It's certainly a lot better than their pick for last year, Mark Zuckerberg. I might've agreed with that choice back in, say, 2007, but no-one made a bigger impact on the news during 2010 than Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. Unfortunately, there was no overly-hyped, Aaron Sorkin-directed, Justin Timberlake-starrig biopic about Assange out that year, so he was snubbed.
The Guardian and the LSE determined that that London riots were sparked by protests against social injustice? Surely that can't be right - the majority of the rioters seemed to simply be criminal opportunists, looting whatever they could find.
I agree with TIME's pick. The thing with their Person of the Year award is that it's not whomever was the "best" person of 2011, but more the person/people/object who made the biggest impact on the news, and the various protestors certainly did that.
may I have a second go? "Person of the Year" is for me Colin Crouch, because in his analysis of the economic MALAISE affecting all of us he is acknowledged both in Britain and Germany, which goes a long way to bridging that huge rather Balkan divide between us. His book is titled "Post-Democracy" - worth reading.
Personally, I'm a fan of Julian Assange. I can understand choosing protesters over him, but the reason(s) are an interesting debate in themselves... didn't some of the protests in the Middle East start because of Wikileaks, or were these claims false/exaggerated?
That aside, if I were editor of Time Mag, I'd have probably gone along the lines of 'Protesters everywhere, except the UK', but then again I'm not afraid of a good scrap with the establishment (he says through the anonymity of the web)
The award is given to the person who "for better or for worse, has done the most to influence the events of the year.". An wether you agree with the protesters or not, they have thrown over a government, which is kind of a big deal.
Whatever, the person of the year should probably just be "You" every year, since whoever influenced anything is a part of everyone, which is what they mean by "You", as far as i understand it. I don't like concepts or multiple people being called "Person", though.
The UK 'protests' - as in the summer riots, not the students or Occupy movement - severely bring down the significance of this award. One could go so far as to say the average UK protester doesn't deserve this selection! As many deserving protesters there are in the UK who did get involved this year, the award does raise the question of whether we are effective in our protests, particulary if the Government doesn't respond.
I am glad that the protesters recieved recognition.
Those in the middle east fought for something most of us in the western world take for granted, the right to vote.Also they did this in appaling and terrifying conditions. These people ought to be applauded and remembered by history.
However the riots in my opinion was a disproportionate reaction to a single event and many of those looting did so out of vain opportunism. This award should not include them in my opinion.
I think that Time's "heart was in the right place." The Lybian, Egyptian and Tunisian people did something remarkable. In Egypt's case, it appears that the protesters underestimated the duplicity or cupidity of military leaders. In Syria, the protesters are heroic. I do not think we have yet seen the full impact of the Occupy protests. Certainly, they will have an effect on US elections to come. The UK pension and student fees protests may yet moderate the furure blows of the Coalition.
@lanush22 That was going to be another questio for this video but the footage became corrupt. Rebecca Black got video of the year, which was a bit depressing. Who do you think should/ would win YouTuber of the year?
well I think Phillip DeFranco should be considered. he has done so much over the past few years.
Rebecca Black also got the webstar at the US teen choice awards...don't think she has don allot to get that title... but with all the hate she got, I guess it's only fair... maybe...
Well, I don't think the Person of the Year has to be 100% positive. It's definitely true that 2011 was a year for major upheavals, and I think it is wise to acknowledge them. Especially because the Arab Spring was just unprecedented. I haven't read the issue yet, but I hope it focuses more on the Arab Spring than on, say, Occupy or the London riots. Weren't they called "riots" and not "protests"?
@fizzylimon They say it is meant to be the person who is most influential, which is why so many US presidents have won it in the past, I suppose. The article does mainly focus on the Arab Spring but also touched on Europe (mainly Spain and the 'indignados') and Wall St. It's a good read, I recommend it.
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
I think it is a brilliant choice. If you agree with what someone is protesting about or not and if it is successful or not surely we should be applauding the fact that people are protesting!
someone smarter that me once said "death of democracy is not likely to be an assassination from ambush. It will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment."
The fact that people across the world are voicing an opinion is something that should always be encouraged.
@DINGONERD I also think it's great that protesting is becoming normal again. It is our right and it should be exercised. I think the last year has shown that the masses are not as apathetic as they are shown. Good comment.
In Syria we have protesters in earnest danger of being gunned down by government forces. That deserves a cover slot. Protesters are always somehow right. Occupy challenges the bankers to sort themselves out - why should protesters always solve the problem? It's not the way most people want to spend a Saturday night out. Looting was a London speciality, maybe that's the way you do things on your island :-)
@Marcomanseckisax it's true that protestors are always seen as right, but it's because they are the underdog, against the establishment and the global media loves that. Also, when media doesn't do its job of maintaining accountability, protest is the only way to make your voice heard. I agree that the expectation of there to be a result to a protest is not always realistic, the fact that a debate is sparked is important.
Well it depends on your definition of a protest, if you think the riots were a form of protest then I can see why you might disagree with their decision however many would argue the riots weren't a protest and so would agree
@TRDPaul the riots started in london, they were the results of a protest about a black fellah being shot point blank by the police. The resulting riots accross the UK can not be seen as anything other than the result of decades of cutural oppression, Orwellian doublespeak, Thought police and hate crimes produced by an insidious and self affirming ruling class/media. Happy new year mate :) lol
"if rioting, looting and starting fires is the means of UK protestors, do they deserve to be person of the year?" - Do you believe there weren't fires, looting or riots in the Libya/Egypt? Do you believe that our "protests" are significantly different? Do you believe that protesting THE DECISIONS of a government is in actual fact acknowledgement of (and consent to) their authority? Remove your acknowledgement people, do not dignify these criminals with a response, including avoidable taxes.
I would've picked the man who resisted when everyone told him he was crazy. The man who stood tall and defiant when everyone thought he was wrong. For sheer resistance against public opinion, Ghaddifi is my person of the year.
