I joined a few days ago. I’ve posted about a number of issues, all on a similar vein (the loss of effective action through a reversion to performative activism).
It pretty much the only topic I’m interested in posting on.
As such, I’m unlikely (even given time) to have said this about a cisgender person because cisgender activism is not one of the issues affected by such changes.
I don’t go around balancing my comments by identity. I don’t think “oh, my last comment criticised a woman, I’d best make sure I criticise a man next”. That is exactly the type of performative activism I’m opposing here. Waste of time. Doesn’t actually help anyone who’s seriously suffering.
If we want to help prevent another such particular poor victim we’d be better off adding our voices to the already large campaign against gun violence in general.
Know what else causes a loss of effective action and leads to a reversion to performative activism?
Making good points badly, to such a degree that your (presumably personally and deeply held beliefs) come across as the inverse of your intention.
Because neither the erosion of effective action nor the rise of performative activism, occurs in a vacuum.
In fact, both play into the hands of those who benefit from said erosions, and who have guided the communual discourse in such a way that even the very act of discussion in regards to the topics most important to the themes at hand, is apt to fracture into a mixture of ineffective action, which itself can only come across as “performative activism” to those approaching the very same problems, from a different angle.
Like, are you even aware of how poignant your gun violence example is, how your approach can easily be misconstrued as the same performative activism (an angry, contrarian, lone wolf call to sanity online is practically a trope at this point)?
They’re winning, because nuance cannot be shouted, it must be demonstrated.
You make a good point. But all of what we’re doing here is performative. I’m not pushing back on these issues as an act of activism. That would be crazy, I’m immediately drowned out in every topic by hordes of self-congratulating back patters, giving a lovely comfortable feeling of puritanical martyrdom to anyone toeing the line. I can’t compete with that.
You’re right. I am the angry, contrarian, lone wolf trope. And I’m as much the product of the process you’ve highlighted as I am perpetrator of it.
This is venting. Activism takes place in the real world.
Where I don’t agree is that this in any way leads to performative activism. That I lay squarely at the door of social media algorithms creating polarisation. I don’t think anything we do here can be but a drop in the ocean compared to that.
I joined a few days ago. I’ve posted about a number of issues, all on a similar being (the loss of effective action through a reversion to performative activism).
Okay, contributing is good but are you going to comment this on any post relating to an issue you don’t care about?
It seems some (most) are having trouble understanding the concept of performative activism.
It’s easy to be pro-trans. It’s easy to shout about anti-vaxxers. It’s easy to hold a brunch party and complain about Trump.
These are all examples of performative activism because they cost the activist nothing and gain plenty in social kudos. They are actions aimed at enriching the activist (socially) not the group the activism is claiming to target. The equivalent of wearing a badge or waiving a flag.
This article (and the sycophantic Fauci-worship I previously commented on) are examples of performative activism. Easy wins to gain social brownie points. The article’s author/editor is capitalising on the easy-win of sympathising with a nice middle-class, western, developed-world minority group, whose raising out of oppression would not threaten the dominant order one iota. We would live in exactly the same economic structures if the entire government were composed of trans and queer people as we do now when it’s composed almost entire of white rich men. It’s a totally safe, no risk way of showing how very much you care about people, and what great a person you are. You don’t have to actually do anything - you don’t have to change your spending habits, cut down on luxuries, give money to anyone, risk life and limb,…nothing. Zero investment maximum gain.
Calling instead for an increased in coverage of poverty-related deaths might lead to questions about one’s own wealth, about one’s own purchasing, how much one is doing to help the poor in one’s own neighbourhood. Because helping the poor is material. It requires actual material sacrifice.
So no. I won’t be commenting this on every issue. I will be commenting this on issues dominated by performative activism.
I joined a few days ago. I’ve posted about a number of issues, all on a similar vein (the loss of effective action through a reversion to performative activism).
It pretty much the only topic I’m interested in posting on.
As such, I’m unlikely (even given time) to have said this about a cisgender person because cisgender activism is not one of the issues affected by such changes.
I don’t go around balancing my comments by identity. I don’t think “oh, my last comment criticised a woman, I’d best make sure I criticise a man next”. That is exactly the type of performative activism I’m opposing here. Waste of time. Doesn’t actually help anyone who’s seriously suffering.
If we want to help prevent another such particular poor victim we’d be better off adding our voices to the already large campaign against gun violence in general.
Know what else causes a loss of effective action and leads to a reversion to performative activism?
Making good points badly, to such a degree that your (presumably personally and deeply held beliefs) come across as the inverse of your intention.
Because neither the erosion of effective action nor the rise of performative activism, occurs in a vacuum.
In fact, both play into the hands of those who benefit from said erosions, and who have guided the communual discourse in such a way that even the very act of discussion in regards to the topics most important to the themes at hand, is apt to fracture into a mixture of ineffective action, which itself can only come across as “performative activism” to those approaching the very same problems, from a different angle.
Like, are you even aware of how poignant your gun violence example is, how your approach can easily be misconstrued as the same performative activism (an angry, contrarian, lone wolf call to sanity online is practically a trope at this point)?
They’re winning, because nuance cannot be shouted, it must be demonstrated.
You make a good point. But all of what we’re doing here is performative. I’m not pushing back on these issues as an act of activism. That would be crazy, I’m immediately drowned out in every topic by hordes of self-congratulating back patters, giving a lovely comfortable feeling of puritanical martyrdom to anyone toeing the line. I can’t compete with that.
You’re right. I am the angry, contrarian, lone wolf trope. And I’m as much the product of the process you’ve highlighted as I am perpetrator of it.
This is venting. Activism takes place in the real world.
Where I don’t agree is that this in any way leads to performative activism. That I lay squarely at the door of social media algorithms creating polarisation. I don’t think anything we do here can be but a drop in the ocean compared to that.
Okay, contributing is good but are you going to comment this on any post relating to an issue you don’t care about?
It seems some (most) are having trouble understanding the concept of performative activism.
It’s easy to be pro-trans. It’s easy to shout about anti-vaxxers. It’s easy to hold a brunch party and complain about Trump.
These are all examples of performative activism because they cost the activist nothing and gain plenty in social kudos. They are actions aimed at enriching the activist (socially) not the group the activism is claiming to target. The equivalent of wearing a badge or waiving a flag.
This article (and the sycophantic Fauci-worship I previously commented on) are examples of performative activism. Easy wins to gain social brownie points. The article’s author/editor is capitalising on the easy-win of sympathising with a nice middle-class, western, developed-world minority group, whose raising out of oppression would not threaten the dominant order one iota. We would live in exactly the same economic structures if the entire government were composed of trans and queer people as we do now when it’s composed almost entire of white rich men. It’s a totally safe, no risk way of showing how very much you care about people, and what great a person you are. You don’t have to actually do anything - you don’t have to change your spending habits, cut down on luxuries, give money to anyone, risk life and limb,…nothing. Zero investment maximum gain.
Calling instead for an increased in coverage of poverty-related deaths might lead to questions about one’s own wealth, about one’s own purchasing, how much one is doing to help the poor in one’s own neighbourhood. Because helping the poor is material. It requires actual material sacrifice.
So no. I won’t be commenting this on every issue. I will be commenting this on issues dominated by performative activism.