PDA

View Full Version : Activism



Betty
12-06-2004, 08:54 PM
I attend a, what you could call, very socially active university. My friend and I were discussing the other day that this environment probably made us much more bitter towards any form of activism than we should be. (It's not my fault, it's my crazy school!)

And regardless of whether some forms are useful or necessary, I think the photos I have here are good evidence of the kind of activism I strongly disapprove of.

So, at our school, there is a tradition where students go out and paint a cannon in the centre of campus in the middle of the night with whatever message they want to send. There are a lot of messages for residence halls, birthdays, campus events, and yes, social activities.

So, we decided it would be entertaining to paint a message in support of the local conservative candidate during the Canadian elections over the summer. We didn't want to make it offensive in any way and chose a simple "Demand better" slogan with the conservative C logo (which I very nicely stenciled by the way).

Here is shown our work of art.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v603/Wildbetty/finishedcannon2.jpg

And hours later, this is what became of it. Needless to say it was rather quickly painted over by the administration, which doesn't often happen.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v603/Wildbetty/Cannonvandalisma.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v603/Wildbetty/Cannonvandalism2.jpg

sKratch
12-06-2004, 08:56 PM
Apparently they have a slight bone to pick with conservatives.

Betty
12-06-2004, 08:58 PM
Apparently.

Mota Boy
12-06-2004, 10:16 PM
Heeheehee... demand beer.



Ah, good ol' liberal activists. They're so tolerant of all cultures and peoples that they'll do all they can to shout down anyone they perceive as intolerant. It's especially annoying because, although both sides think that they're right, many times liberals just seem to think that they're more enlightened solely due to their viewpoint, and that any sort of intolerant or shrill activities done in the name of that view don't matter, because they're for a greater, more enlightened, cause.

Perhaps it's just that I expect more out of liberals (I guess I am one) that this really gets to me. I'm in a part of the country where people have their Kerry bumper stickers torn off, though, so (duh) it goes both ways. Advertising a cause is one thing, just as long as you allow, to a certain extent, the others to voice their opinions.

Betty
12-07-2004, 09:44 AM
The beer thing is the only part that I like...

It's true that it works both ways, and I could understand some deep rooted hate of right-wingers from somebody who is surrounded by a bunch of extremists in their daily life. This is just a glimpse into why I have some bitterness towards the social activists, because I am surrounded with it constantly. Some in a good way, some in a bad way. A good example: people campaigned to get rid of styrofoam in a food-serving location and it worked. Bad examples: people vandalized a whole bunch of coke machines, spraypainted messages about coke on buildings...

It's frustrating because they are tolerant of gays, of women, of racial minorities... but when it comes to say christians. No tolerance there. And I've never really understood that. Different cultures have different beliefs, gay people have their own way of living that some people don't agree with, but christians can't have their own point of view at all. And like, people will say they're forcing their beliefs on people, but nobody would ever complain about a rainbow sticker with an "ally" message, or a gay rally, or something like that. A religious organization on campus ran this big campaign and plastered their messages everywhere. (Not offensive at all, not god related, it was actually fairly cryptic e.g. just had the website) and people just went nuts on them.

And saying this, I am not religious, I think gay people can do whatever they please, and I don't support conservatives who are social extremists either. It's just very hypocritical to preach tolerance and not be tolerant yourself. Of everybody. Even the straight wealthy white male.

Mota, I like the comment about the enlightenment... I think that's a good way of putting it.

wheelchairman
12-07-2004, 10:33 AM
The thing is, (and I don't approve of bashing of religion, and in this case, Christianity because it seems like just like a mild form of rebelling for the sake of rebelling) but you could argue for example, that they are intolerant towards the forms and shapes of the oppressors. Women and gays aren't and won't be oppressors, however Christians, especially in North America, even in some parts today exert forms of oppression and forcing their beliefs on others. I however, think this would be rather hard to find an example of in Canada.

Betty
12-07-2004, 11:06 AM
I agree with that, and I don't support Christians (or any religion) that are truly oppressing with their beliefs (although they should still be allowed to express what they believe without people overreacting).

Actually, you could argue that women and gays CAN be oppressors, come to think of it. It really depends on what we mean by oppressing... if you take it to be putting your rights above somebody else's... or putting down somebody else in supporting your beliefs... I suppose that could be oppression... but there are so many degrees so it's difficult to judge.

I guess the idea is to have a fairness for everybody when it comes to the definition of it. I guess I think that if people's expression of beliefs remains positive, it should be okay. And this would be more difficult for religions because more often their beliefs necessarily say other people are wrong (e.g gays are wrong, you're going to hell if you don't believe in god... ) but some religious people (be they "bad" religious people based on their religion's "rules") are much more tolerant. Like my parents for example. You could argue that they are bad catholics if they don't automatically hate gays, or don't worship the sabbath, or whatever else... but they are very positive and inspiring in what they believe... even though I don't agree.

