They began in Missouri in 1819.
Progress?

First, I confess I only skimmed this very long article.

However, the message seems to be reiterated historic examples of how little various past protest movements have succeeded in their stated purpose.

I guess the only sure reply I have to CHAS' lead question, is that protests opposing social injustice, create a social and legal climate which are a LOT better than doing nothing about them.

Besides which, there have been major instances where the weight of history shows a groundswell of indignation and protest HAVE ended in major legislative change. Also a change in social attitudes.

Think women's suffrage and gay rights, to name only two.

Over time (usually much longer than it ought to take) persevering in protest DOES make a difference, even if in the short term, individual cases may not be resolved successfully. I think the issues become part of the social consciousness until the masses of the public take for granted the change in attitudes.

Much of the difference is made by how issues and protests are presented. In this regard, the present differs greatly from past protests (most of which are highlighted here) because of the effect of social media.

Interesting.

Yes.

But it is a marathon. Protests often succeed in shifting the conversation in the public.

Progress is slow and we are in a period of serious pushback spearheaded by the current president, so it may feel like 'nothing ever comes' from protesting.

I wonder - without the violence and looting, would this current round of protests just have been another blip in the news cycle? People are talking, people are writing, people are getting involved.