@rhymingwithoranges In all seriousness I think this accolade of person of the year is a little like when Obama got the Nobel Prize. Yep, phase one complete, you've got rid of the bad leader and shifted your countries political landscape to have a chance, but you have to take the chance. 2012, year of Democracy, or of tribal dictatorship? We shall see.
Also, I think the protestor does deserve it. As a whole protestors have had a dramatic affect, more so than any one person. Protestors have toppled regimes, and even though occupy wall street may be a little lacking in direction it.s affected massive amounts of people. Its at least set a shadowy spectre over corporations, and government. Its called out corporate corruption and called for justice, and brought awareness to the gap between the rich and the average person.
I actually agree that the protester was named person of the year. Person of the year is awarded to those most influential, and if the Arab Springs weren't influential then I don't know what is.
I don't think that the London Riots should be classified as protests because it had no clear goal for those participating in it. No one was united under one ideal for the world afterwards. It was messy and as you can tell by the amount of retail shops broken into, taken advantage of.
good video as always Jazza. I think it was a perfect choice as you can see from the mostly peacefull Protests in Tunisia to the most recent Protests in Russia and the still ongoing Syria Uprising. Maybe protesting women should have gotten an extra notice cause in many islamic countries they face much greater dangers than in western societies. Have a great New Years my friend :)
I agree with the choice- as for once, POTY isn't an establishment figure. We should never do down protests - they are amazing; one of the few ways people can truly rule sometimes. I don't agree that Occupy doesn't have an aim - it clearly wants to democratise the economic system for the benefit of all, not the 1%. Finally, the riots weren't protests - they were the manifestation of a diseased societal obsession with material goods and wealth crossed with urban decay and social marginalisation.
I think the protester is a good choice since in a protestor is basically a person prepared to speak up for what they believe is right, often to the benefit of others if their voice is heard. Some people use the cover of 'protestor' as an excuse for violence, as with the London Riots, which gives them a bad name. This isn't something I've ever really thought much about, and it is quite interesting, so thank you for raising this topic!
Based on the criteria used to choose the person of the year. I understand it has very little to do with good and evil. However I care about those two in my own idea of the world. I think protestors have shown all over the world all through 2011 more than any other time and some changes are ocurring. But you know, nobody perfect, neither is TIME magazine. Happy new year from the Southamerican Pampas
@093quicksilver More than since the 80s at least. It was nice to see the human race fighting for something again. We have become so stagnant as a global society as of late and its about time the status quo had its cage rattled. Thanks for the comment！
I'm where the magic happens. Excited! :) I treat myself to Empire magazine every month :) I think it was a bad year, I can't really think of anyone that has outshone the rest. Don't think any EU leaders anyway.
@TheRockinGinger Haha, yes, you are! I am a fan of Merkel. She is the only leader showing any leadership (ironically) and, although some people may not agree with her vision for Europe, at least she is standing for something. It's nice to have someone trumpeting the possibilities of a united Europe rather than poopooing them for a change. I wouldn't have been opposed to her winning.
First of all, HI JAZZA. Second of all, you haven't been on YouTube much over the past... forever, but the days of rating videos are OVER. "Rate and Comment." Oh, Jazza. So precious.
LOOK I'm just leaving a YouTube comment and already I'm trying to start a little bicker of a fight with you - just like the good ol' days!
And I have no idea who should have won Person of the Year so I'm just going to quietly slink back into the shadows.
@ISnoggedHarry Hi Sam! I have been on recently! A video every two weeks! And yes, I know that people are meant to be 'thumbing' me now, but it sounds so vulgar! I miss our bickerings. Come on, commit to the comment and name someone.
2. I think the LSE/Guardian study is heavily slanted and actually slanders working class people. This wasn't a protests, it was just oppurtunism: the majority of all people, all classes, all ages, did not take part. To use said statuses as a 'cause' is not only to excuse by stealth, but goes against established studies (e.g. DiPasquale and Glaeser 1996, see also here: [bit . ly / ooBQHs]) I also wrote a blogpost on the riots here: bit . ly / pl86Fv
1. I think protests are only effective insofar as they reflect the public will: the TUC marches, the student-tuition-fee protests do not seem to have the backing of the majority of the nation. The revolutions in the Middle East clearly do and are much, much more important.
@Folderol1992 Maybe because I am a student, but I think tuition fees were a very contentious issue. Importance is also relative. Is the occupy movement less important because we already have what the middle east was/is fighting for?
@rhymingwithoranges I agree with you that importance is relative BUT for issues which don't involve fundamental human rights: there's no 'one' important issue amongst, say, tuition fee rises and funding for Bombardier. But, where whats at stake is the right to life, the right to free speech - I'm comfortable with saying its more 'important.' And I don't think I'm stretching it too far to say that there is no right to higher education which matches the right to free spech/not to be killed.
But I do like bringing the focus to the human element of protest, I think that there is value in recognizing what a group of motivated people can do - a thought that extends to the Time selection of Hitler. While I condemn everything that Hitler did, it's important to recognize that fact that he and a small group of motivated radicals were able to achieve power to such a massive extent.
I think that maybe "social media" could have been an inanimate person of the year this year. Social media is increasingly changing the way that we communicate, making protests like the Arab Spring and the Occupy movement possible.
@ThoughtsBelow Ooh, good answer. I have the image of the front cover now. A twitter bird framed by TIME's red boarder. I like your comment about the humanisation of protest as well. The TIME article actually did that pretty well. Some very good stories in that piece. I would recommend it.
sorry, i already left a comment, but then i thought some more. for me, MICK WILSON is the person of the year. he was an ambulance helicopter retrieval service paramedic who died during a christmas eve rescue :( he was part of the rescue teams in australia (during the floods), in chrustchurch NZ (earthquake) and in japan (fukushima). he saved countless lives and then died on christmas eve to save 2 more. he'd be truly deserving of the title :(
hitler?? WHY and when did they choose hitler as the person of the year? that's disturbing.
i am all pro protesters who protest for a valid reason (as opposed to those who join a protest just to be part of it but don't even know what the protest is about or those who go protesting just so they can bash people or destroy things.) so, those who join protests in order to change something or to declare their views - i say they deserve it. everybody else: not really, do they.
