I’ve concluded quite some time ago that those online petitions are a way for politicians to diffuse people’s indignance or anger whilst not actually having to adress their problems (they might, if it doesn’t affect their priviledges or the benefits of the elites, but there is zero real pressure for them to do so).
People sign the petition and get a feeling that they did something about that thing that was making them angry, thus spending their impulse for action without actually having done anything trully effective, and politicians now don’t have to deal with real pushes for them to fix things or even threaths to their position since people aren’t getting together and going on demonstrations or even activelly campaigning to stop them from being re-elected.
I wouldn’t at all be surprised if those things are propaganda ops devised for some mainstream party or other by some smart marketing types which then spread because they were so useful at keeping most people from actually acting in effective ways when they felt their elected representatives weren’t representing their interests.
Complaining on social media about political issues does the same thing, gives the feeling of action without actually changing anything.
what experience are you citing here?
this comment is strange to me because all the online petitions i’ve participated in had some kind of outcome (they were all small scale and local, obviously we are not talking massive federal change or anything). and all of them very clearly had sections like “HEY DON’T STOP HERE” and then provided resources for further on-the-ground action or charities who could aid the situation. which people then did. and then change happened.
so like idk? im not saying your “conclusion from quite some time ago” is altogether false, but it’s certainly not representative of any whole or total reality.
im sure the psy-ops you theorize exist somewhere, but goodness gracious don’t write off every petition you see as some kind of malicious slacktivism campaign. look into it, talk to people. see for yourself, vote in the petition if you like, then do the activism whether it’s on the change.org site or not.
I don’t see how anyone can do this themselves but someone with a lot of money who wants to help could certainly start an organization that tries to use capitalism to crush capitalism and robin hood the ultra rich as much as possible. What we need for normal people to be able to be involved at all is a platform that can enable conversation and action that helps keep track of progress and ideas and ways to accomplish them while belittling misinformation so that it can’t gain purchase. I call it a consensus engine but there are many ideas of the same concept, none I’ve seen in real life though
How would that work?
Maybe better start with an introduction to the topic: https://www.quora.com/Who-invented-the-modern-computer-look-and-feel/answer/Harri-K-Hiltunen
situation one
politician/leader: i want to do XYZ
oponent: no one wants that
fact checkers: he’s right, there is no evidence anyone wants that
outcome: nothing changes
situation two
politician/leader: i want to do XYZ
opponent: no one wants that
fact checkers: yes they do, look at this change.org petition with 9999 votes
outcome: politician/leader has a public will-based platform from which to do XYZ
conclusion
petitions should not be the end of the story when it comes to making change. but they are an invaluable tool for starting it. don’t diss petitions.
deleted by creator
How about Reggie’s chair?
