You’re saying work within the current framework to create change for the people.✅
Grassroots groups are important but need to check in with professionals who know the structure. ✅
When there’s a dichotomy here shit happens. ✅
What I think you’re missing is you’re assuming professionals who know the structure and grassroots groups come from the same starting point as to what the problem is.
Sometimes it’s only when you get to like season 9 in a ‘movement’ you realise the people you’ve been in a ‘movement’ with had a completely different bedrock belief to you and the ‘change’ they want was never the ‘change’ you wanted.
Astroturfing is inevitable if your understanding of the problem is off.
I think this is entirely right - what might at first glance appear to be a shared starting point could be revealed to be radically different. Having a similar goal might be enough to get some collaboration going but can't pave over really very divergent starting points if they become salient later on down the line.
If you're starting point is different then I think the way you view the 'solution' to the problem will also be very different.
Very few 'movements' are 'single issue' that and can bring all people from all walks of life together.
It's different politics, lack of political awareness, egos of people who write outside of their expertise and won't admit they're wrong.
And especially in the UK it's a social club.
Grifters who can blatantly lie and give zero fucks they're doing damage.
You do know if you have a radical feminist analysis and apply that analysis to good peer reviewed work - that's not going to be compatable with Catholic Integralism. No matter how flowering that movement tries to sell it, it's actually quite horrifying.
You’re saying work within the current framework to create change for the people.✅
Grassroots groups are important but need to check in with professionals who know the structure. ✅
When there’s a dichotomy here shit happens. ✅
What I think you’re missing is you’re assuming professionals who know the structure and grassroots groups come from the same starting point as to what the problem is.
Sometimes it’s only when you get to like season 9 in a ‘movement’ you realise the people you’ve been in a ‘movement’ with had a completely different bedrock belief to you and the ‘change’ they want was never the ‘change’ you wanted.
Astroturfing is inevitable if your understanding of the problem is off.
I think this is entirely right - what might at first glance appear to be a shared starting point could be revealed to be radically different. Having a similar goal might be enough to get some collaboration going but can't pave over really very divergent starting points if they become salient later on down the line.
If you're starting point is different then I think the way you view the 'solution' to the problem will also be very different.
Very few 'movements' are 'single issue' that and can bring all people from all walks of life together.
It's different politics, lack of political awareness, egos of people who write outside of their expertise and won't admit they're wrong.
And especially in the UK it's a social club.
Grifters who can blatantly lie and give zero fucks they're doing damage.
You do know if you have a radical feminist analysis and apply that analysis to good peer reviewed work - that's not going to be compatable with Catholic Integralism. No matter how flowering that movement tries to sell it, it's actually quite horrifying.
Checking to see if my last comment was recorded.