The Pathology of Activism

[+OverSword]

 

Peterson echoes my feelings here somewhat.  Thoughts?

[Piney]

49 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Peterson echoes my feelings here somewhat.  Thoughts?

I've been a environmental and Indian rights activist since 4th grade. But I don't believe in protests and think they don't work.

My group the Union of Concerned Scientists and my sister's group the Raging Grannies don't allow people that act like asses around us when we protest though.

 

[+OverSword]

6 minutes ago, Piney said:

I've been a environmental and Indian rights activist since 4th grade. But I don't believe in protests and think they don't work.

My group the Union of Concerned Scientists and my sister's group the Raging Grannies don't allow people that act like asses around us when we protest though.

 

I think this is not black and white and the video pretty much says that too. 

[Kittens Are Jerks]

Ugh, not that racist, sexist, homophobic incel again. He's the last person on this planet who knows anything about a 'quick route to moral virtue.'

I do, however, agree with him that a desire to make the world a better place, no matter how difficult it is to effect change, is a motivator for young protestors. What he doesn't focus on is how youth are often criticised for being entitled and apathetic, then treated with derision and disdain when they finally do speak out.

Why is there a need to marginalise protestors? Is it because people hate having their neighbourhoods disrupted? Are people unwilling or unable to accept some hard truths about certain issues? Or are people simply okay with the status quo?

Edited June 11, 2020 by Kittens Are Jerks
Grammatical correction.

[+Liquid Gardens]

1 hour ago, OverSword said:

Peterson echoes my feelings here somewhat.  Thoughts?

I guess it depends on what we mean by 'activism'.  Activism, very loosely, is promoting a particular viewpoint with some amount of persistence.  How it this video clip (watched by millions I believe given Rogan's popularity) or Peterson's top selling book, '12 Rules for Life', not also 'activism'?  Everything these two say here can also be put through Peterson's psychological interpretation of protesters concerning promoting a certain morality or wanting to make the world a better place and apply also to them.  I may be biased as I've seen few things that Peterson has said that were both 'highly intellectual' and 'not too vague', but for example how does his point that changing the world is so complex and hard not apply to his book also?  Isn't changing someone's 'rules of life' and psychology also pretty hard?  

 

 

25 minutes ago, Piney said:

But I don't believe in protests and think they don't work.

Depends on 'work' I guess, I think the current situation in the US might be evidence to the contrary of your statement above.  We've had a lot of similar situations to George Floyd that really did not result in much change in a relative sense.  There are probably lots of other reasons, an ongoing pandemic obviously, that this particular case appears to be a breaking point, but the reaction/protests could have been just like those for Trayvon Martin, et al, however many years ago which didn't accomplish as much as this case has.  Now, cops are being immediately suspended or fired when there's evidence of brutality; regardless of whether that's a good or bad thing, it is definitely a change, and thus is indication that protests do work.  

[+OverSword]

20 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

Ugh, not that racist, sexist, homophobic incel again. He's the last person on this planet who knows anything about a 'quick route to moral virtue.'

I do, however, agree with him that a desire to make the world to make a better place, no matter how difficult it is to effect change, is a motivator for young (and other) protestors. What he doesn't focus on is how youth are often criticised for being entitled and apathetic, then treated with derision and disdain when they finally do speak out.

Why is there a need to marginalise protestors? Is it because people hate having their neighbourhoods disrupted? Are people unwilling or unable to accept some hard truths about certain issues? Or do people simply okay with the status quo?

He is not an incel, racist or homophobic, those are ridiculous accusations.  Your information is wrong and uninformed propaganda repeated ad infinitum by his detractors who can't differentiate between a trans-phobe and someone who is protesting a law about required speech. 

