3 ms·

I don't see why you get to define the widespread civic unrest as hysteria. There have now been two consecutive weekends of thousands of normal people mobilizing

by guelo 10y ago

I don't see why you get to define the widespread civic unrest as hysteria. There have now been two consecutive weekends of thousands of normal people mobilizing mass protests. What is the difference between people legitimately concerned and hysteria?

ajkjk 10y ago
You've identified the point of the phrasing "Some people call this activism, others would call it hysteria.".
dragonwriter 10y ago
> What is the difference between people legitimately concerned and hysteria? Whether or not the person making the characterization agrees with the people in question, mostly.
- concinds 10y ago
  Disagree, see my reply above. Every movement has both. Every movement has an ebb and flow. They become stronger and weaker. But keep in mind that when empowering the rational activists, you are by necessity also empowering the shrill mob. I want people to be mindful of this. Have convictions, but breathe, meditate, do whatever you need. If you feel angry, let yourself be, but then let the anger and everything else go, and rely only on your principles. No emotions.
concinds 10y ago
In any protest, you'll probably have 80% of people protesting because they're too emotionally invested in something (admittedly that's subjective), and 20% protesting because they thought things through, and made a rational decision. This isn't specific to any political movement or ideology. If you want to check, go to an anti-Trump protest wearing a Trump hat (or an Occupy Wall Street protest when you're the top 1%). Some will directly assault you or steal the hat, some will yell obscenities, and a minority will actually talk with you calmly and see if they can change your mind. This doesn't make their aims less legitimate, since it's a characteristic of any mass movement, but you can't brush it away. We're in an era where Twitter mobs can make stocks drop and get people fired.

by guelo 10y ago

ajkjk 10y ago

You've identified the point of the phrasing "Some people call this activism, others would call it hysteria.".

dragonwriter 10y ago

> What is the difference between people legitimately concerned and hysteria? Whether or not the person making the characterization agrees with the people in question, mostly.

concinds 10y ago
Disagree, see my reply above. Every movement has both. Every movement has an ebb and flow. They become stronger and weaker. But keep in mind that when empowering the rational activists, you are by necessity also empowering the shrill mob. I want people to be mindful of this. Have convictions, but breathe, meditate, do whatever you need. If you feel angry, let yourself be, but then let the anger and everything else go, and rely only on your principles. No emotions.

concinds 10y ago

In any protest, you'll probably have 80% of people protesting because they're too emotionally invested in something (admittedly that's subjective), and 20% protesting because they thought things through, and made a rational decision. This isn't specific to any political movement or ideology. If you want to check, go to an anti-Trump protest wearing a Trump hat (or an Occupy Wall Street protest when you're the top 1%). Some will directly assault you or steal the hat, some will yell obscenities, and a minority will actually talk with you calmly and see if they can change your mind. This doesn't make their aims less legitimate, since it's a characteristic of any mass movement, but you can't brush it away. We're in an era where Twitter mobs can make stocks drop and get people fired.