I think it was really well though that the protester was chosen because as you said there has been a lot of positive point to come from their protests. It's right because even those who weren't successful in achieving their aims still had the guts and will to make a stand for what they believe in. However I feel that the 'protester' should be counted as one who did complete their actions for a real reason of protest, which is a minority where the 'Summer Riots' were concerned.
@EimiiAthena The gumption shown is definitely worth mentioning. I like people with balls, it's something to be admired... that's going to get misquoted, isn't it...
I thought it fit brilliantly. When we look back on 2011, who comes to the forefront of so many of the news stories and sound bytes? I like how the issue explored protests all around the world--"protester" is all inclusive, not intrinsically good or bad but more the news of the moment, influence in terms of how widespread and attention-getting (both critics and supporters) the movements--and the people behind them--were.
A good choice. Not every protest won its objective. I quarrel with ranking riots as protests—there was too much opportunistic looting and appalling arson—but social injustice was part of the fuel, wasn't it? Nevertheless, protests topled governments, awoke our sleepy acceptance of inequality. In the U.S. there's no doubt that occupy changed the national conversation from debt and deficit to inequality and jobs.
@mickeleh I am skeptical of the blaming of social injustice for the Summer Riots. Yes, in a way the social inequality that has been allowed to grow is to blame, but how many people when stealing a TV thought, "I hope someone gets the message of what I'm doing." They were thinking about getting a new telle.
@rhymingwithoranges I'm with you on that. I tried to convey that by calling it "opportunistic looting." To say that social injustice fueled the riots is not to say that the riots were a just response.
I am pleasantly surprised the protesters won, they are against "the man" and I expected Time magazine to side with authority. However, whether a good or bad thing, the protests, riots and revolutions of the past year have dominated the news and 2011 reminded everyone what supposedly powerless people can do.
PS-I love looking at the comments on your videos, they are always so well-thought out and thought-provoking, you have attracted a lovely audience :)
@bansribb Good point, TIME does have a tendency to side with the man. Look at the number of US presidents who have won in the past! I love the comments in my video too!
Although we heard about the protesters alot not everyone agreed with what they were protesting for, some were against and some were on their side. Even then for the people on their side they may not have agreed 100% and may not have fully understood what their reasons for protesting were, for me a 14 year old i often found it confusing. There will be alot of people agreeing with Time magazine and alot against, then there will be people like me confused on whether or not I agree or disagree .
@CatIsRandom That's why I make these videos, so we can talk about disagreeing and so we can agree to disagree. You will never, especially in the world of politics, agree 100%. I think it's about finding the things that you hold closest to your heart and then looking at what you are willing to compromise on in order to get as much done as possible that the most people are happy with. Of course, quite often that doesn't happen.
The riots were in no way about social injustice. The original riot in Tottenham, maybe was, but when it spread to other areas of London, and the rest of the country, it was complete opportunism, and should have been considered a protest at all.
Time are bang on with their selection in my eyes, even for the failed protests, at least it shows people are willing to stand up for themselves and not be contained by their own apathy.
Also, feel lucky that you could graze! My whole family bar me were ill over Christmas, so only a fraction of the food was eaten! :( And I'm flying back to Germany tomorrow! :(
You're lucky! My family was ill over Christmas so we didn't eat as much!
I agree that the protesters should get the Person of The Year Award, because of the reasons you gave regarding the Arab Spring.
Oddly enough, I think it applies (albeit more loosely) to the rioters in the UK as well - despite their methods. Any good psychiatrist will tell you that criminal activity, on ANY scale, can very much be seen as a cry for attention, which I think to some extent also counts as a form of protest.
Time's Person of the Year? The selection's supposed to be for the most influential, good or bad, which explains some of the bad characters that have won. Selecting all protesters was a bit of a cop out. There's one protester that started all of this, a "nobody" Tunisian street merchant who set himself on fire, sparking protests throughout the world, w/little to do w/him. Having lived through the late 60's & early 70's protests, seeing the change they brought, you shouldn't count them out so soon
@dafttool They have an extensive piece on him in the article, actually. His name was Mohamed Bouazizi. There is no doubt that he was influential, the spark, but I think it is right that the masses were chosen. It is them that, in the end, made the difference. It is nice to see people standing up again, I feel our society has become very stagnated in the last 20 or so years (ie, my lifetime), it's good to give the man a kick up the arse every now and again.
@rhymingwithoranges Don't get me wrong, I DO think selecting all protesters was the right decision, I was just expressing apprehension that the one who started it all was lost in the shuffle, & have gotten annoyed that Time keeps having cop out selections, even if I approve of the selection this year. Also, obviously not all of the protests are going to be successful, some embarrassing, some even criminal. But all in all it is good people are speaking out against injustice.
Also, sure, go on and give the protesters the Person of the Year Award. It doesn't really make a difference in my opinion. It doesn't make them any better or worse for what they've been doing. In my opinion they've done a lot in the way of impacting people, opening the eyes of just every day people. So sure, Person (or people rather) of the Year Award. Good on them! (:
I don't think that protesters should be the only ones criticised for resorting to such extreme methods. Those in charge need to take responsibility as well, because it's their inaction when faced with peaceful protests that resulted in more drastic steps being taken. Riots happen when governments stop listening to the people they're supposed to serve and start treating them like statistics. In essence, if you ignore the people's desires don't be surprised if they get pissed off and retaliate
@Qw3rtypop Hmm, I'm not sure how I feel about the riots and if I agree with you. I am not sure the government is to blame in the way you suggest it is. I think the riots and looting have more to do with a wider social problem of ghettos being allowed to develop and the growth of a culture where we get used to getting things for free. Who do you think should have won then?