The obvious answer to your third paragraph, speaking as the person in this forum who is no doubt more disrupted than anyone else here is that you are hard put to find anyone in my city who doesn't believe the black community in general is not treated equally or fairly by the police and that, that doesn't need to change.  The issue is (in my city) these protesters for the most part are demanding instant simple solutions to something that is too complicated and large for any quick fix to work, thus demonstrating the shallowness and simplicity and naivety of their thought.

 

Edited June 11, 2020 by OverSword

[Kittens Are Jerks]

2 minutes ago, OverSword said:

He is not an incel, racist or homophobic, those are ridiculous accusations.  Your information is wrong and uninformed propaganda repeated ad infinitum by his detractors who can't differentiate between a trans-phobe and someone who is protesting a law about required speech. 

He is indeed all those things, and it's been discussed ad nauseam (with evidence) in other topic threads. I don't, however, wish to rehash those discussions, nor do I want to deviate any further from this specific topic, so will say no more on the matter.

5 minutes ago, OverSword said:

The obvious answer to your third paragraph, speaking as the person in this forum who is no doubt more disrupted than anyone else here is that you are hard put to find anyone in my city who doesn't believe the black community in general is not treated equally or fairly and that, that doesn't need to change.  The issue is (in my city) these protesters for the most part are demanding instant simple solutions to something that is too complicated and large for any quick fix to work, thus demonstrating the shallowness and simplicity and naivety of their thought.

I agree that the situation is 'complicated and large' but that doesn't mean protests can't change politics. A Harvard study found that protests work, not because large crowds send a signal to policy makers, but because protests get people politically activated. In other words, protests can have lasting effects on voting, political contributions, ideology and the like.

https://qz.com/901411/political-protests-are-effective-but-not-for-the-reason-you-think/

 

[+OverSword]

25 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

I agree that the situation is 'complicated and large' but that doesn't mean protests can't change politics. A Harvard study found that protests work, not because large crowds send a signal to policy makers, but because protests get people politically activated. In other words, protests can have lasting effects on voting, political contributions, ideology and the like.

https://qz.com/901411/political-protests-are-effective-but-not-for-the-reason-you-think/

 

But your question was:

Quote

Why is there a need to marginalise protestors? Is it because people hate having their neighbourhoods disrupted? Are people unwilling or unable to accept some hard truths about certain issues? Or do people simply okay with the status quo?

Which asks nothing about the effectiveness of protesting in general. 

I note here that these people protesting in Seattle are so impatient for immediate change that when our democrat mayor (who most of them probably voted for if they bothered to vote at all) told them that defunding the police and changing their practices is not going to have a quick fix they called for her resignation.  Very shallow, simple, reactionary people. That is fair reason to somewhat marginalize them right there.  They are not nuanced enough in their knowledge, understanding or experience to have earned a big voice in the discussion.  They are loud and emotional and that is about it.

Edited June 11, 2020 by OverSword

[Kittens Are Jerks]

1 hour ago, OverSword said:

Which asks nothing about the effectiveness of protesting in general. 

No it doesn't. Did it have to?

1 hour ago, OverSword said:

I note here that these people protesting in Seattle are so impatient for immediate change that when our democrat mayor (who most of them probably voted for if they bothered to vote at all) told them that defunding the police and changing their practices is not going to have a quick fix they called for her resignation.  Very shallow, simple, reactionary people. That is fair reason to somewhat marginalize them right there.  They are not nuanced enough in their knowledge, understanding or experience to have earned a big voice in the discussion.  They are loud and emotional and that is about it.

But they know what they are protesting against, so that's something. I mean, seriously, is it your expection that protestors have the qualifications and experience to know exactly what is necessary for effective, long-lasting reform, and to be able to reach a consenus and articlute those demands with clarity and consistency? Is it your expectation that they be able to easily grasp complex solutions presented to them? I would argue it isn't. The onus is on the government and institutional leaders to be the smart ones. They're the ones who have to come up with a solution(s) and articulate it in such a way that it's understood. Some people will get it, others won't. Whatever the case, it's still no reason to put down the latter. Everyone has a voice; no one has to earn a place at the big table. It is their right to be there. 

