• TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    13 hours 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
      ·
      12 hours 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
        ·
        12 hours 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
          5 hours 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.