Posted by shar on July 31, 2002, at 14:38:48
In reply to Uh-oh. » LostBoyinNC1, posted by beardedlady on July 31, 2002, at 5:36:19
When I think of the movements led in anger, the result seems to be war rather than change. Yes, war certainly does change things! But, I think the point at issue is positive change coming from anger.
An angry crowd taking an 'us vs. them' perspective is too volatile, imo, to lead to anything positive...at least until well after the riots have ended.
An angry crowd that quiets down to listen to Gandhi talk about a day of prayer, or passive resistance, has a much better chance of leading to positive change, imo. Gandhi, MLK...they stood against wrongdoing, and did what was right. And, imo, worked miracles. They did not come off as heart-attack bound enraged men, and I feel sure our world would be very different if they had.
Shar
P.S. I have counted 7 things in this post that would get me in trouble with my English teacher. I await my corrections. "Thank you, Mistress, may I have another?"
> Lostboy:
>
> I agree with many points in your last post. (Okay, most of the them.) Had you said all this without name calling or accusations, you'd have won kudos and back pats (at least from a few of us).
>
> A little anger is a good thing, and it is a catalyst for change. But Martin Luther King didn't bully people. (He didn't guilt them, either.)
>
> Your post was well-written and articulate, emotionally charged and pretty right on target. The only thing missing was a little bit of compassion and the ability to turn accusation into something more innocuous. Oh--and the ever-illusive apostrophe. Add those things, and you'll be a force to be reckoned with.
>
> beardy
>
> ----
>
>
> > Oftentimes in society, the greatest social changes occur when people get angry and decide to do something about it. They go into politics, they write a book to voice their experiences and opinions on whats wrong with the system. They form political lobbying groups to foster changes they believe needs to occur. Anger can be a catalyst for change and its not always a bad thing, unlike how many mental health specialists would have you believe.
> >
> > Without anger, there would have been no civil rights movement in the sixties. There would have been no psychiatry reform movement in the sixties and seventies. Many social changes have occurred because a small group of people could see things fundamentally wrong with certain aspects of the system and became angry about it and wanted to change it.
> >
> > People who dont get angry are sheep. They are the passive codependents Ive complained about that habitate this board. Many successful people have anger problems and many times its the anger that motivates them to get things done (attorneys, politicians, corporate CEOs, etc). Many of them die young from cardiovascular disease as well. While it might not be pretty or fun for the people around an angry person, anger gets things done.
> >
> > If you want change, you must get angry. At least a little bit.
> >
> > LostBoyinNC
> >
>
>
poster:shar
thread:6841
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020725/msgs/6892.html