• LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I don’t even know what this text is in reference to and I have no concrete suggestions immediately. But I will be thinking, connecting, and sharing in the coming months as a strategy emerges. Trumpism can still be defeated. The election was plan A but it’s time to come up with plan B. I am thinking that it’s going to take massive organized civil disobedience. We directly disrupt their ability to govern and harm marginalized people.

      But it’s going to take more than just me, so I ask everyone here to be ready and participate in whatever capacity you can.

      • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        27
        ·
        1 month ago

        My “text” is a direct response to your comment that proceeded it. Im not sure how that’s confusing.

        The fact of the matter is the election results are legal, certified, and recognized by every country on Earth. As much as I hate it, and I really really hate it, that’s reality.

        Unless things get ridiculously out of hand, which has yet to be seen, the only real thing anyone can do is create protests and marches, and vote for change when the time comes.

        If you think you’re going to create a “resistance army” you’re going to be checked very hard by reality. Your little keyboard warrior “massive organized civil disobedience” will be as lame as Jan 6.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I went to DC and yelled at a bunch of brutalist buildings. I’m sure someone in one of those knows a guy who knows someone who sometimes gets close enough to see a representative. I did my part!

          • Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            20
            ·
            1 month ago

            The part of the 60s that enacted change was not peaceful.

            That said, here is an especially relevant section of a document from 1963:

            [ We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jetlike speed toward gaining political independence, but we still creep at horse and buggy pace toward gaining a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, “Wait.” But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate filled policemen curse, kick and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six year old daughter why she can’t go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five year old son who is asking: “Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?”; when you take a cross county drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading “white” and “colored”; when your first name becomes “nigger,” your middle name becomes “boy” (however old you are) and your last name becomes “John,” and your wife and mother are never given the respected title “Mrs.”; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of “nobodiness”–then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience. You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate concern. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. One may well ask: “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.”]

            https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

          • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            The civil unrest of the 60s worked because the black panthers were presenting the path to real change, so the establishment compromised by giving rights to people without threatening their power.

    • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      if you want things to change, first you have to find a way to be able to confidently say “I’m ready for things to change”. Then, you have to help other people find a way to say it too. And when there’s finally enough people, nobody has to “go first”.

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        I mean that’s a nice sentiment, but it’s not the late 19th century anymore. Even if it was, that’s not really how revolutions worked in the past.

        The majority of revolutions that have been successful in the past have sprung from pre-arranged hierarchical bodies like the military. There is a reason the US military was developed to be domestically apolitical, and is forbidden to operate in any real sense within the United States.

        If there is some sort of revolution it’s perfectly reasonable to assume there will be Martyrs, it’s also perfectly reasonable to not want to willingly participate in martyrdom.

        • pyre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          There is a reason the US military was developed to be domestically apolitical, and is forbidden to operate in any real sense within the United States.

          well buckle up…

        • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I honestly don’t understand how you can read what I’m saying and think that I must be specifically talking about people martyring themselves or violent political revolutions and I would really appreciate it if you could just take my words for granted without making broader inferences about them.

          • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            And when there’s finally enough people, nobody has to “go first”.

            I mean, it’s what the person you responded to was talking about… Am i supposed to “take your words for granted” and also assume you were making a point completely disjointed from the original context?

            • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              so like I’ve spent a lot of time studying history and revolutions and political movements, so personally when I see somebody say something as vague as “we should do something about this ourselves instead of expecting other people to” it’s very hard for me to assume that they must be talking specifically about violently overthrowing the government.

              • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                If you’ve spent a lot of time studying history and revolutions…in your opinion, what does it mean when someone says “we should take care of this ourselves”?

                In reference to our current political situation, how else would an individual or a small group of like minded individuals “take care” of the situation?

                • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  it could mean a lot of things, such as widespread civil disobedience. It’s also not necessarily asking anybody to do anything right now, but to be open to the idea of organized direct action. The real point I’m trying to make is when a person says “you go first” reactively in response to any call to action, they actually become part of the problem that needs to be overcome.