Re:The Internet of Kafkaesque Things
by aaronbrethorst on Tuesday April 07, 2015 @05:04PM
(#9337151)
A Bush 43 appointee and former Scalia clerk resigning in protest over what he sees as unjust sentencing, and perhaps working for the ACLU, like Steve Schmidt did on same-sex marriage would have sent a powerful message and also perhaps done some good by virtue of having a clearly very skilled legal practitioner working to change laws he found wrong.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
It would have sent a very powerful message to those already listening and looking to agree with it. It would not have sent a meaningful message to most, who would have never encountered this hypothetical message.
That is generally the nature of "powerful messages". If you're advocating change, most of that time will be spent talking to people that don't, won't listen. If not, change would already have happened.
That's not the nature of activism, friend. If you're spending most of your time talking to people who don't or won't listen, it's because you aren't communicating effectively. People listen when you communicate effectively.
That said, do not ever confuse people listening for people agreeing. They are very different things. Just because someone honestly listens to you does not mean they will come to agree with you.
Also, people listen when you are willing to listen to them. Too many "conversations" are thinly veiled preaching.