@rhymingwithoranges I totally agree that the growth of a culture where we get things for free contributes to the social problem, especially in hard economic times when we must tighten our belts it becomes difficult for people to understand why they are no longer receiving things without working for them - in essence we are unwilling to sacrifice our lifestyle to make the necessary changes.....it's kind of selfish really...
I come from Cambridge, an area as far from ghetto as one could possibly imagine. But despite that I know many well educated people who were on the streets protesting and who even joined in the riots. These are upper-middle class people, not 'ganstas'. Some of these people are young enough that they haven't had that chance to vote, but they have genuine concerns that the people in charge are gambling with their future and they have no control over it.
But I do agree that part of the problem is the culture of getting things for free. The issue I have is seeing everything being cut equally. I'm sorry but I can't see how in an economic crisis, art degrees deserve the same amount of funding as maths or science. They are that drive growth, but still I see talented youths who miss out on further education in say, engineering, because of their background while a someone else gets a grant for hairdressing.
@Qw3rtypop Riots happen when the people feel that they aren't being listened to. The reality is that we have a functioning democracy, the government of which were voted in on the basis of austerity measures and reducing public section beuracracy. I disagree that the actions of the indiviudal against the state can be laid entirely at the government's door, whatever action this may take the form of. Governments do serve the people, but they also govern them.
I didn't mean to imply that the actions of an individual are permissible when judged alone, nor that the actions can be blamed solely on the government. Not everyone can be satisfied all of the time, but when a collective of this size gathers together they need to be taken seriously.
As for functioning, that's debatable. Too often when I've asked someone why they voted for who they did, the response I was "I dunno". This is very wrong, and not what I'd call functioning.
i think that it makes sense to decide that the protestor was the person of the year. simply because the title doesn't actually denote good. it may connote it, but that's a different story. the protestor however bad and good they were this year still did a lot and that cannot be argued.
I agree with you completely. While the protester may not have always been the best person of the year, they were certainly the person we heard the most about, no matter where we or they were.
@rhymingwithoranges He only affected part of the world, although he did so for the better. Were this a contest for best person of the year, I would consider him, but I cannot come up with a better example of a person I have constantly heard about and most of the world have constantly heard about this year than the protester. There are probably many other candidates who one could argue are much better people of the year, but I think Time did not make an unsupported decision.
@itssmoshins truth, and I suppose the people who have won in the past aren't squeaky clean wither. Apart from the endangered earth of course... and Gandhi.
@rhymingwithoranges As a whole protesters this year have actually proved that by protesting eventually you can change something and I think it's this kind of thinking that changes things for the better. As well as this in my opinion I don't think the London riots count as protests it was more looting for the sake of looting because if it was a protest then what they were protesting about would have or should have been made clear.
It's certainly a lot better than their pick for last year, Mark Zuckerberg. I might've agreed with that choice back in, say, 2007, but no-one made a bigger impact on the news during 2010 than Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. Unfortunately, there was no overly-hyped, Aaron Sorkin-directed, Justin Timberlake-starrig biopic about Assange out that year, so he was snubbed.
charlyandjosh 1 month ago
The Guardian and the LSE determined that that London riots were sparked by protests against social injustice? Surely that can't be right - the majority of the rioters seemed to simply be criminal opportunists, looting whatever they could find.
I agree with TIME's pick. The thing with their Person of the Year award is that it's not whomever was the "best" person of 2011, but more the person/people/object who made the biggest impact on the news, and the various protestors certainly did that.
charlyandjosh 1 month ago
My thoughts:
-shouldn't person of the year just be one person?
-anyone could be a protester, technically if i stood outside my school with a sign saying please close i could say i won this title (as a protester)
Who do you think should have won Jazza? :)
ViewRenz 1 month ago
may I have a second go? "Person of the Year" is for me Colin Crouch, because in his analysis of the economic MALAISE affecting all of us he is acknowledged both in Britain and Germany, which goes a long way to bridging that huge rather Balkan divide between us. His book is titled "Post-Democracy" - worth reading.
Marcomanseckisax 1 month ago
Personally, I'm a fan of Julian Assange. I can understand choosing protesters over him, but the reason(s) are an interesting debate in themselves... didn't some of the protests in the Middle East start because of Wikileaks, or were these claims false/exaggerated?
That aside, if I were editor of Time Mag, I'd have probably gone along the lines of 'Protesters everywhere, except the UK', but then again I'm not afraid of a good scrap with the establishment (he says through the anonymity of the web)
OrgasmandTea 1 month ago
How did Charlie Sheen not win this?
Beffinee 1 month ago
The award is given to the person who "for better or for worse, has done the most to influence the events of the year.". An wether you agree with the protesters or not, they have thrown over a government, which is kind of a big deal.
Whatever, the person of the year should probably just be "You" every year, since whoever influenced anything is a part of everyone, which is what they mean by "You", as far as i understand it. I don't like concepts or multiple people being called "Person", though.
1marchk1 2 months ago
The UK 'protests' - as in the summer riots, not the students or Occupy movement - severely bring down the significance of this award. One could go so far as to say the average UK protester doesn't deserve this selection! As many deserving protesters there are in the UK who did get involved this year, the award does raise the question of whether we are effective in our protests, particulary if the Government doesn't respond.
straightfromschool 2 months ago
I am glad that the protesters recieved recognition.
Those in the middle east fought for something most of us in the western world take for granted, the right to vote.Also they did this in appaling and terrifying conditions. These people ought to be applauded and remembered by history.
However the riots in my opinion was a disproportionate reaction to a single event and many of those looting did so out of vain opportunism. This award should not include them in my opinion.
