|
|
Post by Canuovea on Jan 21, 2017 21:18:00 GMT
I do have to agree with StyxD about protests, though, that's what people disgruntled with the status quo do. If you don't, then you're not "walking the walk" as my aunt would say.
And honestly, I don't think your characterization of StyxD's response is accurate. I think you might be a bit too obsessed with being labelled the "heretic" because you've changed your mind. Yes, that has happened in the past, but I don't think it is what StyxD meant here in this case.
Its like that whole Martin Luthor King Jr. thing. What confuses (maybe not the right word in this case?) people fighting for change most is not so much vehement denial and assault as it is lukewarm acceptance. "Yes black folks should be treated well, but..." "Trump is bad, but..." The enemy are the "moderates" not the extremists, as he might say.
Furthermore, it seems pretty self evident to me, and it seems to StyxD, why people are protesting. His statement that he doesn't know what you are trying to mean is more along the lines of "I really don't see what you're complaining about, I thought this was understood as a thing people do." And it really does seem like a strange complaint to make to me. You've decided that they don't know what their interests are and that they shouldn't do what you think isn't good enough.
To turn your own argument against you, you live in England, what do you care about why people are protesting in the USA? Why are you trying to tell them what to do? Now, my point there isn't to say you shouldn't care about people protesting in the USA, but rather that maybe your remarks about other people protesting in other countries is just silly.
And you are getting an attitude about this too, and being somewhat dismissive. I can see why he's annoyed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Jan 22, 2017 0:28:58 GMT
Well my wife is America and I lived in America for 2 years so I have a direct connection to America in that sense.
I didnt mean to criticise people in other countries caring about things happening in America, I apologise if I gave that impression. I meant that if having a vague protest about intersectional justice or whatever isn't going to work in America, then having one in another country that is completely separate is clearly a waste of time. I can go stand in Rotherham town centre with a sign sayign "down with Trump" and I will feel really righteous and most people who see it will agree with me. I will probably get applauded. But I also wont do a damn bit of good to change anything.
You described the protests as "trying to change the zeitgiest" which is about as vague a goal as I think its possible to imagine.
You keep bringing up this Martin Luther King quote about how terrible moderates are, which seems like an appeal to authority, but I guess I can entertain it. The problem with taking that as ghospel is that you are creating a situation where its impossible to criticise the methods the movement uses.
To do so is to be a dreaded "white moderate" and thus worse than the Klan.
Black Lives Matter, for example, has clearly alienated a lot of people. More than a third of black people in america don't support the group. Should I question their methods of rioting, anti cop/anti white rhetoric and crazy ideological ideas, or should I keep quite for fear of being an evil moderate? Cause it seems like their movement turned into a joke and has pretty much run out of steam, possibly even stoking white fears that helped encourage more votes for Trump.
Making white people scared so they vote for a crazy orange strong man doesn't seem like a good idea. Should I point this out or should I keep cheering them on as they steer the movemnet over a cliff?
The left is really good these days at sealing themselves off from criticism, and to me this argument you are using is another example.
I do think using effective tactics is important. Doing stupid things and then acting outraged when people don't react the way you want doesn't win anything.
I guess I might be wrong about this, but since the left seems to be in full retreat across America and Europe, I would say its reasonable to start wondering if their tactics and methods might be backfiring.
I actually kind of got side tracted a bit here, as the fact the protests wont help anything (they wont) wasn't the main thing that I foudn interesting. The main thing was the weird way the people involved brought in a load of things about the protests needed to focus on women of colour and put them at the centre of it etc. The fact that the event was so quickly highjacked in this way seems to kind of demonstrate a big problem the left is stuck with. Identity politics is so rampant that everyone has to try to appeal to all identities all the time.
We cant have a march abotu women without someone saying "what about women of colour, huh?"
When people are that busy picking things apart to see if their particular group got a mention, nothing gets done.
The right has no such weakness.
I guess if you think these tactics and this infighting is helping the left then have at it. Liberals seem super keen to indulge in it so I don't think there will be any shortage of it.
To me, when things are failing doing the same shit that got you there is a bad idea, but who knows? Maybe if we just repeat the same stuff over and over eventually we will get a different result?
|
|
|
|
Post by Harkovast on Jan 22, 2017 0:33:07 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Jan 22, 2017 0:47:16 GMT
Hijacking it might not have been great, but it is probably women of colour who will suffer most under a Trump regime. I don't know though, I've not been paying any attention to these things. It doesn't effect me at all, I'm not about to "walk the walk", I have better things to do for myself.
Anyway, I don't really give a shit about Martin Luther King at the moment. I honestly don't know enough about him to care. But a certain someone keeps bringing up Martin Luther King Jr. and how he'd not at all be siding with Black Lives Matter because they're too radical and radicals are scary. So I brought him up to point out that these are not new tactics, they're old tactics. They've been around a long time. It is very much about escalating tension, and while it might scare some of those "moderate whites" and whatever, there is a point to it. Tension means something has to give eventually, after all, and the more you move away from what is right, the greater that tension should get.
Interesting strategy. Whether or not it works, I don't know. There is also the question of if a smaller, tension creating population should really be able to employ that to change the situation, against the apathy or will of the larger population. But to these people it isn't about democracy, it is about justice.
The zeitgeist thing is deadly serious though. These protests, in the US and elsewhere, are a sign that people will not stand for what Trump stands for. It is a message, not just to the enemies of Trump, but also to people who find themselves afraid of what is to come. I heard about transgender folks actually committing suicide over Trump and company (and I'm half expecting you to scoff at them for it, because it isn't a real danger and they're probably overreacting, and honestly? They probably were overreacting, I'm not as worried about Trump anymore, leastways not for myself). But what Trump represents, what he stands for, will soon become more accepted and the bigots will crawl from the woodwork. Consider these rallies a shared reaction to future horror, if you will, to ironically enough make people feel better as much as to put Trump down.
Of course, it also sends a message that women are aware of the threat he poses to their rights, Which he does pose a threat to, when it comes to abortion at the very least.
|
|
