| What is activism?
It is systematic action taken to arrest,
reform, correct or redefine concepts,
laws, values, customs and systems with
target the improvement of everyday quality
of life and minimization of the factors
causing poverty, hardship, exhaustion
and abjection in part or the whole of
a population against a seemingly
only more powerful group of people.
What defines activism? (that is,
what quality makes activism, truly
activism)
The only element defining action
as activist is the effectiveness
they have towards the target they
have set.
For example, during the 1930s trade
unionism (syndicalism) world wide
was indeed and objectively activism.
That is because through trade unionism
of the time vital rights and protections
of the citizens both from the state
and the capital holders of the level
of multi - millionaires were achieved
and established. ( link to Joe Hill)
Unfortunately, however, trade unionism
was corrupted and systematically downrated
by the state and people who were not
trade unionists but party-owned owners
and representatives who progressively
saw it so that the weapons of trade
unionism (i.e. the strike, the demonstration,
the sit-down strikes and boycotting
up to a point) lost their force and
power in the awareness of common opinion
and in the effect they have in the
state machine and the corporate world.
Especially since 1980 there was an
eruption of use (and abuse) of these
weapons for meaningless issues and
minimal or non existent results except
for the weariness of common opinion
from them.
Therefore, the fall-from-grace of
trade unionism in the awareness of
the people and its weakening regarding
its capacity to affect the state course
and the corporate world makes trade
unionism in its present form NON ACTIVIST.
The same measure holds for all the
political camps, movements, organizations
claiming to have activist or resistance
motivations and targets: if they can
demonstrate through actions results
in their moves or being arrested/
gagged through violence (state through
the police or military due to inability
of the state to legally assert itself)
then they are truly activist. If not,
they cannot be named that way and
we will need to look further to categorize
them.
Can a person alone do activism?
Of course he/she can. In essence,
throughout history all the true and
actual activist movements began after
the activist actions (always peaceful)
of one single person. (link to Luther,
Confucius, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther
King, Schindler, Gandhi, Florence
Nightingale, Henrique Dynan, and others)
All the people we are listing as
examples successfully, peacefully
and objectively stood up
against the oppressive, illegal and
unfounded pressure and violence of
a group of people (small or large)
which, behind the force of the mob,
were acting as more powerful but were
proven to be powerless.
But isn�t anonymity protection of
my person which will stop if I start
doing activism?
That is a great myth so that the
citizen will be threatened into concessions
and conforming to any misdemeanour
or breach or his/her rights being
enforced on him/her through his/her
silence. The legislation proves that
people who are named or people of
international clout due to their profession
or activity or social activism are
more protected by the law than any
nameless citizen.
Therefore activism by name is protection
of our person which anonymity cannot
offer.
How can I do activism?
Proper activism is always peaceful
and law-abiding. Violence of any kind
is the expression of the impotence
of the one committing it to enforce
what he/she wants through logic and
the law. The true activist is rationalist,
calm and speaks always with proof
and arguments, not simple unfounded
and unconfirmed views and admonitions
or threatening or fanatic slogans
and cliches.
We do activism when:
- we keep the limits of our own
personality and guard our rights.
- we do not step on the rights
of others through our actions and
words PROVIDED THAT THEY ARE TRULY
THEIR ESTABLISHED RIGHTS AND THEY
ARE NOT INFRINGING ON OUR OWN.
- we do not commit acts of racism
towards anyone but not towards
ourselves either, keeping
the proper balance of pluralism
and cohabitation without, however,
waive or denounce any of our established
rights.
- we do not ignore or pardon any
injustice or infringement of human
right of any social group, whether
this group constitutes the majority
or the minority, in favour of avoiding
anger or 'trouble'.
- we offer help when it is asked
estimating objectively the best
way in which to offer it.
- we have the exact same measure
for our self and for the others
alike. INJUSTICE TO OUR SELF BY
OUR OWN SELF IS EXACTLY
THE SAME IF NOT GREATER
CRIME AND INFRINGEMENT
AS THE INJUSTICE TO OUR SELF BY
OTHERS OR INJUSTICE BY OUR SELF
TO OTHERS.
|
RSS