GingerandNuts 2 months ago
Christopher Hitchens, who died in December but who stood against the ills of the world all his life.
sl1993locko 2 months ago
I think that Time's "heart was in the right place." The Lybian, Egyptian and Tunisian people did something remarkable. In Egypt's case, it appears that the protesters underestimated the duplicity or cupidity of military leaders. In Syria, the protesters are heroic. I do not think we have yet seen the full impact of the Occupy protests. Certainly, they will have an effect on US elections to come. The UK pension and student fees protests may yet moderate the furure blows of the Coalition.
kramkatz 2 months ago in playlist More videos from rhymingwithoranges
@nablus0is0nablus I've been making them every two weeks or so for the last three months. Tram Lady, We 7 Billion etc. Look in the related videos.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago 5
I'm waiting on YouTube to be person of the year.
lanush22 2 months ago
@lanush22 That was going to be another questio for this video but the footage became corrupt. Rebecca Black got video of the year, which was a bit depressing. Who do you think should/ would win YouTuber of the year?
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
@rhymingwithoranges
well I think Phillip DeFranco should be considered. he has done so much over the past few years.
Rebecca Black also got the webstar at the US teen choice awards...don't think she has don allot to get that title... but with all the hate she got, I guess it's only fair... maybe...
lanush22 2 months ago
Well, I don't think the Person of the Year has to be 100% positive. It's definitely true that 2011 was a year for major upheavals, and I think it is wise to acknowledge them. Especially because the Arab Spring was just unprecedented. I haven't read the issue yet, but I hope it focuses more on the Arab Spring than on, say, Occupy or the London riots. Weren't they called "riots" and not "protests"?
Anyway, yes, I think it was an excellent choice.
fizzylimon 2 months ago
@fizzylimon They say it is meant to be the person who is most influential, which is why so many US presidents have won it in the past, I suppose. The article does mainly focus on the Arab Spring but also touched on Europe (mainly Spain and the 'indignados') and Wall St. It's a good read, I recommend it.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
DINGONERD 2 months ago
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
DINGONERD 2 months ago
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
DINGONERD 2 months ago
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
DINGONERD 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
DINGONERD 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
DINGONERD 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
DINGONERD 2 months ago
ps rioting is not protesting. The people taking part in the London riots were not there to make a statement or take a stand. They were out for themselves. The fact that this help support many protesters argument about the disintegration of our society is interesting. But the rioters themselves were not protesters just as the people who attend the May day protests to cause chaos and destruction do not actually care for the cause that has brought genuine protesters there.
DINGONERD 2 months ago
I think it is a brilliant choice. If you agree with what someone is protesting about or not and if it is successful or not surely we should be applauding the fact that people are protesting!
someone smarter that me once said "death of democracy is not likely to be an assassination from ambush. It will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment."
The fact that people across the world are voicing an opinion is something that should always be encouraged.
DINGONERD 2 months ago
@DINGONERD I also think it's great that protesting is becoming normal again. It is our right and it should be exercised. I think the last year has shown that the masses are not as apathetic as they are shown. Good comment.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
In Syria we have protesters in earnest danger of being gunned down by government forces. That deserves a cover slot. Protesters are always somehow right. Occupy challenges the bankers to sort themselves out - why should protesters always solve the problem? It's not the way most people want to spend a Saturday night out. Looting was a London speciality, maybe that's the way you do things on your island :-)
Marcomanseckisax 2 months ago
@Marcomanseckisax it's true that protestors are always seen as right, but it's because they are the underdog, against the establishment and the global media loves that. Also, when media doesn't do its job of maintaining accountability, protest is the only way to make your voice heard. I agree that the expectation of there to be a result to a protest is not always realistic, the fact that a debate is sparked is important.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
Well it depends on your definition of a protest, if you think the riots were a form of protest then I can see why you might disagree with their decision however many would argue the riots weren't a protest and so would agree
TRDPaul 2 months ago
@TRDPaul the riots started in london, they were the results of a protest about a black fellah being shot point blank by the police. The resulting riots accross the UK can not be seen as anything other than the result of decades of cutural oppression, Orwellian doublespeak, Thought police and hate crimes produced by an insidious and self affirming ruling class/media. Happy new year mate :) lol
ConspiracyLoon 2 months ago
"if rioting, looting and starting fires is the means of UK protestors, do they deserve to be person of the year?" - Do you believe there weren't fires, looting or riots in the Libya/Egypt? Do you believe that our "protests" are significantly different? Do you believe that protesting THE DECISIONS of a government is in actual fact acknowledgement of (and consent to) their authority? Remove your acknowledgement people, do not dignify these criminals with a response, including avoidable taxes.
ConspiracyLoon 2 months ago
@Seamalicious I really do hope that was a joke...
ralphbalfe 2 months ago
I would've picked the man who resisted when everyone told him he was crazy. The man who stood tall and defiant when everyone thought he was wrong. For sheer resistance against public opinion, Ghaddifi is my person of the year.
Seamalicous 2 months ago
@Seamalicous lol, oh, seamus.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
@rhymingwithoranges In all seriousness I think this accolade of person of the year is a little like when Obama got the Nobel Prize. Yep, phase one complete, you've got rid of the bad leader and shifted your countries political landscape to have a chance, but you have to take the chance. 2012, year of Democracy, or of tribal dictatorship? We shall see.
Seamalicous 2 months ago
@Seamalicous ps, make a video!
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
Also, I think the protestor does deserve it. As a whole protestors have had a dramatic affect, more so than any one person. Protestors have toppled regimes, and even though occupy wall street may be a little lacking in direction it.s affected massive amounts of people. Its at least set a shadowy spectre over corporations, and government. Its called out corporate corruption and called for justice, and brought awareness to the gap between the rich and the average person.
mrjohnnylipps 2 months ago
I actually agree that the protester was named person of the year. Person of the year is awarded to those most influential, and if the Arab Springs weren't influential then I don't know what is.
I don't think that the London Riots should be classified as protests because it had no clear goal for those participating in it. No one was united under one ideal for the world afterwards. It was messy and as you can tell by the amount of retail shops broken into, taken advantage of.
NatalieZenaLouise 2 months ago
Jazza I've missed you! I read that article as well.
mrjohnnylipps 2 months ago
@mrjohnnylipps Thanks, what did you think of it?
