What should be done about "professional protesters"

I just found a fascinating article about the current riots in Baltimore. Apparently a data mining firm has studied social media activity, and concluded that many of the very same people who instigated the Feguson, MO riots are currently at work in Baltimore. This stongly suggests that these people are essentially professional trouble-makers.

Let’s assume that the claims in this article are true. What should be done about “professional protesters?” What can be done that wouldn’t trample on the free speech rights of legitimate protestors?

Public shaming would seem to be the only legitimate response.

“protester” != “riot instigator.” A “professional” protester can keep on protesting until the cows come home. A riot instigator can/should be arrested and jailed whenever possible, whether they are “professional” or not (whatever “professional” means in this context).

The linked story – from Fox News – is not any sort of actual news. Anonymous sources and unanalyzed data about some social media accounts that were active both for Ferguson and Baltimore… Who could imagine that some of the same people might be interested in similar events.

But assuming that there are professional troublemakers who view such situations only as opportunities to get wild and crazy, such people should be arrested when they violate the law. And at the same time, law makers should strive to make sure no segments of society are unfairly dicriminated against, and that people from disadvantaged upbringings should be afforded equal opportunities for quality education and job training.

For what moral flaw? If they’re criminals, then prosecution is the obvious legitimate response.

But if they’re just bussed-in “freedom riders” and other northern liberals and carpetbaggers, coming to protest – legally and peacefully – lynching in Alabama – ah, police brutality in Maryland – what’s to be ashamed of? More power to them!

You’re right, I didn’t think that through.

It’s like professional mourners at funerals. What’s the point if they’re not genuine?

What should be done about “Fox News”?

When you’re professional protesters, are you saying they’re being paid to protest? And if so, who is paying them?

If, on the other hand, you’re saying there are fulltime protesters who go from protest to protest, then you’re probably right. But I don’t necessarily see their actions as illegitimate. They may feel that local incidents are part of a wider problem and they’re opposing that problem by participating in various local protests. For example, a person who thinks that police brutality is an issue may have participated in protests in several different communities lately - they’re protesting the issue of police brutality rather than a specific police department. A right wing equivalent might be somebody who protests outside abortion clinics in several different communities.

A professional protester should not be permitted to protest at an Olympic event. Other than that I don’t see a reason to react.

How is someone who regularly participates in law-abiding protest intending to influence society any different from someone who regularly contributes dollars to a politician intending to influence society?

The answer is the former is constitutionally protected, and the latter is generally illegal. And the former is disreputable and the latter is considered “just the way things are”. Which indicates just how sick society has become.

You can’t call them “professional trouble-makers”. They may have a sincere belief in the cause and are protesting where ever they think their voice will be heard.

Many people who attend the various organized protests you see in Washington also protest in their home cities. If they believe in the cause, they’ll go to where the protest is.

If you think this is problem, you’d be better off looking at the source, which is how these people manage to spend their time complaining about society and not working. Are they rich trust fund kids? Then there’s not much you can do. Are they funded by NGOs that receive government funding? Then pull that funding. You need to look attack the root cause of the issue, not the symptom.

And has been mentioned, there’s nothing wrong with legal protest. But if these people are professional agitators and instigators, then build a case against them and throw them in the slammer.

Why on earth not? Why are the Olympics above criticism?

I think they are joking. The Olympics have traditionally been for amateur participants, professionals were not allowed. So only amateur protesters and instigators should be allowed, it is about preserving the purity of the sport.

I think you’re behind the times regarding the Olympics. Each sport’s regulatory body decides now if its professionals may compete in the Olympics.

Aww fuck.

The Olympics’ marketing and bribe-taking departments are certainly professional-grade. Why not their protesters?

I just want to learn the scoring system. How do competing protest groups gain more points to win the gold medal in their event?

I thought it was funny.

If they weren’t professionals, they wouldn’t be protestors. They’d be amateurtesters.