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

  • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
    2·
    5 months ago

    I’d suggest until you do, don’t talk about politics because you’ve no clue what you are spreading as these are not your ideas but those fed to you. https://www.britannica.com/topic/agitprop ag·it·prop
    /ˈajətˌpräp/
    noun
    noun: agitprop; noun: agit-prop

    political (originally communist) propaganda, especially in art or literature.
"agitprop painters"
    • infinitevalenceEnglish
      11·
      5 months ago

      Money is not speech, and individuals can donate, but corporations should not be able to do so. First Past the Post always produces a 2 party system, we need to switch to something like ranked choice, or other voting system where my vote counts, and i can vote for candidates who I actually want to win. I want redistricting to be non partisan by law, and proportional universally as was the intent in the constitution. If that means that we need to expand the house (which we do) to keep at the 30,000:1 ratio defined in the constitution then we should do so. I want voting right to be treated as rights. Automatic registration, paid national voting holidays, and overturning felony disenfranchisement.

      So, these are not my ideas and they are being fed to me, by who? Also yes not a single one of them is my idea they are concepts that I have found through research, discussions, and deliberate thought.

      You keep attacking me personally but providing no rational rebuttal to any of the references or points I have made. I really am open to adjusting my opinions when provided with better evidence or better arguments (logical not emotional). I really dont understand what you want from me, do you want me to just vote for democrats because Trump is evil? Do you want me to just vote because you think every vote counts? Do you think I have an agenda to get people not to vote for Biden because I disagree with his support of Netanyahu?

      Could you please take a moment to stop attack and help me understand?