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
good video as always Jazza. I think it was a perfect choice as you can see from the mostly peacefull Protests in Tunisia to the most recent Protests in Russia and the still ongoing Syria Uprising. Maybe protesting women should have gotten an extra notice cause in many islamic countries they face much greater dangers than in western societies. Have a great New Years my friend :)
andrsdtz 2 months ago
@andrsdtz Thanks and thanks for your input. They did, to be fair, make the front cover look like a woman. Your point is right about them.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
What I'm still amazed by is that a noticeable amount of people mistook the riots for protests. :|
Saaduk92 2 months ago
@rhymingwithoranges hate to break it to you, but i am pretty sure not even ghandi can be called squeaky clean
itssmoshins 2 months ago
I agree with the choice- as for once, POTY isn't an establishment figure. We should never do down protests - they are amazing; one of the few ways people can truly rule sometimes. I don't agree that Occupy doesn't have an aim - it clearly wants to democratise the economic system for the benefit of all, not the 1%. Finally, the riots weren't protests - they were the manifestation of a diseased societal obsession with material goods and wealth crossed with urban decay and social marginalisation.
antmoorfield 2 months ago
I think the protester is a good choice since in a protestor is basically a person prepared to speak up for what they believe is right, often to the benefit of others if their voice is heard. Some people use the cover of 'protestor' as an excuse for violence, as with the London Riots, which gives them a bad name. This isn't something I've ever really thought much about, and it is quite interesting, so thank you for raising this topic!
darceyisntadoctor 2 months ago
A fair choice
093quicksilver 2 months ago
Based on the criteria used to choose the person of the year. I understand it has very little to do with good and evil. However I care about those two in my own idea of the world. I think protestors have shown all over the world all through 2011 more than any other time and some changes are ocurring. But you know, nobody perfect, neither is TIME magazine. Happy new year from the Southamerican Pampas
093quicksilver 2 months ago
@093quicksilver More than since the 80s at least. It was nice to see the human race fighting for something again. We have become so stagnant as a global society as of late and its about time the status quo had its cage rattled. Thanks for the comment！
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
Comment removed
093quicksilver 2 months ago
*just understood why Tom Milsom's twitter says he was Time person of the year 2006*
dumbledorerox98 2 months ago
@dumbledorerox98 I'm sure Tom got a special mention :P
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
I'm where the magic happens. Excited! :) I treat myself to Empire magazine every month :) I think it was a bad year, I can't really think of anyone that has outshone the rest. Don't think any EU leaders anyway.
TheRockinGinger 2 months ago
@TheRockinGinger Haha, yes, you are! I am a fan of Merkel. She is the only leader showing any leadership (ironically) and, although some people may not agree with her vision for Europe, at least she is standing for something. It's nice to have someone trumpeting the possibilities of a united Europe rather than poopooing them for a change. I wouldn't have been opposed to her winning.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
First of all, HI JAZZA. Second of all, you haven't been on YouTube much over the past... forever, but the days of rating videos are OVER. "Rate and Comment." Oh, Jazza. So precious.
LOOK I'm just leaving a YouTube comment and already I'm trying to start a little bicker of a fight with you - just like the good ol' days!
And I have no idea who should have won Person of the Year so I'm just going to quietly slink back into the shadows.
ISnoggedHarry 2 months ago
@ISnoggedHarry Hi Sam! I have been on recently! A video every two weeks! And yes, I know that people are meant to be 'thumbing' me now, but it sounds so vulgar! I miss our bickerings. Come on, commit to the comment and name someone.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
I'm very glad the protesters won.
heyummrandommuch 2 months ago
they shouldn't of won! You should of! x
zevie42 2 months ago
@zevie42 Haha, thanks. Maybe one day :P Or when hell freezes over, whichever is fine for me, haha.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
2. I think the LSE/Guardian study is heavily slanted and actually slanders working class people. This wasn't a protests, it was just oppurtunism: the majority of all people, all classes, all ages, did not take part. To use said statuses as a 'cause' is not only to excuse by stealth, but goes against established studies (e.g. DiPasquale and Glaeser 1996, see also here: [bit . ly / ooBQHs]) I also wrote a blogpost on the riots here: bit . ly / pl86Fv
Folderol1992 2 months ago
@Folderol1992 I agree with you on LSE and Guardian. Thanks for the links. I will read with relish.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
@rhymingwithoranges Cool! I'd be really interested to hear what you think of the blogpost :)
Folderol1992 2 months ago
Comment removed
Folderol1992 2 months ago
1. I think protests are only effective insofar as they reflect the public will: the TUC marches, the student-tuition-fee protests do not seem to have the backing of the majority of the nation. The revolutions in the Middle East clearly do and are much, much more important.
Folderol1992 2 months ago
@Folderol1992 Maybe because I am a student, but I think tuition fees were a very contentious issue. Importance is also relative. Is the occupy movement less important because we already have what the middle east was/is fighting for?
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
@rhymingwithoranges I agree with you that importance is relative BUT for issues which don't involve fundamental human rights: there's no 'one' important issue amongst, say, tuition fee rises and funding for Bombardier. But, where whats at stake is the right to life, the right to free speech - I'm comfortable with saying its more 'important.' And I don't think I'm stretching it too far to say that there is no right to higher education which matches the right to free spech/not to be killed.
Folderol1992 2 months ago
But I do like bringing the focus to the human element of protest, I think that there is value in recognizing what a group of motivated people can do - a thought that extends to the Time selection of Hitler. While I condemn everything that Hitler did, it's important to recognize that fact that he and a small group of motivated radicals were able to achieve power to such a massive extent.
ThoughtsBelow 2 months ago
I think that maybe "social media" could have been an inanimate person of the year this year. Social media is increasingly changing the way that we communicate, making protests like the Arab Spring and the Occupy movement possible.
