![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
transemacabreThis Cracked.com article caught my attention, and then this Foreign Policy magazine article by Golnaz Esfandiari gave me food for thought. I recall a couple of years back when the revolts in Iran were taking place, and seeing people here and there in fandom and elsewhere excitedly changing their location to 'Tehran', as some kind of symbol of solidarity with the Iranian people, or occasionally claiming it would help confuse "them" -- "them" being the Iranian government, I suppose -- and back then I was like "Whut". There were news articles trumpeting how crucial Facebook and Twitter were to the revolutionaries. People were tweeting breaking news on Iran hither and yonder, some of which turns out to have been misinformation the Iranian authorities were deliberately feeding them.
So what is the deal with this whole phenomenon? Well, this is just good old-fashioned slacktivism, created by the desire to MAKE A DIFFERENCE, to do something to help those activists but in such a way that does not demand:
1) your money
2) your time
3) your effort
or, most importantly,
4) that you at any point put your own life and liberty at risk.
It's the same mentality that spawns worthless internet petitions, or promotes hoaxes like that "bonsai kitties" thing that was all the rage on Myspace back in the day. One problem is that, well, to be honest with you, the only things that do MAKE A DIFFERENCE are time, money, effort, and sometimes, tragically, lifeblood.
The other, bigger problem with the slacktivist thing is that it diverts attention from the people who really did put themselves at risk and go out and fight for their rights, even if that right was to cast a vote between Evil and Slightly Less Evil. Instead of being heroes for their cause, they're just the faceless mob who needed our help to be educated in the ways of social networking, which of course was going to pave the way for their future democracy. The whole mess is even more ridiculous when, as Cracked.com points out, social networking is a laughably bad way to try to plan any sort of revolution. As we've seen in the last couple of years, these totalitarian regimes have no problem pulling the plug on the cell phones and internet, feeding the news media false information to be eagerly lapped up, harassing and arresting Iranians abroad by tracking their internet history, or hell, just swooping in and arresting would-be protesters as soon as they arrive at the pre-arranged demonstration site.
I must wonder if part of the appeal of things like the so-called Twitter revolution are people's desire to be part of something historic. Going to wash bedding and scrub floors at your local animal shelter is, of course, a worthy effort that actually creates a small but important impact on your community, but it's not very glamorous. Whereas feeling like you contributed to the downfall of an oppressive regime, even if done from behind the safety of your laptop screen, is much more romantic.
So what is the deal with this whole phenomenon? Well, this is just good old-fashioned slacktivism, created by the desire to MAKE A DIFFERENCE, to do something to help those activists but in such a way that does not demand:
1) your money
2) your time
3) your effort
or, most importantly,
4) that you at any point put your own life and liberty at risk.
It's the same mentality that spawns worthless internet petitions, or promotes hoaxes like that "bonsai kitties" thing that was all the rage on Myspace back in the day. One problem is that, well, to be honest with you, the only things that do MAKE A DIFFERENCE are time, money, effort, and sometimes, tragically, lifeblood.
The other, bigger problem with the slacktivist thing is that it diverts attention from the people who really did put themselves at risk and go out and fight for their rights, even if that right was to cast a vote between Evil and Slightly Less Evil. Instead of being heroes for their cause, they're just the faceless mob who needed our help to be educated in the ways of social networking, which of course was going to pave the way for their future democracy. The whole mess is even more ridiculous when, as Cracked.com points out, social networking is a laughably bad way to try to plan any sort of revolution. As we've seen in the last couple of years, these totalitarian regimes have no problem pulling the plug on the cell phones and internet, feeding the news media false information to be eagerly lapped up, harassing and arresting Iranians abroad by tracking their internet history, or hell, just swooping in and arresting would-be protesters as soon as they arrive at the pre-arranged demonstration site.
I must wonder if part of the appeal of things like the so-called Twitter revolution are people's desire to be part of something historic. Going to wash bedding and scrub floors at your local animal shelter is, of course, a worthy effort that actually creates a small but important impact on your community, but it's not very glamorous. Whereas feeling like you contributed to the downfall of an oppressive regime, even if done from behind the safety of your laptop screen, is much more romantic.
