6 ms·

> But on second thought, I think there might be an actual scenario to worry about: Activists hijacking the system to show political messages. Oh, the horror

by antris 2y ago

gunsle 2y ago
People are paying their own money to see these shows, protesting by ruining that experience is just going to piss people off and hurt your cause.
- pests 2y ago
  They must feel the pain for them to care.
- HeyLaughingBoy 2y ago
  And probably get your ass kicked if they can tell it's you doing it.
Waterluvian 2y ago
There's something ironic about activists behaving like they somehow have the right to just be in people's way. As if the ends justify the means.
- ada1981 2y ago
  Rosa Parks, Henry David Thoreau and MLK disagree.
  - freedomben 2y ago
    Seriously asking: did those three go around to existing events and hijack them? e.g. Did they jump on stage and grab the microphones, or did they block traffic so nobody could get through? Or did they threaten people with violence for passing through having contrary opinions? My understanding after reading "King" by Jonathan Eig (a fantastic biography btw, highly recommend to everyone) is that they didn't do that kind of stuff. They marched alongside traffic and were so non-violent that they allowed themselves to be hit with dogs and high-pressure water hoses without responding. Rosa Parks especially was not like most "activists" today. She clamly and peacefully kept her seat on the bus. Maybe the former Google employee activists who refused to leave the conference room would be similar here, though there are of course differences. I consider myself an activist, and I believe strongly that people need to help raise awareness because there is far too much ignorance and apathy out there, but I agree with GP and siblings that many of the activists today are harming their own cause by being obnoxious. Raising awareness in an empathetic way is the right way to do it, not trying to bully people into agreeing.
    - ada1981 2y ago
      Yes, this is exactly what they did. Rosa Parks “got in the way” by not leaving a seat she wasn’t legally allowed to sit in. She disrupted the flow of the white passengers. Today people would say “why doesn’t she protest elsewhere? She’s just getting in the way of bus riders who are trying to get to work.” Sit ins were lead by MLK. People would go into restaurants, order food, and refuse to leave until they were served, despite being told they had to leave because of (legal) race laws. Today they’d be told they should protest elsewhere, that there is a time and a place, and they are hurting their cause by creating a disturbance. Thoreau explicitly states you have a moral obligation to oppose unjust laws, etc. and resist governments, etc. Empathetic awareness raising is one way and often not sufficient. Read kings Letter from a Birmingham Jail. 1) determine if an injustice is actually being committed 2) attempt to talk with those committing the injustice to resolve it 3) prepare spiritually for non-violent resistance to evil 4) engage in non-violent resistance, protest only after all other means are exhausted, be prepared to be beaten and do not fight back, and 4 is only a means to get back to 2 — to open negotiations and discussions to restore justice. The greatest “harm” to a cause is often passive silence. Sitting by and critiquing activists is often a pastime of folks who stand to benefit from the preservation of the status quo and who have no real desire for immediate change. Here is King reading his Letter from Birmingham Jail. Worth the 50 minutes to listen. https://youtu.be/ATPSht6318o?si=37312G9PxNHyYAEs https://youtu.be/ATPSht6318o?si=37312G9PxNHyYAEs
      - dgfitz 2y ago
        > Rosa Parks “got in the way"..." "...She’s just getting in the way of bus riders who are trying to get to work You had to quote "got in the way" so even you realize what a bad rebuttal it is. And sitting in a seat designed to be sat in is not getting in the way, not even a little bit. (Standing in the middle of traffic is actually what most people consider 'getting in the way') > Sit ins were lead by MLK. People would go into restaurants, order food, and refuse to leave until they were served So people went to an establishment that expected, and was designed, to serve patrons. And they "got in the way" by sitting at a table? Your words lose meaning when they're disingenuous. > Sitting by and critiquing activists is often a pastime of folks who stand to benefit from the preservation of the status quo and who have no real desire for immediate change. You ruined whatever tenuous point you were trying to make with this line. Blocking traffic for hours and hours because "my protest is more important than ANYTHING ELSE" is such an entitled, arrogant way to think.

