Do I think Walton is one of these "good ones"? No, I don't. But I can't deny that there's no way for me to tell for sure. I don't believe she is, but the plausible deniability this provides her creates problematic dynamics, which is why I made my comment. Of course I believe that this is a cynical game on Walton's part, I'm only saying that we can't know for sure when it comes to this sort of activism, which is disturbing and problematic for movements, because it muddies the waters. It gives plausible deniability and confuses people in the middle, not to mention giving ammunition to the conservatives who want to claim that all these movements are billionaire funded ploys. "No Kings" is Walmart associated now? Now you need disclaimers to specify you don't like them either. It's disheartening to see (what I believe was a grassroots?) movements being co-opted by the wealthy and powerful as yet another way of the system integrating dissent to it's own benefit. It makes me think it may be necessary to form movements radical enough that they intrinsically cannot be adopted by the system - but of course such movements have proportionately more difficulty gathering support.

As an aside, I've noticed that I often get really reactionary responses to my comments like this on Lemmy when I say something that even hints at a possibility of reality being different from the dominant cultural narrative on the site, even when I in fact agree with that narrative. But even acknowledging the ways in which that narrative might be wrong is met with hostility. Nuance is an important thing, but it's unfortunate that I have to be so painstakingly precise with anything that even has the scent of countercultural thinking just to get my point across. The defensiveness and jumping to antagonistic conclusions is not a good thing to cultivate.

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

That's a shit argument, and I'm willing to bet you already know that

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Which part is shit? The post you reply to is a bit longer and I am willing to bet you already know that.

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

To name one: the dream of starting, much less organizing, a massive era-changing movement at the scale capable of nationwide impactful and lasting change without billionaire (et al) connections that stretch beyond funding alone... is a shit plan, but it's got heart and it feels good.

So, sure, let's get those flyers out. We'll do this like Norman Rockwell would've, had he been cast as the propagandist art lead for the plebs-with-the-truth rebel fighters in Man In The High Castle. That went great for the V For Vendetta marks, amirite? Do we get masks, too? How else would we know what's up without secret badges or members only jackets? What's the move, btw? To bypass the whole "vilified by the media" stage of our heroic resistance — or, we just throwing out the entirety of Modern Uprising 101 core curriculum?

FWIW, the last section's a bit whiny on the "aw, but I don't want to be accurate and precise in my statements that require brevity and a familiarity with their content that affords me the ability to speak to fellow citizens of vastly differing backgrounds". This is at the core of every single fucking conversation in life, FFS. You can choose to ignore it, or you can choose to leverage it, but whinging about the way people communicate in "anonymity" is wasting your time, and hope, really.

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago

Hey, such a good reply! Thank you.

[–] mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Argument? I'm agreeing with you. What do you think we're even arguing about? And please don't insinuate that I'm posting in bad faith just because you think I disagree with you.

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 12 hours ago

No, you're not. It's telling that you think you are, though.