This Is My Rifle: The Death of Free Speech Pt. 1.5 - Reaction-ism

Since I've taken on the massive task of reading the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, and because it's an overwhelming mindfuck of a read, I wasn't planning on writing anything this week. But then as I cruised through the site I call home this afternoon, I came across an article written by a reader named Eddieftw in response to my "Death Of Free Speech Pt.1" entry from last week. First of all, I highly recommend you go and give it a read; he breaks down a very important subject that I think we all should pay more attention to. Secondly, I'd like to tip my hat to him since he made some excellent points. Such great points that the gears began to grind in my head and well, here I am, back behind my laptop and chain smoking my way through an unplanned writing session. Call it a response to a response or a sudden stroke of inspiration; whatever it is, I’m glad it happened.

Sidenote: This article is an expansion of a comment I made on Eddie's article. So click the link in the paragraph above if you'd prefer to read the Cole's Notes version.

While I agree with virtually everything Eddieftw had to say in his article, it was this statement that really jumped out at me: "Activism has ZERO effect if anti-intellectualism, greed, incompetence, apathy and naivety is already killing the country".

I couldn't have said it better. The problem with what we perceive as being "activism" is that it really isn't that at all. Instead what we have is reaction-ism completely dependent on the approval of the majority; meaning that people wait until something they don't like impedes on their chosen lifestyle and they react to it in accordance with the sentiments of their peers. If the general consensus is "this is bad and we don't like it" amongst a large percentage of the group then they will gladly join the fight, but only if they are surrounded by enough people to ensure their safety should there be any repercussions for their actions. Today's activist is no longer the mysterious figure in a black sweater and a balaclava; he's the cashier at Starbucks, the frat boy from the upper class family, the 75 year old retired war veteran or the pissed off rapper that writes for a Hip Hop blog (*raises hand*). And as we saw from the recent SOPA debacle, now people from a variety of cultural, political, financial and ethnic backgrounds are repeatedly finding themselves banding together to fight a common enemy, which leads me to ask the question, do we all share a similar set of principles or are we all just here because it's the popular thing to do?

To put it into perspective, Time Magazine named the protester their "Person Of The Year" for 2011. While most people would take that as a sure sign that the establishment is recognizing the power of our presence, I can't help but wonder if it was their way of slighting the activists as if to say “Congratulations, you’re the new trend” and to encourage mainstream America to get involved in social and political activism so it can later be discredited. Perhaps this was their clever move to commercialize dissent so that it will be looked at as disingenuous and insignificant.

The upside to this is that it inadvertently works to strengthen the message by adding physical numbers to the respective movement. Rather than 100 people standing outside of the Parliament Building, you have 100,000 descending on the National Mall, which draws attention to the issues at hand. And while a lot of the people involved may not have a clue as to why they’re there in the first place, their attendance alone will spark debate amongst outsiders and possibly cause a few more people to join in. The great thing about truth is that it’s addictive and once the public gets a taste of it they will demand more. “Occupy” is a great example of this. Even though a lot of the people taking part in it are there for different reasons, they inspired millions of people to look further into their own circumstances and question their government. Regardless of their lack of organization, the message became clear: the people want change.

Unfortunately there is a downside to it all as well; a lot of the information being passed around is incorrect. We live in a society based on hearsay, where large groups of people share assumptions masked as information. In our time, truth is not defined by proven fact but on the opinion of the majority. The media pushes an idea, which is then regurgitated on the Internet (websites, blogs, etc.), people then take these opinions, reinterpret them and personalize them via Facebook and Twitter and then the rest of the population nods in agreement. Sadly, very few of these people ever take the time to trace a story back to its origin and find the motivation behind it. More often than not they just accept it and base their own knowledge of a subject on something that is a complete fabrication.

This is how the media maintains control over the average person. They know that most of the public won’t take the time to check the information and so they twist and manipulate events in order to push their own agenda. This is where “activism” becomes dangerous because it’s a path that leads to nowhere. Without ever stepping back and investigating their own motives, these people play right into the hands of the ones they’re fighting against. Instead of understanding the system and possessing the necessary awareness to effectively engage their enemy, they wait until their rights are infringed upon and spring into action after the fact. The problem with our fight is that it’s less pro-active and more reactive.

In closing, I’d just like to encourage you all to define you own individual freedom and pursue it if you aren’t already doing so. Educate yourselves on the issues that impact your life directly and work to remove whatever obstacles that are blocking your way. As Eddie pointed out in his article, there are hundreds of bills being passed into law every year which have a much more negative consequence than anything written in SOPA/PIPA/OPEN/ACTA.

Now with that said, I’m gonna get back to reading this novel known as the National Defense Authorization Act. See you next week.

See Also: This Is My Rifle: The Death of Free Speech - Pt. 1 SOPA