It’s educate, AGITATE, organize

edit: putting this at the top so people understand the basis for this:

You may well ask: “Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?” You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood.

Letter from Birmingham, MLK

  • PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    “Changing 50 years of foreign policy on an issue most American voters don’t regard as important (however horrific that is) isn’t going to happen because the left-wing is threatening to let a fascist take power; that’s literally the opposite of the scenario that should be happening for improvement”

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      most American voters don’t regard as important (however horrific that is)

      This is quite literally the thing we’re trying to change.

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        Reasonably speaking - how do you propose to do that? How do you propose to switch the primary issues of concern for the American electorate from domestic security (including the safety of LGBT folks, immigrants, and democracy itself) and economics (at a time when many are pressed hard by the current economic situation) to foreign policy?

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.socialOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          7 months ago

          Treating this as an honest question - by raising the issue so that it can’t easily be ignored.

          Just gonna put this here, because MLK says it better than I can:

          Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth.

          Letter from Birmingham - MLK

          • PugJesus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            7 months ago

            That presumes that the issues you’re raising are going to raise tension above the tension of the aforementioned issues, which is extremely unlikely in the current circumstances.

            My point isn’t “STOP RAISING AWARENESS”, my point is “This is not the winning issue you think it can be; and threatening to hand power over to fascists if you don’t get your way is just going to hand over power to fascists”

            • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.socialOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              7 months ago

              “This is not the winning issue you think it can be; and threatening to hand power over to fascists if you don’t get your way is just going to hand over power to fascists”

              This is a contradictory statement.

                • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.socialOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  It can’t both be

                  • a losing issue and
                  • an issue that threatens to let fascists win

                  Either pushing this issue threatens the democratic base of support or nobody cares enough about this issue to make it a winning one.

                  • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    7
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    It can’t both be

                    a losing issue and

                    an issue that threatens to let fascists win

                    what the fuck

                    That…

                    that’s exactly why it IS a losing issue

                    This isn’t some fucking game, where the sides are ‘balanced’ or someshit.

                    We run in a system where victories are decided by a fraction of a fucking percentage point.

              • bobburger@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                I’ll try to clear it up a little.

                Here’s a recent poll showing that support for ending the invasion into Gaza isn’t widely supported

                There’s a lot of risk to Biden’s election chances if he withdraws his support for Israel, probably more risk than if he maintains his current actions. So withdrawing his support for Israel isn’t the clear cut winning decision that you seem to think it is.

                Your threat of withholding your vote for Joe Biden unless he changes policy to match what you want will most likely result in Joe Biden losing the election. If he changes course and withdraws support as you want then he’ll probably lose more voters than he gains, costing him he election. If he stays the course and you don’t vote for Joe Biden he’s likely to lose the election.

    • HuntressHimbo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yes and you’ve decided that rather than try and change their minds you’ll just write off Palestine and sit around waiting for another five months. Or sorry not even that, you’ve decided that you’re going to scream at the people who are going to try and call them Trump supporters.

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yeah, sorry that my issue of first concern is stopping a genocide here, in the US, which is very likely to happen in case of a very-probable Trump presidency, instead of [checks notes] completely reversing the entire US establishment and Democratic Party (with their razor-thin majority in the Senate and literal minority in the House) in the next 5 months over an issue most voters are simply not that concerned with to remove all aid from Israel, which will [checks notes again] not actually stop Israel’s policy of continued genocide.

        • NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Different guy, different perspective.

          Never once have I ever said we should stop all support of Israel, I think we should give them all the iron dome missiles they want, but that is it.

          Let them have their best self defense weapon, god knows it will save some kids from a whackadoo with a rocket launcher.

          Hell, if we have anything to do with arrow, or whatever the other one is, I want to say David’s sling, but that is probably wrong, give them all they want of those as well.

          Whoever makes those missiles deserves the money for them.

          You seem to be trying to take this to an extreme when there a ton of us that just want a more moderate solution.

          Fucking set up real places for these people, an actual safe place with shelter, food, water, and medical, including therapy, especially for those kids.

          Surround the motherfucker with a wall and a deadline, but use someone smart enough to know not to kill a kid that wanders in there.

          Put livestream cameras on every inch that isn’t private.

          People can only do so much in a tent city under tight surveillance.

          Vet the people as they come in with both a terrorist list and tsa body scanners.

          Whoever builds that is the fucking hero, safety, food, and starting to tear down all of the psychological issues that would save them so many problems later on.

          Also put that motherfucker under iron dome protection, that way no one can bomb it, accidentally or otherwise, without it being obvious.

          The us military is the most effective logistical team on earth.

          I doubt you could find someone more effective at setting up ad-how shelter in a desert environment, while also keeping it safe.

          • PugJesus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Never once have I ever said we should stop all support of Israel

            You seem to be trying to take this to an extreme when there a ton of us that just want a more moderate solution.

            Man, I’VE said we should do so. It’s not a question of how extreme I want the US’s response to Israel to be.

            The difference in extremes is in what I think is reasonable to push that view; I’m very aware that it’s not something that is just ‘demanded’ six months before an election, and that playing chicken with my vote, or trying to convince other people to play chicken with their’s, is a great way to get hit by a freight train of fascism in this election.