Do people calling for an immediate permanent ceasefire realize that Israel currently occupies most of Gaza? Or do they not realize that a ceasefire does not automatically entail Israeli withdrawal? Really, the only scenarios where Israel leaves Gaza are either 1) A unilateral decision from Israel to do so (seems unlikely, but not impossible) 2) Hamas militarily defeating Israel (pretty much impossible) or 3) An agreement between Israel and Hamas where Hamas gives major concessions to Israel in exchange for an Israeli withdrawal (also seems extremely unlikely, but weirder things have happened, I suppose). #3 is probably closest to what ceasefire proponents are imagining, but that is only one very unlikely form of what a ceasefire would look like and would still take a huge amount of time.
Now, I'm sure there are plenty of people who want to see a ceasefire along current lines of control to allow for further negotiations - I'm personally in this camp, at least to some extent. But that comes with the acceptance that Israel will have almost all the leverage in dictating the terms of the peace (even completely aside from any pressure or aid from the US) and will almost certainly lead to a less "free Palestine" than pre-October. So, if it was a "free Palestine" I was looking for, I don't know if "ceasefire now" would be the chant I would go with.
If I were to give some unsolicited advice, I'd say "Resist occupied Gaza!" would be a better slogan, since that does put a modicum of pressure on how Washington and Jerusalem are anticipating the post-war peace to go. Currently the mindset is "We'll figure it out once Hamas is defeated." By emphasizing that resistance will continue with or without Hamas, it puts that assumption into question.
I have some terrible news for you: these people aren’t that smart and don’t actually know what they want other than to just be mad about something.