ThoughtsBelow 2 months ago
@ThoughtsBelow Ooh, good answer. I have the image of the front cover now. A twitter bird framed by TIME's red boarder. I like your comment about the humanisation of protest as well. The TIME article actually did that pretty well. Some very good stories in that piece. I would recommend it.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
sorry, i already left a comment, but then i thought some more. for me, MICK WILSON is the person of the year. he was an ambulance helicopter retrieval service paramedic who died during a christmas eve rescue :( he was part of the rescue teams in australia (during the floods), in chrustchurch NZ (earthquake) and in japan (fukushima). he saved countless lives and then died on christmas eve to save 2 more. he'd be truly deserving of the title :(
Maryangel24 2 months ago
@Maryangel24 Good answer, thanks for your contribution. :)
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
hitler?? WHY and when did they choose hitler as the person of the year? that's disturbing.
i am all pro protesters who protest for a valid reason (as opposed to those who join a protest just to be part of it but don't even know what the protest is about or those who go protesting just so they can bash people or destroy things.) so, those who join protests in order to change something or to declare their views - i say they deserve it. everybody else: not really, do they.
Maryangel24 2 months ago
I think it was really well though that the protester was chosen because as you said there has been a lot of positive point to come from their protests. It's right because even those who weren't successful in achieving their aims still had the guts and will to make a stand for what they believe in. However I feel that the 'protester' should be counted as one who did complete their actions for a real reason of protest, which is a minority where the 'Summer Riots' were concerned.
EimiiAthena 2 months ago
@EimiiAthena The gumption shown is definitely worth mentioning. I like people with balls, it's something to be admired... that's going to get misquoted, isn't it...
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
I thought it fit brilliantly. When we look back on 2011, who comes to the forefront of so many of the news stories and sound bytes? I like how the issue explored protests all around the world--"protester" is all inclusive, not intrinsically good or bad but more the news of the moment, influence in terms of how widespread and attention-getting (both critics and supporters) the movements--and the people behind them--were.
irrelephantnonsense 2 months ago
A good choice. Not every protest won its objective. I quarrel with ranking riots as protests—there was too much opportunistic looting and appalling arson—but social injustice was part of the fuel, wasn't it? Nevertheless, protests topled governments, awoke our sleepy acceptance of inequality. In the U.S. there's no doubt that occupy changed the national conversation from debt and deficit to inequality and jobs.
mickeleh 2 months ago
@mickeleh I am skeptical of the blaming of social injustice for the Summer Riots. Yes, in a way the social inequality that has been allowed to grow is to blame, but how many people when stealing a TV thought, "I hope someone gets the message of what I'm doing." They were thinking about getting a new telle.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
@rhymingwithoranges I'm with you on that. I tried to convey that by calling it "opportunistic looting." To say that social injustice fueled the riots is not to say that the riots were a just response.
mickeleh 2 months ago
I am pleasantly surprised the protesters won, they are against "the man" and I expected Time magazine to side with authority. However, whether a good or bad thing, the protests, riots and revolutions of the past year have dominated the news and 2011 reminded everyone what supposedly powerless people can do.
PS-I love looking at the comments on your videos, they are always so well-thought out and thought-provoking, you have attracted a lovely audience :)
bansribb 2 months ago
@bansribb Good point, TIME does have a tendency to side with the man. Look at the number of US presidents who have won in the past! I love the comments in my video too!
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
Although we heard about the protesters alot not everyone agreed with what they were protesting for, some were against and some were on their side. Even then for the people on their side they may not have agreed 100% and may not have fully understood what their reasons for protesting were, for me a 14 year old i often found it confusing. There will be alot of people agreeing with Time magazine and alot against, then there will be people like me confused on whether or not I agree or disagree .
CatIsRandom 2 months ago
@CatIsRandom That's why I make these videos, so we can talk about disagreeing and so we can agree to disagree. You will never, especially in the world of politics, agree 100%. I think it's about finding the things that you hold closest to your heart and then looking at what you are willing to compromise on in order to get as much done as possible that the most people are happy with. Of course, quite often that doesn't happen.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
The riots were in no way about social injustice. The original riot in Tottenham, maybe was, but when it spread to other areas of London, and the rest of the country, it was complete opportunism, and should have been considered a protest at all.
Time are bang on with their selection in my eyes, even for the failed protests, at least it shows people are willing to stand up for themselves and not be contained by their own apathy.
PositiveTension505 2 months ago
@PositiveTension505 It's one of the few times they have gone for a non-establishment figure as well. I like that.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
Also, feel lucky that you could graze! My whole family bar me were ill over Christmas, so only a fraction of the food was eaten! :( And I'm flying back to Germany tomorrow! :(
strangebob2007 2 months ago
@strangebob2007 I'm so sorry! Although, especially when sprouts are involved, sometimes it is better to eat less.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
@rhymingwithoranges Ahh I don't eat sprouts, so I was spared that, thankfully :)
strangebob2007 2 months ago
You're lucky! My family was ill over Christmas so we didn't eat as much!
I agree that the protesters should get the Person of The Year Award, because of the reasons you gave regarding the Arab Spring.
Oddly enough, I think it applies (albeit more loosely) to the rioters in the UK as well - despite their methods. Any good psychiatrist will tell you that criminal activity, on ANY scale, can very much be seen as a cry for attention, which I think to some extent also counts as a form of protest.
strangebob2007 2 months ago
Time's Person of the Year? The selection's supposed to be for the most influential, good or bad, which explains some of the bad characters that have won. Selecting all protesters was a bit of a cop out. There's one protester that started all of this, a "nobody" Tunisian street merchant who set himself on fire, sparking protests throughout the world, w/little to do w/him. Having lived through the late 60's & early 70's protests, seeing the change they brought, you shouldn't count them out so soon
dafttool 2 months ago
@dafttool They have an extensive piece on him in the article, actually. His name was Mohamed Bouazizi. There is no doubt that he was influential, the spark, but I think it is right that the masses were chosen. It is them that, in the end, made the difference. It is nice to see people standing up again, I feel our society has become very stagnated in the last 20 or so years (ie, my lifetime), it's good to give the man a kick up the arse every now and again.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
@rhymingwithoranges Don't get me wrong, I DO think selecting all protesters was the right decision, I was just expressing apprehension that the one who started it all was lost in the shuffle, & have gotten annoyed that Time keeps having cop out selections, even if I approve of the selection this year. Also, obviously not all of the protests are going to be successful, some embarrassing, some even criminal. But all in all it is good people are speaking out against injustice.
dafttool 2 months ago
Oi the grazing was soo bad. No more food!
