3 ms·

I honestly think that there are people in the US who feel distraught enough to do so, but they know that it wouldn't do any good for anyone else -- they would b

I honestly think that there are people in the US who feel distraught enough to do so, but they know that it wouldn't do any good for anyone else -- they would be ignored, or labeled as "crazy". No doubt life in the US is still much better than many other places, but we have to remember that protest itself has been systematically marginalized and penalized as a form of expression, and adjust our evaluation of the state of the US accordingly.

DevKoala 6y ago
So they suffer enough to want to burn themselves, but won’t because they fear being labeled crazy? I feel that comparing the suffering of such an individual to the suffering of people who actually burned themselves to protest the oppression they experienced is insulting to the sacrifice of the later. I agree with the sentiment of the protests in the USA, but there is no need to invent fictional martyrs who “could have been”.
- nitrogen 6y ago
  insulting to the sacrifice of the later. I think it's insulting to all that we even feel the need to compare. This perhaps counterintuitively amplifies divisions, when we want to unite.
heavenlyblue 6y ago
Are you saying that burning yourself during Arab Spring has better hope for success than in the US?
- nitrogen 6y ago
  We have clear evidence that it did.
emilsedgh 6y ago
I have a theory that distribution of power in democracies leads to "distribution of blame". Living in a third world country means you probably are dealing with a (semi) dictatorship. That means there's only a few entities (eg regime, government, whatever) that you can assign the blame to. Therefore, you can light yourself on fire in protest to them. In the U.S. who would you light yourself to protest to? Elected congress? Elected government? Wall Street? Supreme Court? Unfortunately when system gets rigged and gamed in a democracy it's really difficult to untangle the mess. This also has a secondary effect: In these countries people are not so divided. They have a common enemy: The dictator [0]. Source: Anecdotal experience based in years of life in a third world country and the U.S. [0] This is an oversimplification as even the dictators have support of a big chunk of the population to rely on.
- kiliancs 6y ago
  > I have a theory that distribution of power in democracies leads to "distribution of blame". I think there's some truth to this, but I think this eventually results in widespread cynicism, skepticism and loss of trust towards any sort of institution (aka "the system") in general --including science and religion--, which is a perfect environment for fake news and conspiracy theories. Long term it leads to chaos and unrest too.
  - Avicebron 6y ago
    I think that you are correct that in the long term it leads to chaos and unrest, but I think it also has a slow burn problem that ultimately leads to deep ennui, cynicism, and a feeling of powerlessness that can last many generations. This has the effect of further concentrating power in those who have rigged the system and leads to such an unbalance that maybe when the chaos comes, it won't lead to anything better. Conversely I think in more volatile arenas, the power dynamics while large, are less so (logically this makes sense because a revolution that can win is closer in power to the system they are fighting). While this volatility may be worse overall in that society, it is less systematically oppressive than say a rigged democracy deeply meshed into a non-democratic economic system. The more I think about it the more my nihilism takes hold and I find that very disheartening.
    - JohnClark1337 6y ago
      Robespierre knew what he was doing

DevKoala 6y ago

So they suffer enough to want to burn themselves, but won’t because they fear being labeled crazy? I feel that comparing the suffering of such an individual to the suffering of people who actually burned themselves to protest the oppression they experienced is insulting to the sacrifice of the later. I agree with the sentiment of the protests in the USA, but there is no need to invent fictional martyrs who “could have been”.

nitrogen 6y ago
insulting to the sacrifice of the later. I think it's insulting to all that we even feel the need to compare. This perhaps counterintuitively amplifies divisions, when we want to unite.

heavenlyblue 6y ago

Are you saying that burning yourself during Arab Spring has better hope for success than in the US?

nitrogen 6y ago
We have clear evidence that it did.

emilsedgh 6y ago

I have a theory that distribution of power in democracies leads to "distribution of blame". Living in a third world country means you probably are dealing with a (semi) dictatorship. That means there's only a few entities (eg regime, government, whatever) that you can assign the blame to. Therefore, you can light yourself on fire in protest to them. In the U.S. who would you light yourself to protest to? Elected congress? Elected government? Wall Street? Supreme Court? Unfortunately when system gets rigged and gamed in a democracy it's really difficult to untangle the mess. This also has a secondary effect: In these countries people are not so divided. They have a common enemy: The dictator [0]. Source: Anecdotal experience based in years of life in a third world country and the U.S. [0] This is an oversimplification as even the dictators have support of a big chunk of the population to rely on.

kiliancs 6y ago
> I have a theory that distribution of power in democracies leads to "distribution of blame". I think there's some truth to this, but I think this eventually results in widespread cynicism, skepticism and loss of trust towards any sort of institution (aka "the system") in general --including science and religion--, which is a perfect environment for fake news and conspiracy theories. Long term it leads to chaos and unrest too.
- Avicebron 6y ago
  I think that you are correct that in the long term it leads to chaos and unrest, but I think it also has a slow burn problem that ultimately leads to deep ennui, cynicism, and a feeling of powerlessness that can last many generations. This has the effect of further concentrating power in those who have rigged the system and leads to such an unbalance that maybe when the chaos comes, it won't lead to anything better. Conversely I think in more volatile arenas, the power dynamics while large, are less so (logically this makes sense because a revolution that can win is closer in power to the system they are fighting). While this volatility may be worse overall in that society, it is less systematically oppressive than say a rigged democracy deeply meshed into a non-democratic economic system. The more I think about it the more my nihilism takes hold and I find that very disheartening.
  - JohnClark1337 6y ago
    Robespierre knew what he was doing