I was very happy to come to the defense. I had a great time, and the topic was extremely interesting. Not to mention that the party afterward was a lot of fun too. :)
As for the rest, I'm not saying those things aren't possible. I am well aware that there are many many people who are activists at various levels, and I admire them a great deal for their passion, involvement and commitment. This is not, nor has it ever been, an either/or situation.
What I was trying to get across is that, just because I am not an activist, it doesn't mean I'm not trying to do my part in my own small way. It doesn't make me a bad person, or an unfeeling person.
I get asked: "But don't you care about the world?" And my answer to that is, of course I care. But I don't care the same way that I do about my friends and family. That kind of answer generally gets me horrified stares, as though I had just openly advocated genocide and the mass killing of babies, which is obviously not the case.
There is a difference between not being an activist, and actively wishing harm on others. There's a middle ground.
To pick up on your examples... okay, let's pick one. Let's talk about the equality of women. I could be a worldwide activist, which many are, or a nationwide activist, or even a local activist.
I don't particularly have the expertise to be an activist (nothing annoys me more than when someone embraces a cause without any knowledge of what it's about). I'm none of these things, but I *do* champion the cause of women where and when I can, usually in the workplace. I have argued against many preconceived notions, and I have written letters on occasion, to local governments. Mostly I try to quietly advance the cause by example, by talking to people and trying to change their minds through reason. I'd like to think that, in some cases, it's better to talk to people than to wave a placard in their faces.
There are times when placards are absolutely necessary. Demonstration, protest and revolt all have their place in social change. But they are not the only vectors of change. That's all I'm saying.
Re: The false dilemma
As for the rest, I'm not saying those things aren't possible. I am well aware that there are many many people who are activists at various levels, and I admire them a great deal for their passion, involvement and commitment. This is not, nor has it ever been, an either/or situation.
What I was trying to get across is that, just because I am not an activist, it doesn't mean I'm not trying to do my part in my own small way. It doesn't make me a bad person, or an unfeeling person.
I get asked: "But don't you care about the world?" And my answer to that is, of course I care. But I don't care the same way that I do about my friends and family. That kind of answer generally gets me horrified stares, as though I had just openly advocated genocide and the mass killing of babies, which is obviously not the case.
There is a difference between not being an activist, and actively wishing harm on others. There's a middle ground.
To pick up on your examples... okay, let's pick one. Let's talk about the equality of women. I could be a worldwide activist, which many are, or a nationwide activist, or even a local activist.
I don't particularly have the expertise to be an activist (nothing annoys me more than when someone embraces a cause without any knowledge of what it's about). I'm none of these things, but I *do* champion the cause of women where and when I can, usually in the workplace. I have argued against many preconceived notions, and I have written letters on occasion, to local governments. Mostly I try to quietly advance the cause by example, by talking to people and trying to change their minds through reason. I'd like to think that, in some cases, it's better to talk to people than to wave a placard in their faces.
There are times when placards are absolutely necessary. Demonstration, protest and revolt all have their place in social change. But they are not the only vectors of change. That's all I'm saying.