Also, sure, go on and give the protesters the Person of the Year Award. It doesn't really make a difference in my opinion. It doesn't make them any better or worse for what they've been doing. In my opinion they've done a lot in the way of impacting people, opening the eyes of just every day people. So sure, Person (or people rather) of the Year Award. Good on them! (:
TheMusicalAnarchy 2 months ago
@TheMusicalAnarchy SO MUCH FOOD! Thanks for the comment :)
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
putting hitler as person of the year is pretty messed up so i wouldn't pay attention to that magazine in the first place
purplebob101010 2 months ago
@purplebob101010 To be fair, he did win it before we declared war. At the point of winning we were still friends with him.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago 4
@rhymingwithoranges haha, i guess that makes sense. :)
purplebob101010 2 months ago
@purplebob101010 Remember, it's not "best" person of the year. It's the person who had the greatest impact.
mickeleh 2 months ago
@mickeleh oh yeh, i didnt think of that... :/
purplebob101010 2 months ago
I don't think that protesters should be the only ones criticised for resorting to such extreme methods. Those in charge need to take responsibility as well, because it's their inaction when faced with peaceful protests that resulted in more drastic steps being taken. Riots happen when governments stop listening to the people they're supposed to serve and start treating them like statistics. In essence, if you ignore the people's desires don't be surprised if they get pissed off and retaliate
Qw3rtypop 2 months ago 2
@Qw3rtypop Hmm, I'm not sure how I feel about the riots and if I agree with you. I am not sure the government is to blame in the way you suggest it is. I think the riots and looting have more to do with a wider social problem of ghettos being allowed to develop and the growth of a culture where we get used to getting things for free. Who do you think should have won then?
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
@rhymingwithoranges I totally agree that the growth of a culture where we get things for free contributes to the social problem, especially in hard economic times when we must tighten our belts it becomes difficult for people to understand why they are no longer receiving things without working for them - in essence we are unwilling to sacrifice our lifestyle to make the necessary changes.....it's kind of selfish really...
ThoughtsBelow 2 months ago
@rhymingwithoranges
I come from Cambridge, an area as far from ghetto as one could possibly imagine. But despite that I know many well educated people who were on the streets protesting and who even joined in the riots. These are upper-middle class people, not 'ganstas'. Some of these people are young enough that they haven't had that chance to vote, but they have genuine concerns that the people in charge are gambling with their future and they have no control over it.
Qw3rtypop 2 months ago
@rhymingwithoranges
But I do agree that part of the problem is the culture of getting things for free. The issue I have is seeing everything being cut equally. I'm sorry but I can't see how in an economic crisis, art degrees deserve the same amount of funding as maths or science. They are that drive growth, but still I see talented youths who miss out on further education in say, engineering, because of their background while a someone else gets a grant for hairdressing.
Qw3rtypop 2 months ago
@Qw3rtypop Riots happen when the people feel that they aren't being listened to. The reality is that we have a functioning democracy, the government of which were voted in on the basis of austerity measures and reducing public section beuracracy. I disagree that the actions of the indiviudal against the state can be laid entirely at the government's door, whatever action this may take the form of. Governments do serve the people, but they also govern them.
Slapbass13 2 months ago
@Slapbass13
I didn't mean to imply that the actions of an individual are permissible when judged alone, nor that the actions can be blamed solely on the government. Not everyone can be satisfied all of the time, but when a collective of this size gathers together they need to be taken seriously.
As for functioning, that's debatable. Too often when I've asked someone why they voted for who they did, the response I was "I dunno". This is very wrong, and not what I'd call functioning.
Qw3rtypop 2 months ago
i think that it makes sense to decide that the protestor was the person of the year. simply because the title doesn't actually denote good. it may connote it, but that's a different story. the protestor however bad and good they were this year still did a lot and that cannot be argued.
itssmoshins 2 months ago 7
I agree with you completely. While the protester may not have always been the best person of the year, they were certainly the person we heard the most about, no matter where we or they were.
asyouwish141 2 months ago
@asyouwish141 Do you think there are any other candidates? Alex Day for never giving up on getting a number 1, for instance?
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
@rhymingwithoranges He only affected part of the world, although he did so for the better. Were this a contest for best person of the year, I would consider him, but I cannot come up with a better example of a person I have constantly heard about and most of the world have constantly heard about this year than the protester. There are probably many other candidates who one could argue are much better people of the year, but I think Time did not make an unsupported decision.
asyouwish141 2 months ago
@asyouwish141 Basically, their decision makes sense, but they could have chosen better.
asyouwish141 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@asyouwish141 Basically, their decision makes sense, but they could have chosen better.
asyouwish141 2 months ago
@itssmoshins truth, and I suppose the people who have won in the past aren't squeaky clean wither. Apart from the endangered earth of course... and Gandhi.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
long trips!? the uk is like the size of my bum hole
jordler 2 months ago 8
@jordler it is still relatively long compared to my walk to the toilet and back.
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
Also I do think the protesters deserved person of the year
OhheythereimJade 2 months ago
@OhheythereimJade how come?
rhymingwithoranges 2 months ago
@rhymingwithoranges As a whole protesters this year have actually proved that by protesting eventually you can change something and I think it's this kind of thinking that changes things for the better. As well as this in my opinion I don't think the London riots count as protests it was more looting for the sake of looting because if it was a protest then what they were protesting about would have or should have been made clear.
OhheythereimJade 2 months ago
Oh the grazing :'(
OhheythereimJade 2 months ago