For context he is a black man that has gotten over a hundred leaders of the KKK, including former convicts to leave the Klan. Not by arguing with them, not be reasoning, not by showing them the effects of their behaviour, but instead by sitting down, talking with them and becoming their friend.
In a nutshell this one man has probably done more to combat racism, than all the angry tweets on twitter combined.
In some cases this is possible. The Klu Klux Klan is comprised of broken men who dance in costumes at night. What about the racists who do not do that? Who enact their racism as government policy? Or as housing discrimination? Or through their art?
How long will it take to reach them? To quote James Baldwin^[1]:
> You always told me it takes time. It's taken my father's time, my mother's time, my uncle's time, my brothers' and my sisters' time, my nieces' and my nephews' time. How much time do you want. For your progress.
Thanks for the link, that was an incredible talk, and that guy is cool as hell.
The fact is that Obama has got way more done for America than Omar, so I'm inclined to think he's right.
Many social activists were famously unpopular. Martin Luther King died with a 66% disapproval rating^[1]. Susan B. Anthony was ridiculed and accused of trying to destroy the institution of marriage (sound familiar?).
Of course some activists veer too far. Jane Fonda is an example. I don't fault her opposition to the Vietnam War, but her infamous photo practically advocated for violence against American troops.
In a sense the aim of social activists is to be ahead of their time. MLK was reviled in his time and practically infallible today. We need both politicians and activists for progress. Politicians push forward the policy, but the activists push forward the politicians. Without activists, politicians can end up in holding patterns, afraid to lose popularity. Without politicians, activists are just screaming into a void.
[1]: https://www.newsweek.com/martin-luther-king-jr-was-not-alway...
Being unpopular is hardly the same as being abrasive and rude.
Its funny how the people endorsing Obama's experience on the "defund the police" slogan losing people seem to ignore the other "error" he mentioned as losing people in the same interview: giving too small of a platform within the Democratic Party to voices like AOC's (who, obviously, has the opposite view as Obama on "defund the police") who have proven quite effective with connecting with large constituencies with which the party establishment (implicitly, including Obama himself) has been ineffective.
I would be cautious in selectively referencing that Obama interview to suggest he knows better than "The Squad".
Fred Rogers and Carl Sagan are standing at the front of a very long line of people who are waiting to gently disagree with you.
I guess if I had to refine my original claim: it's impossible to politely disagree with fundamental societal values.
Tell that to Gandhi, tell that to the many people in the Civil Rights Movement and Martin Luther King, tell that to the people who were in the Monday demonstrations in East Germany, the list goes on.
His demeanor was polite, but his impact was rude and abrasive to many (racist) people.
Exhibit A: Gandhi
Of course social activists may at times cross the line and be unnecessarily rude or abrasive. But I'd have more sympathy because their fundamental job is to be subversive and critical of people.