MARCUS BALDWIN - WEEK 4 Blog Post

Articles I’m responding to:Principle: “Anger Works Best When You Have the Moral High Ground” Tactic: “Creative Petition Delivery”Theory: “Theory: Anti-Opression”

“Activist groups sometimes make the mistake of assuming that oppression (the unjust exercise of power or authority) is only what they do; that we are inherently anti-oppressive purely because of our intention to do away with oppressive structures. Unfortunately the situation is much more complex, and we ignore that complexity at our peril.”

-Lisa Fithian/Dave Oswald Mitchell

I think this opening line from the “Theory: Anti-Oppression” article poses a really important point of concern in regard to how we are all capable of evils, and how evils can spring from even the noblest beliefs and intentions. There are two sayings I have always heard that I feel relate to this idea: “The beginning of all evil starts with pointing a finger at someone else and calling them evil” -Unknown, and “I destroy my enemies when I make them my friends” -Abraham Lincoln. In this sense I agree with this concern, because it is my belief that we will win more supporters to our causes if we are willing to first befriend them rather than condemn them. It is after all more fair to keep ourselves open to their beliefs and ideas (even if we disagree), because we are already asking them to be open to (and potentially adopt) the beliefs and ideas that we hold to be true. This is where I think the article, “Anger Works Best When You Have the Moral High Ground” falls short. While I do think that standing your ground (being stern/steadfast potentially) is important to standing up for ones beliefs when they are being threatened/tested, I think expressing anger is a very slippery slope. My reasoning in this is that I believe that if one truly has the moral high ground, they can usually afford to make a strong case for their point of view without resorting to a display of their emotions/passions. In fact, I think they would have a better shot at changing the opposition’s mind in a dispassionate way. For example: if I express my anger towards you by yelling at you, this would very rarely inspire you to feel equal anger towards yourself. You’d likely instead feel equally fearful of or angry towards me, and likely yell as well. But you wouldn’t yell at yourself, you would yell at me. Similarly, if I express anger in my viewpoint which stands in opposition to yours, this would most likely frighten you and inspire you to angrily advocate for your own position. This ultimately stands in the way of progress, because with each action comes an equal and opposite reaction. Therefore, it is better to engage in a discussion that is founded upon logic and discourse. Because even if you leave the discussion still in disagreement, you will have heard eachother’s points clearly (and with a greater sense of open mindedness if you foster it yourself). And if you truly have the moral highground, you likely have the more informed point. So overall, the likelyhood that you will change their mind is higher and all you really risk in this scenario is standing to learn something from them and potentially changing your own mind as well. This leads me to tactics. In “Creative Petition Delivery”, the concept of taking online movements and physicalizing them into action to gain visibility in the real world is a great idea. However, I think it is only effective if it is controlled. A perfect example comes from comparing the marches in Selma organized during the Civil Rights Movement to the recent protests organized by Black Lives Matter. Black Lives Matter protests have received criticism, especially from right wing politicians, because there have almost always been actors in the crowd who have contributed to the destruction of public property and at times even violent resistance to police officers. The issue is that Black Lives Matter generally advocates for peaceful protest, but because there aren’t clear leaders like there were in the Civil Rights Movement, nor as few as there were, not everyone who participates is on the same page. And as a result, it only takes a small portion of the group protesting to resort to a violent or destructive act in order for right wing politicians to write off the entire protest as criminal and violent. Whereas during the marches in Selma, it was the imagery of the Civil Rights activists, as organized under Martin Luther King, being beaten while protesting peacefully— it was their refusal to fight back that inspired white people to march and that eventually inspired greater legal change in our country. But this was only as successful as it was, because everyone who marched held steadfast to the tenets of their protest, namely that it remain peaceful even in the face of police brutality. Similarly, the use of cardboard pigs to represent petition signers talked about in “Creative Petition Delivery” is a clever idea to gain media attention to the cause of holding factory farms to a higher standard in the face of the swine flu. However it becomes very important how they organize the petitions electronically and how they organize the set up of the cardboard pigs. Because most movements begin online today, much like this one, there is greater risk for an issue arising in the line of communication. So, for example, if the number of cardboard pigs on display didn’t actually match the number of petition signers (by the 200s), then a media outlet reporting on the publicity stunt might do the research themselves and expose the falsehood. In which case the movement as well as the cause, could actually become dismissed and thus diminished in the public eye. Organization is of vital importance to maintaining the integrity of your message, when exercising physical action in the name of it.