this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2024
90 points (76.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
741 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Username checks out
Time to push up my glasses and say "well akshually..."
I think they're saying that because Direct Action has a particular definition.
So on one hand, they're right. Direct Action is not done at the ballot box. It's done in the streets.
But on the other...it doesn't matter. Just like most "well akshaully" statements!
Because people should do everything you've laid out, regardless. And don't forget to vote!
While I think it's important to vote, the user you are replying to is mostly correct. It's just important to understand that "direct action" isn't the only viable domain of activism or civil engagement.
It's a small level of harm reduction. It is not a substitute for direct action. But it is necessary if you care about reducing any kind of harm in the world no matter how small.
I can agree with your complaint. That is true.
Can you provide definitions for direct action and harm reduction?