As for being 'loud and emotional, and that's about it,' I could just as easily argue that some polititians have behaved no different.

[+Liquid Gardens]

2 hours ago, OverSword said:

I note here that these people protesting in Seattle are so impatient for immediate change that when our democrat mayor (who most of them probably voted for if they bothered to vote at all) told them that defunding the police and changing their practices is not going to have a quick fix they called for her resignation.  Very shallow, simple, reactionary people. That is fair reason to somewhat marginalize them right there. 

I would just be careful though about equating a general 'these people protesting in Seattle' with those specific ones who are reactionary and want a quick fix or else the mayor needs to resign.  If the existence of extreme members of a group is justification to marginalize the entire group, then essentially all groups should be marginalized.

[+OverSword]

46 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

No it doesn't. Did it have to?

But they know what they are protesting against, so that's something. I mean, seriously, is it your expection that protestors have the qualifications and experience to know exactly what is necessary for effective, long-lasting reform, and to be able to reach a consenus and articlute those demands with clarity and consistency? Is it your expectation that they be able to easily grasp complex solutions presented to them? I would argue it isn't. The onus is on the government and institutional leaders to be the smart ones. They're the ones who have to come up with a solution(s) and articulate it in such a way that it's understood. Some people will get it, others won't. Whatever the case, it's still no reason to put down the latter. Everyone has a voice; no one has to earn a place at the big table. It is their right to be there. 

As for being 'loud and emotional, and that's about it,' I could just as easily argue that some polititians have behaved no different.

The point being kids are allowed their opinion but it doesn't usually carry as much weight as an adult for a reason.  A good portion of these people are kids and are not well informed or have opinions that are their own or very well thought out and are not necessarily there for all the right reasons.  Point in case, a young coworker, aged 25 has attended nearly every night and every morning regales me with the number of phone numbers he's come away with and naked pictures of the two that went home with him.

22 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

I would just be careful though about equating a general 'these people protesting in Seattle' with those specific ones who are reactionary and want a quick fix or else the mayor needs to resign.  If the existence of extreme members of a group is justification to marginalize the entire group, then essentially all groups should be marginalized.

I don't really have to be careful in this case because the ones I'm referring to are not the people that got the Mayor and the chief of police to acquiesce to demands of reform and reallocation of funding and understand that is a process but the ones who no amount of concessions will ever be enough for  and are currently keeping me from the free use of public property near my home.  How careful should I be?  **** those guys.

 

Edited June 11, 2020 by OverSword

[+OverSword]

Here let me explain my attitude about this a bit and why I think that although you may feel that I'm judging harshly this situation you may not want to judge me too harshly yourselves.  I work kitty corner to the City Hall and two blocks away from the federal building.  I live on Capital Hill where the current occupation is taking place.  I have been a first hand experiencer of this entire thing, being kept up all night to the sound of megaphones, flash bombs, and helicopters.  I'm not sitting in my living room watching it all unfold on the television.  Every day last week I had no choice but to be part of the march from the financial district to capital hill because it took place during my commute home and I walk everywhere I go in the city.  I know from first hand experience the general makeup of the crowd and can confidently say they are mainly kids at this point and I feel they are presently accomplishing nothing positive.

Edited June 11, 2020 by OverSword

[Kittens Are Jerks]

3 minutes ago, OverSword said:

The point being kids are allowed their opinion but it doesn't usually carry as much weight as an adult for a reason.  A good portion of these people are kids and are not well informed or have opinions that are their own or very well thought out and are not necessarily there for all the right reasons.  Point in case, a young coworker, aged 25 has attended nearly every night and every morning regales me with the number of phone numbers he's come away with and naked pictures of the two that went home with him.