And for women (or another such group), as long as they are promoting women equality and not women superiority then it should be okay. But like I said, you could argue that sometimes they are oppressing men, depending on the issue.

Not Ozymandias
12-07-2004, 03:38 PM
Wah wah wah, next time don't use a symbol of mass-murder. I'm sure the people who had their house burned down last year for having a sign on their lawn of the number of dead U.S. soldiers are crying a river over your plight.

Betty
12-07-2004, 04:06 PM
What the hell...?

Well, I'm glad you think it's perfectly justified.

Not nearly as bad as a house being burned down, so obviously it's okay.

nieh
12-07-2004, 05:16 PM
I think it's funny that on their attack to your painting, they put "the poor queers" while obviously trying to criticize conservatives for being intolerant. Here, the word 'queer', while not horrible, is still somewhat derogatory...is that not the case in Canada?

Betty
12-07-2004, 06:26 PM
Actually, I think queer is an appropriate word. I think it's common to say something is "queer friendly"... I'm pretty sure.

nieh
12-07-2004, 06:33 PM
ok, never mind then

Not Ozymandias
12-08-2004, 04:46 AM
It's not a matter of justification. You aspired to piss people off; you succeeded.
Take pride instead of whining about what a cruel, intolerant world this is.

T-6005
12-08-2004, 05:27 AM
It's not a matter of justification. You aspired to piss people off; you succeeded.
Take pride instead of whining about what a cruel, intolerant world this is.

I completely agree....

Betty
12-08-2004, 09:45 AM
Ozy... oh we proved exactly what we wanted to. Probably turned out even better than we could have hoped. Like setting a speed trap. Or a fake drug deal. There is a lot of satisfaction from that.

Mostly I'm not so much whining as continuing to try and prove my "why a lot of activism is stupid" point... or at least why I feel that way. And I thought this was a really good example. It is more directed at those whom I have had the activism debate with... and not everybody who thinks everything in the politics forum is basically mindless (like tubgirl)... which it kinda is, but it's entertaining. More entertaining than "what was the last thing you ate"... and certainly more entertaining than studying (exam period = lots of procrastination).

Whatever, it's still true that there's a difference between intolerance and hypocritical intolerance.

Not Ozymandias
12-08-2004, 03:02 PM
WTF?!?!?!

This is not activism, it is a glorified grafitti tag-war. You would've gotten far more hostility had you painted a Montrael Canadiens logo. Calling any of this "activism" is like smearing feces on a wall and calling it "voting". If you want an oppurtunity to continue to look down on people who audaciously care about the world then at least find something applicable like a sit-down. "Proving" that some people are oblivious hypocrites just makes you a natural political correspondent for The Onion ("This Just In: People Are Hypocrits").

Not Ozymandias
12-08-2004, 03:03 PM
Calling any of this "activism" is like smearing feces on a wall and calling it "voting".
Wheras as I usually call this "Saturday night". BA-DUM-CHA!

SicN Twisted
12-08-2004, 03:24 PM
Hey man, smearing feces on the wall is a way of displaying contempt for the system. The feces symbolizes the intrinsic dirtyness of imperialism!

Betty
12-08-2004, 03:25 PM
WTF?!?!?!

This is not activism, it is a glorified grafitti tag-war. You would've gotten far more hostility had you painted a Montrael Canadiens logo. Calling any of this "activism" is like smearing feces on a wall and calling it "voting". If you want an oppurtunity to continue to look down on people who audaciously care about the world then at least find something applicable like a sit-down. "Proving" that some people are oblivious hypocrites just makes you a natural political correspondent for The Onion ("This Just In: People Are Hypocrits").

I feel like you're automatically going to disagree with everything since you don't like my views, and because this makes some of the "people who audaciously care about the world" look bad.

First, I don't see why it can't be considered a mild form of activism. These people are trying to put forth a message. So were we.

Second... your Onion comment, while witty, doesn't discount everything. Sure, everyone's a hypocrite. But some people can be much worse hypocrites than others.

Sure, you can make it seem like it's just a childish "graffiti tag war"... but what the hell... the words painted on there are strong. "Fascist" "Sexist" "Racist" "Queer basher" "War on women"...

I suppose it's alright to totally gloss over this because it's against conservatives? Would people have not cared had the roles been reversed? It seems like your reaction is my case in point exactly.

SicN Twisted
12-08-2004, 04:11 PM
What was the purpose of defacing the activists work? I agree with you that it was stupid, but doing it only proves their point but making people look like intollerent foolhardy morons.

I like the beer thing, I must admit.

Betty
12-08-2004, 06:19 PM
What was the purpose of defacing the activists work? I agree with you that it was stupid, but doing it only proves their point but making people look like intollerent foolhardy morons.

I'm confused by what you're getting at...

Noodles
12-14-2004, 10:53 PM
I thought this post was about Activision. Sorry, my bad.

Sexy Panda
12-16-2004, 05:54 PM
I thought this post was about Activision. Sorry, my bad.

It may as well be.