Then why protest at all? If you're protesting for change, you're still relying on politicians in particular Democrats as they are historically more willing to deal with civil rights than Republicans to enact change. So I don't understand the logic in believing protest is your only avenue for change whiich at the end of the day still relies on the same political system that voting would. It makes no sense.
Protesting and voting should always be the paths needed toward enacting laws for social justice. The NBA players did both but people here want to ignore the voting part of the equation.
That is not quite it.
The US governmental system is designed to slow rapid progress, the methods of enacting change, outside of every single branch being packed with like-minded vanguardists - are incredibly slow and take years to even enact, and even longer for the actual change to come about.
Popular public dissent - directed toward different areas of the government speed things up rapidly - the public pressure shifts the power into the hands of the public away from the power brokers, so to speak. It is insane to think that voting could possibly move in the same direction as a protest - you vote every 2-4 years - unless you're a person that attends local council and board meetings. But labor stoppages, large scale marches, rioting, etc. all grease the wheel and can do things like rapidly establish labor rights, education rights, end de facto segregation, force municipalities to shift funding, end entire non-enumerated Congressional powers, etc.