So we can block traffic in LA to raise awareness that 'Aliens are coming'?
No - absolutely not.
Your arbitrary definition of what you consider to be a 'valid protest' is not relevant.
You 100% do not have the right to block highways under any circumstances. Full stop.
You can of course, block highways if you use force to do it, i.e. by amassing such a large, unlawful group so that 'nobody can do anything about it' - which is of course illegal and completely trampling other people's basic rights.
I firmly believe that if you have enough people who think it’s important enough to block traffic to make a point — if their belief is that aliens are coming to destroy earth — they’re allowed to do that. Sure, it’s illegal, but they’ll do it anyways. I think it’s unlikely that so many people will come together to block traffic, but if it’s so important to them, then I’m all for it. They’ll definitely get to make their argument to the news and American people, who get to decide if their point is valid or not. But that’s the point of free speech.
Blocking traffic is not speech, it's physical harassment whose only outcome and whose intended mechanism of effect is to inject suffering into random innocent peoples' lives.
You have no right to do that any more than you have a right to randomly slap people on the street to make them listen to you.
> It's valid to protest things which are not true?
If you set the bar at "your point has to be true before you can protest", then goodbye free speech. Because who exactly gets to decide what is true, and therefore is legitimate to protest over? The government? The media? That is an insanely dangerous power to give any institution, which is why the first amendment is purposefully interpreted to put the minimum number of restrictions on what is forbidden.
Now you're arguing about the difference between civil disobedience (which necessarily involves breaking norms or laws) and simple protest. This is a fair distinction, but genuinely a tedious one. Yes, standing around in the street is illegal, that's the point. We're not going to work out anything new here that hasn't been discussed over the past century.
What I'm reacting to is you setting the bar based on the content of the speech. That is super dangerous territory, one that I would strongly condemn. The moment you say that tactics become legitimate or illegitimate based on the content of the speech, which is something the highlighted quote was saying, then you're heading into the land of no more free speech.
So you fully support anti-abortion protestors blocking the entrance to abortion clinics?
That's 'civil disobedience' and 'breaking the law' for the 'content of speech' (in their view) of 'saving lives'?
Seems pretty legit? Saving lives?
What about White Supremacists burning down 'desegregated schools' in protest of 'desegregation'?
Or some 'burning crosses' on the streets in front of the NAACP? I mean, hey, it's their right to 'protest'?
How about 'Anti-Vaxxer' protesters surrounding evil big corporate pharma research centres and not allowing anyone in or out (civil disobedience) because 'big pharma' is giving everyone autism?
Or a much more mild case: two days ago in Montreal a small group of protestors brought down a national monument, as police watched and refused to intervene.
So how many protestors do I need exactly to tear down monuments? What's the 'headcount' threshold for the Washington monument coming down? I mean, he did own slaves ...
It's not tedious to distinguish between what is illegal and what is not, it's literally at the heart of civilization.
And no - we generally don't care what your 'cause' is - if someone really wants to 'protests' for 'segregation' - that's totally fine, they can make nice placards and sit in the park.
It's incredibly naive to ignore the damage and harm caused to a lot of people in the wake of a lot of unfortunate protests which have turned violent, let alone the problems caused but otherwise more basic civil acts.
There are 1000 ways to protest, if you want to sit on the sidewalk and get dragged away, that's fine, just don't get in other people's way.
This response is so completely unrelated to what I actually said that it’s genuinely hard to respond to. If you want to continue to discuss this matter, respond to what I said, rather than making up what I said and then arguing against it.
It's valid to protest things which are not true?
So we can block traffic in LA to raise awareness that 'Aliens are coming'?
No - absolutely not.
Your arbitrary definition of what you consider to be a 'valid protest' is not relevant.
You 100% do not have the right to block highways under any circumstances. Full stop.
You can of course, block highways if you use force to do it, i.e. by amassing such a large, unlawful group so that 'nobody can do anything about it' - which is of course illegal and completely trampling other people's basic rights.