3 ms·

Because of a few great wins in history, we have a rather romantic and rosie notion of civil disobedience, protesting, marching, and general civil disruption. A

Because of a few great wins in history, we have a rather romantic and rosie notion of civil disobedience, protesting, marching, and general civil disruption. And so they've become well-worn tools of the modern activist. Its worth questioning whether these are the best tools to use in so many circumstances. Its a very real possibility that the gamble doesn't pay off. It might even drive polarization and skepticism among the very people you need to reach the most. It may just create civil unrest and reduce our resources, leaving us less able to fight climate change. Or a few smart people who might otherwise be able to contribute to a solution, end up spending their valuable time in jail, instead.

jquery 7y ago
Survivor bias in civil disobedience makes some people think that “on average” it produces positive results, especially when the cause is “just” (which every violent extremist does, of course). Anyone even casually familiar with history would blush at such arrogance.
NeedMoreTea 7y ago
> rosie notion of civil disobedience, protesting, marching, and general civil disruption Personally I see protesting and marching as a nice Saturday afternoon out that achieves precisely nothing. Just look what the massive march and demo against the Iraq war achieved - nowt. It's important not to conflate them with civil disobedience which has very different aims and tactics. It's being an ongoing thorn in the side of the state that has historically made a difference. I certainly don't see that as a well-worn tool of the modern activist - it's a forgotten tactic, replaced by one-off marches or demos, and the online petition. Which achieve almost nothing. If a few smart people feel it's gone too long being ignored that they are now willing to risk prison, well good on them. If they're smart enough and presentable enough to not be easily dismissed as eco-nuts by the right wing media, they can often achieve positive press for their aims. It's hard to dismiss a retiree with 40 years in industry, doctor, or IT consultant quite so easily. It remains to be seen if the gamble and assessment of public opinion is correct. For both XR and the school strikes, the public reaction has appeared hugely positive so far - far more so than I would have expected. Which is a problem for a government that would prefer not to act.

jquery 7y ago

Survivor bias in civil disobedience makes some people think that “on average” it produces positive results, especially when the cause is “just” (which every violent extremist does, of course). Anyone even casually familiar with history would blush at such arrogance.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago

> rosie notion of civil disobedience, protesting, marching, and general civil disruption Personally I see protesting and marching as a nice Saturday afternoon out that achieves precisely nothing. Just look what the massive march and demo against the Iraq war achieved - nowt. It's important not to conflate them with civil disobedience which has very different aims and tactics. It's being an ongoing thorn in the side of the state that has historically made a difference. I certainly don't see that as a well-worn tool of the modern activist - it's a forgotten tactic, replaced by one-off marches or demos, and the online petition. Which achieve almost nothing. If a few smart people feel it's gone too long being ignored that they are now willing to risk prison, well good on them. If they're smart enough and presentable enough to not be easily dismissed as eco-nuts by the right wing media, they can often achieve positive press for their aims. It's hard to dismiss a retiree with 40 years in industry, doctor, or IT consultant quite so easily. It remains to be seen if the gamble and assessment of public opinion is correct. For both XR and the school strikes, the public reaction has appeared hugely positive so far - far more so than I would have expected. Which is a problem for a government that would prefer not to act.