> But on second thought, I think there might be an actual scenario to worry about: Activists hijacking the system to show political messages. Oh, the horror

by antris 2y ago

> But on second thought, I think there might be an actual scenario to worry about: Activists hijacking the system to show political messages. Oh, the horror

gunsle 2y ago

People are paying their own money to see these shows, protesting by ruining that experience is just going to piss people off and hurt your cause.

pests 2y ago
They must feel the pain for them to care.
HeyLaughingBoy 2y ago
And probably get your ass kicked if they can tell it's you doing it.

Waterluvian 2y ago

There's something ironic about activists behaving like they somehow have the right to just be in people's way. As if the ends justify the means.

ada1981 2y ago
Rosa Parks, Henry David Thoreau and MLK disagree.
- freedomben 2y ago
  Seriously asking: did those three go around to existing events and hijack them? e.g. Did they jump on stage and grab the microphones, or did they block traffic so nobody could get through? Or did they threaten people with violence for passing through having contrary opinions? My understanding after reading "King" by Jonathan Eig (a fantastic biography btw, highly recommend to everyone) is that they didn't do that kind of stuff. They marched alongside traffic and were so non-violent that they allowed themselves to be hit with dogs and high-pressure water hoses without responding. Rosa Parks especially was not like most "activists" today. She clamly and peacefully kept her seat on the bus. Maybe the former Google employee activists who refused to leave the conference room would be similar here, though there are of course differences. I consider myself an activist, and I believe strongly that people need to help raise awareness because there is far too much ignorance and apathy out there, but I agree with GP and siblings that many of the activists today are harming their own cause by being obnoxious. Raising awareness in an empathetic way is the right way to do it, not trying to bully people into agreeing.
  - ada1981 2y ago
    Yes, this is exactly what they did. Rosa Parks “got in the way” by not leaving a seat she wasn’t legally allowed to sit in. She disrupted the flow of the white passengers. Today people would say “why doesn’t she protest elsewhere? She’s just getting in the way of bus riders who are trying to get to work.” Sit ins were lead by MLK. People would go into restaurants, order food, and refuse to leave until they were served, despite being told they had to leave because of (legal) race laws. Today they’d be told they should protest elsewhere, that there is a time and a place, and they are hurting their cause by creating a disturbance. Thoreau explicitly states you have a moral obligation to oppose unjust laws, etc. and resist governments, etc. Empathetic awareness raising is one way and often not sufficient. Read kings Letter from a Birmingham Jail. 1) determine if an injustice is actually being committed 2) attempt to talk with those committing the injustice to resolve it 3) prepare spiritually for non-violent resistance to evil 4) engage in non-violent resistance, protest only after all other means are exhausted, be prepared to be beaten and do not fight back, and 4 is only a means to get back to 2 — to open negotiations and discussions to restore justice. The greatest “harm” to a cause is often passive silence. Sitting by and critiquing activists is often a pastime of folks who stand to benefit from the preservation of the status quo and who have no real desire for immediate change. Here is King reading his Letter from Birmingham Jail. Worth the 50 minutes to listen. https://youtu.be/ATPSht6318o?si=37312G9PxNHyYAEs https://youtu.be/ATPSht6318o?si=37312G9PxNHyYAEs
    - dgfitz 2y ago
      > Rosa Parks “got in the way"..." "...She’s just getting in the way of bus riders who are trying to get to work You had to quote "got in the way" so even you realize what a bad rebuttal it is. And sitting in a seat designed to be sat in is not getting in the way, not even a little bit. (Standing in the middle of traffic is actually what most people consider 'getting in the way') > Sit ins were lead by MLK. People would go into restaurants, order food, and refuse to leave until they were served So people went to an establishment that expected, and was designed, to serve patrons. And they "got in the way" by sitting at a table? Your words lose meaning when they're disingenuous. > Sitting by and critiquing activists is often a pastime of folks who stand to benefit from the preservation of the status quo and who have no real desire for immediate change. You ruined whatever tenuous point you were trying to make with this line. Blocking traffic for hours and hours because "my protest is more important than ANYTHING ELSE" is such an entitled, arrogant way to think.