In my opinion, activists in most cases who inconvenience the general public are not justified. There are a few reasons for this which I will outline below. But first of all, it's good to define what we are talking about. What is an activist?
According to Oxford Languages Dictionary, an activist is someone who campaigns to bring about political or social change.
I can understand why people may want to be an activist and this is ok for me, some do some great work to educate the public and their effort should be praised. However, if an activist wants to communicate and propose something to me, as a thinking adult, there are better ways to communicate with me than disruptive behaviour such as blocking roads, vandalism or other destructive behaviours.
The fact that most people don't know how to think still doesn't justify disruptive types of behaviour.
As we are all bestowed with God-given rights, I can fully support the rights of people who want to get active and inform others about any social or political change they want, I believe this is called the "outreach" type of activism.
But if the activism involves breaking any laws that would cause injury to other people through personal harm, damage to their property or general restrictions on them exercising their freedom to go or do something, I would be against it.
The reason for this is that we are all equal and do not have the right to interfere with how others are living. There is no reason why we should not respect the rights of others, the same as we should not expect others to try and remove our rights. This for me has a higher value than the rights of someone promoting activism.
The reason why we should not allow other people's rights and freedoms to be infringed is that if we allow it for activism, it would set a precedent of allowing rights to be removed for any subjective behaviour. This I think is morally wrong and could lead to a dark place where we give more rights to people with certain beliefs considered right at this moment in time, at the expense of those who may have differing beliefs.
Another reason is that it is most of the time, totally unnecessary. I have seen videos where some activists could have broken the law to do their activism but instead engaged in a dialogue with those they were protesting against and were actually given permission to do their activism. So there is always a possibility to avoid needing to inconvenience others through your activism and still be successful.
Examples of this I have seen were by Earthling Ed and Joey Carbstong. Both are ardent vegan activists who campaign to stop animal cruelty. In some of their activism videos, you will see that when they approached the farmers or slaughterhouse owners, in some cases they were allowed to film on the farmer's property and therefore avoided needing to break the law.
The next reason is that most of these protests which incite violence or criminal damage are led by government undercover agents. Their aim is to co-opt movements that go against their agendas and often this involves using activist groups as pawns to commit crimes to discredit their causes or as items of propaganda against the public to forward agendas.
Some of the world's most successful activists were carrying out activism without trying to cause problems for the general public such as Martin Luther King who advocated non-violent protests and marches directly against the political leaders.
source
Another very prominent and successful activist is Gandhi. He participated in many non-violent protests and activism that involved just himself such as hunger strikes.
source
Therefore, if two of the world's most successful activists with such massive achievements as ending slavery in the US and freeing millions of people in India from colonial rule and oppression were successful without the need to inconvenience the public and damage their freedoms, I think this is still the case for activists today.
Gandhi had a saying for his peaceful, non-violent protests. It was called satyagraha. Gandhi is so well known and associated with peaceful protesting and civil disobedience, that his legend precedes him like no other. When you think about it, it sounds unbelievable that his method could achieve so much.
source
In this perspective, it really shows that blocking motorways and smashing up restaurants are out of touch with successful methods of activism. This leads me to question if their activism is really genuine and if there is some ulterior motive at play here.
Those showing no respect for others will not win over other people to their cause and unite people to create the change they desire.
The correct way to evoke change in the general public (if they are the target of your activism) is to try and engage with them and inform and educate them. You should try to reason with them and evoke logic and use rhetoric to convince them that you are right. This is what adults do should do.
These skills you will find if you learn the trivium. This involves work and effort to try to understand the workings of your own mind and how to think. Yes, work on yourself first before trying to change other people.
Most often people instead allow themselves to be controlled through their emotions. The argument goes that it's okay to trample on the rights of others because they are feeling emotional and the rights of someone else are less than the social and political changes wanted.
Well, I'm here to say that no it isn't ok to do that. It's morally wrong. This is not acceptable behaviour in a free society to have no respect for others.
This leads me to my final point.
The real way to effect change is to be the change you want yourself and lead by example. Knowledge is knowing, wisdom is doing.
Political and social structures are just mental constructs and do not exist in reality. Therefore to make a change in the world, you only need to change your own way of thinking.
This would then avoid the need to inconvenience the general public in any activism.
Thanks for reading.
This post is part of the EcoTrain Question of the Week series. To participate or read more from others, please check here.
Resources:
Title image created in Canva.
All text is my own writing and any references are sourced.
This is very well said. If you as a leader or activist actually want a change, it should be seen in you first to change, educate and make others aware because peaceful protest will result in great unity and cooperation but in a situation where you need to vandalize others' properties because you want to get across your message sent to the audience, then your actions can never be justified.
This is very true 👍
Thank you for your amazing contribution
Thank you for your kind words and feedback. 😀
You are welcome
You have brought up very valid points in your perspective @mypathtofire, in a very respectable way. It was a pleasure to read this. And agreed with the ideal of lead by example. Unfortunately, most of the current leaders do not practice that. That is why there is so much division and violence going on.
This post was obtained through Dreemport.
You are right. Divide and rule is the tactic. It has worked well for the controllers up until now.
Thanks for dropping by :)
Upvoted on behalf of the VYB Curation project
Thanks for your support!
One of the best answers I have read so far Steve! I completely agree with you which some may argue is why I think it is one of the best answers !LOLZ... But I think we need to look at each particular incidence of activism and ask ourselves whether (a) it is actually achieving anything in the grand scheme of things, and (b) whether it is doing more harm than good... If activism has no hope of changing the status quo, and if it does more harm than good, it really isn't justified. When the exercise of one set of rights is facilitated through the trampling of the rights of others, this cannot be right! The end does not always justify the means! As you point out, some of history's greatest activists achieved incredible feats through peaceful means that did not infringe upon the liberties and rights of others in a disproportionate manner. Sadly too many activists use the genre of political protest as a cover to achieve more nefarious objectives. !PIZZA !ALIVE !hivebits
Success! You mined .9 HBIT & the user you replied to received .1 HBIT on your behalf. mine | wallet | market | tools | discord | community | <>< daily
lolztoken.com
I can always count on them
Credit: reddit
@mypathtofire, I sent you an $LOLZ on behalf of @samsmith1971
Use the !LOL or !LOLZ command to share a joke and an $LOLZ.
Delegate Hive Tokens to Farm $LOLZ and earn 110% Rewards. Learn more.
(1/6)
I think those 2 considerations make sense. My understanding of things is that the real war is for people's attention and the elephant in the room is why is there such a profound psychological campaign in place to do this.
Therefore, by removing your attention, you win.
Have a great sunday!
!ALIVE
For the activist, drawing attention to their cause is key. But they should aim to draw positive attention. What a lot of activists do is say... hey if I make life difficult for the rest of society, I'll piss them off sufficiently so that they will collectively decide, by default, to support our objectives simply to make their pain go away. So there is indirect support achieved because those feeling the pain place pressure directly on those causing the issues that are the object of the activism, to force them to put a stop to the activism... and the activist hopes the remedy comes in the form of acquiescence to their demands. It rarely does! This cannot be the right way to approach things.
I agree completely. That's not the right way to get consent/support from people. I'm not even sure if trying to get indirect support like that is even effective, but you have summarised it nicely.
@samsmith1971! You Are Alive so I just staked 0.1 $ALIVE to your account on behalf of @mypathtofire. (7/10)
The tip has been paid for by the We Are Alive Tribe through the earnings on @alive.chat, feel free to swing by our daily chat any time you want.
@mypathtofire! You Are Alive so I just staked 0.1 $ALIVE to your account on behalf of @samsmith1971. (2/10)
The tip has been paid for by the We Are Alive Tribe through the earnings on @alive.chat, feel free to swing by our daily chat any time you want.
Very well said.👍
Thanks for your comment 😀
beautiful response! and especially the final point.. leading my example.. is a golden nugget here.. i think that can inspire others like nothing else! <3
thanks for your kind feedback. :)
Congratulations @mypathtofire! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s):
Your next target is to reach 2500 comments.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPTo support your work, I also upvoted your post!
Check out the last post from @hivebuzz:
PIZZA Holders sent $PIZZA tips in this post's comments:
@samsmith1971(2/10) tipped @mypathtofire (x1)
Learn more at https://hive.pizza.
These are very good points you've stated here. Being the change is the most effective way to bring about change.
Dropped by from dreemport.