I'm almost the same age as your colleague. I consider myself fairly well informed, and whilst I know a thing or two about public policy, I am well aware of the fact that I don't know enough. It's not so much a lack of knowledge as it is a lack of experience. I've never experienced what some of the people protesting have, but I do know that it's all kinds of wrong and that's why I would protest it. And if perchance I made it home with photos of naked guys, well bonus! (jk)

So perhaps yes, some people are there for all the wrong reasons, but I would argue that most are there for the right ones.

[Kittens Are Jerks]

2 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Here let me explain my attitude about this a bit and why I think that although you may feel that I'm judging harshly this situation you may not want to judge me too harshly yourselves.  I work kitty corner to the City Hall and two blocks away from the federal building.  I live on Capital Hill where the current occupation is taking place.  I have been a first hand experiencer of this entire thing, being kept up all night to the sound of megaphones, flash bombs, and helicopters.  I'm not sitting in my living room watching it all unfold on the television.  Every day last week I had no choice but to be part of the march from the financial district to capital hill because it took place during my commute home and I walk everywhere I go in the city.  I know from first hand experience the general makeup of the crowd and can confidently say they are mainly kids at this point and I feel they are presently accomplishing nothing positive.

Appreciate the explanation, but I figured as much. Your first hand experience adds another dimension to the discussion, so thank you for it.

[+OverSword]

4 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

I'm almost the same age as your colleague. I consider myself fairly well informed, and whilst I know a thing or two about public policy, I am well aware of the fact that I don't know enough. It's not so much a lack of knowledge as it is a lack of experience. I've never experienced what some of the people protesting have, but I do know that it's all kinds of wrong and that's why I would protest it. And if perchance I made it home with photos of naked guys, well bonus! (jk)

So perhaps yes, some people are there for all the wrong reasons, but I would argue that most are there for the right ones.

I would not say all the wrong reasons and I don't judge him negatively for that. I was among the first people to get tear gassed in the WTO protests whe I was around that age.  He is black so it's not like he is without experience about how the police treat black people.  Also when you're that age not getting laid for months feels like there is something wrong with the world and people have been locked away from each other for a while.  I believe that is a part of why these protests have gone the route they have world wide.

Edited June 11, 2020 by OverSword

[Grim Reaper 6]

3 hours ago, OverSword said:

He is not an incel, racist or homophobic, those are ridiculous accusations.  Your information is wrong and uninformed propaganda repeated ad infinitum by his detractors who can't differentiate between a trans-phobe and someone who is protesting a law about required speech. 

The obvious answer to your third paragraph, speaking as the person in this forum who is no doubt more disrupted than anyone else here is that you are hard put to find anyone in my city who doesn't believe the black community in general is not treated equally or fairly by the police and that, that doesn't need to change.  The issue is (in my city) these protesters for the most part are demanding instant simple solutions to something that is too complicated and large for any quick fix to work, thus demonstrating the shallowness and simplicity and naivety of their thought.

 

Well if he isn't Homophobic and transphobic he has certainly been accused of it, and there is more where that came from.

Peace

https://planettransgender.com/u-of-t-professor-jordan-peterson-transphobe/

[Kittens Are Jerks]

2 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I would not say all the wrong reasons and I don't judge him negatively for that.  He is black so it's not like he is without experience about how the police treat black people.  Also when you're that age not getting laid for months feels like there is something wrong with the world and people have been locked away from each other for a while.  I believe that is a part of why these protests have gone the route they have world wide.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read somewhere that the gathering has become somewhat like a peace love groovy commune with kids drawing on sidewalks with chalk. 

[+OverSword]

7 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

Well if he isn't Homophobic and transphobic he has certainly been accused of it, and there is more where that came from.

Peace

https://planettransgender.com/u-of-t-professor-jordan-peterson-transphobe/

Well you can go out and listen to hundreds of hours of interviews and decide for yourself.  Or you can rely on planet trasgender dot com 

[+OverSword]

8 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read somewhere that the gathering has become somewhat like a peace love groovy commune with kids drawing on sidewalks with chalk. 

