is predicated on the “constructal law” (a unification theory of evolution within thermodynamics) and states, “For a flow system to persist in time (to live), it must evolve freely such that it provides greater access to its currents.”

    The evolution of culture is the flow of good ideas, and/or philosophical persuasion, to provide greater access to the currents of social harmony via our “unalienable Rights.” Because the evolution of technology, the globe is becoming an effective local neighborhood; and therefore, the “melting pot” of culture is inevitable in units of generational time; hence, cultural globalism. 


    @Mike ;

    Based on your last paragraph, it would appear you tend to more strongly agree with the types of methods I outlined in my description rather than street protests.  Is this a fair interpretation of your position?
  • MikeMike 63 Pts
    @xMathFanx

    Yes, I agree with your position that “protests” are only part of the dynamic in social change. Social change is subtly happening every day and at every moment. Take for example the global social change that is happening today just by the introduction of the smart phone as NBC news pointed out, for example. Just look at the social change happening over the number of decades just by the ease of jet travel. The flow of population migration is also a big social factor of those voting with their feet for freedom and a better way of life. New scientific and medical discoveries are also changing society. We can’t overlook the effects of war on social change.    

     Since social change is an evolutionary process, one can only conclude, time seems to be the most effective method.

    xMathFanx
  • VaulkVaulk 307 Pts
    "The most" effective means that this is relative.  So the answer is simply no, it is not the "Most" effective way to bring about change.  This is simply because Violence is easily ten times more successful at achieving a desired result than peaceful protests.  

    The topic of this debate is without any ethical or moral restriction, we're ONLY talking about what is more effective.  This isn't about what is right, what's wrong, what's good...only what works the most efficiently.  So the answer is no, protests are not the most effective, Violence is the most effective and consequently...the absolute most popular choice of methodology when it comes to achieving victory during a disagreement or conflict of any sort.
    "If there's no such thing as a stupid question then what kind of questions do stupid people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stupid".


  • I don't think protests are the key to solving all of the problems but I think they do help with solving problems. Protesters do not make the decisions, the government does but I do think that protesting helps convince the government about something or vice versa. 
  • Mob rule is never an effective form of governance.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Website!

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2018 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch