It's interesting to see how protest movements, at least when taken in retrospect, seem to get presented as either "peaceful and respectful" or "aggressive and violent." Like, in civil rights,...
It's interesting to see how protest movements, at least when taken in retrospect, seem to get presented as either "peaceful and respectful" or "aggressive and violent."
Like, in civil rights, you've got Martin Luther King versus Malcolm X. In gay rights, you've got the Lavender Panthers versus the mostly white, middle-to-upper class voters that legalized gay marriage. If you consider anti-capitalism, you've got Occupy Wall Street on the one hand and quiet quitting on the other.
I'm not a fan of violence or accommodation: I'm a fan of what works. And I suspect this author is too. You probably need to have a bit of both worlds to make a healthy and effective counterculture. But whenever I read sources like this, the authors always point out, somewhere, the contrast between the two perspectives. It's just a passing thought, but I wonder if the similarities might be even more compelling.
It's interesting to see how protest movements, at least when taken in retrospect, seem to get presented as either "peaceful and respectful" or "aggressive and violent."
Like, in civil rights, you've got Martin Luther King versus Malcolm X. In gay rights, you've got the Lavender Panthers versus the mostly white, middle-to-upper class voters that legalized gay marriage. If you consider anti-capitalism, you've got Occupy Wall Street on the one hand and quiet quitting on the other.
I'm not a fan of violence or accommodation: I'm a fan of what works. And I suspect this author is too. You probably need to have a bit of both worlds to make a healthy and effective counterculture. But whenever I read sources like this, the authors always point out, somewhere, the contrast between the two perspectives. It's just a passing thought, but I wonder if the similarities might be even more compelling.