That's every day in my neighborhood.  This (from what I have heard because I've stayed away from the block where the occupation is since Saturday) has devolved down to shouting matches between ideologies, arguments about who is in charge, brow beating the homeless to camp out there weather they want to or not because everyone empathizes with them, armed civilians taking it upon themselves to do the job of the police they have evicted from the area and if you look like me being labeled a proud boy and harassed out of the area.  That is probably all true but also exaggerated.  Regardless nobody elected these people to run one of the formerly nicest blocks on the hill and certainly nobody asked them to bring their guns.  

[Grim Reaper 6]

18 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Well you can go out and listen to hundreds of hours of interviews and decide for yourself.  Or you can rely on planet trasgender dot com 

Well in my comments above I is it appears that he is, I never said he was. But, why do you think the article by Planet transgender isn't valid, I mean who would know better if he was being Transphobic than Transgender people, it appears by your post above that the fact they are Transgender disqualifies them from being able to comment.

Peace  

[+OverSword]

25 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

Well in my comments above I is it appears that he is, I never said he was. But, why do you think the article by Planet transgender isn't valid, I mean who would know better if he was being Transphobic than Transgender people, it appears by your post above that the fact they are Transgender disqualifies them from being able to comment.

Peace  

Because the argument is years old and am very familiar with it and know better.  As far as I'm concerned it's settled.  You can believe as you want but my opinion did not come from reading articles about him but listening to he himself responding to the allegations.

[Hankenhunter]

2 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

Well if he isn't Homophobic and transphobic he has certainly been accused of it, and there is more where that came from.

Peace

https://planettransgender.com/u-of-t-professor-jordan-peterson-transphobe/

I went and watched some of his 500 hrs. On You Tube. They are right. Indoctrinator is good word to describe him. Joe Rogan is a societal leach who changes his opinions like I change my socks. Daily. Just another right wing trumpet.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Hankenhunter

[SHaYap]

"messianic complex" is disturbing, much more than "military complex"

~

[Peter B]

14 hours ago, OverSword said:

 

Peterson echoes my feelings here somewhat.  Thoughts?

I tend to agree with Peterson when he says that activism is easy while improving yourself is hard, and that it's hard to make the world a better place and easy to make it worse.

I'm also unhappy with the concept of de-platforming - of silencing people you disagree with by shouting them down or forcing their talks to be canceled. To me it looks like the process of people who dislike someone's argument but can't articulate the problems with it, so they settle instead for silencing the speaker. Personally I think I have the confidence and skills to dismantle bad arguments rather than feeling the need to shout down the speaker.

But...having said that, when it comes to de-platforming, while I don't think it's used so much by right-wing activists, they have other methods of stifling arguments from those they don't like (such as using security to evict people for being "disruptive", requiring questions to be submitted in writing so inconvenient ones can be ignored and follow-up questions are prevented, and simply making up evidence to refute those arguments).

Consequently, I'd be curious to hear Peterson provide the same sort of character assessment of young radical right-wing activists, to see if he characterises them in the same way or if he sees them differently in some way.

Finally, Peterson's "12 Rules" book comes across to me as suggesting that people shouldn't criticise the world around them until they've sorted out their own problems, which is a view I don't particularly agree with - a lot of wrongs have been corrected thanks to the actions of imperfect people.

 

[RoofGardener]

1 hour ago, Peter B said:

I tend to agree with Peterson when he says that activism is easy while improving yourself is hard, and that it's hard to make the world a better place and easy to make it worse.

I'm also unhappy with the concept of de-platforming - of silencing people you disagree with by shouting them down or forcing their talks to be canceled. To me it looks like the process of people who dislike someone's argument but can't articulate the problems with it, so they settle instead for silencing the speaker. Personally I think I have the confidence and skills to dismantle bad arguments rather than feeling the need to shout down the speaker.

I'd suggest that this "de-platforming" is nothing short of Fascism and Nazism.