I think that the reason both of
these readings were paired together is because at the core they discuss “good
intentions.” There were two main points that stood out the most from the readings.
The first point that should be talked about is how people apply the “But he
meant well” factor to others and how this affects social activism. The second being
how strengths and weaknesses in social activism differ when comparing two
different types of social activists—the Twitter Revolutionists and Diner
Sit-ins. While the two points may seem different, they are very closely tied
together.
I agree with Bennett in regards to
the fact that people will almost always say “But he meant well” when a mistake
is made, just as easily as they would say “At least I/they tried” when a task
is not fully completed. You can then infer that those who “meant well” when conducting
themselves in a rude or ignorant manner, in regards to social activism, “at
least tried” to understand what those who were oppressed. What is lacking in
this is that those who “tried” or “meant well” can never fully be in support of
what they are acting upon. It makes the person seem ignorant.
In the TSIS reading, Gladwell spoke
about the Diner Sit-ins and Twitter Revolutionists. Of course, the names are of
my unoriginal creation but it helps repaint the picture that Gladwell drew
about differences between to two groups. The Diner Sit-ins were those who
rallied under the flag of social justice. They were organized, helped each
other through their daily difficulties, placed themselves at risk for their cause
and policed their own when necessary. Though a lot of time was spent organizing
sit-ins, rallies, and boycotts. The
Twitter Revolutionists, on the other hand, participate in similarly dangerous
and controversial events from the safety of their homes and jobs. They do not
have to lose school time or pay from work because social media provides an instantaneous
and safe way to support social activism. The only good point they seem to
provide, aside from instant participation and safety, is how fast people can
spread news about events.
Though how does closely tie
together with the second point? The main
reason I say that this two point are closely related is because of how they affect
each other in regards to participation and motivation for causes. Those who are
truly making a difference are those who are physically participating in
creating positive changes. Well those who “mean well” make half-assed attempts from
home to help those in need.
I agree with you completely they both have an essential core of coming together to stand for a movement. However, when Gladwell talked about the diner sit in he also was trying to demonstrate how physical sit in were more effective that the small civil movement performed online, to some extent in my opinion I feel like her is almost trying to demonstrate the passion of the people in the civil movement shows in its self. Black women and men were physically involved in the movement while white on the other hand approach it from social media. Although this is a powerful tool that we can now use today, when it is performed in person it makes all the more difference, it calls more attention that the civil movement are looking for and needComing back to Bennett , I agree with his regards with the “but he meant well” when mistakes are made or “at least they tried” that seem to always be an excuse that people who are ignorant to the ideas get. Although it is understandable, it can be deem inexcusable because before anyone can talk about a subject they sound research and know what they are talking about before commenting on a topic.
ReplyDeleteI agree that these were paired together to battle the thought of good intentions. That even though you think you are doing well, there will always be another side to this story. Brit Bennett explained this at the beginning of her post. She says, “I’ve seen good white people congratulate themselves for deleting racist friends or debating family members or performing small acts of kindness to black people.” This shows that she doesn’t want white people to “pity” the black people and feed off of our problems. In I don’t know what to do with good white people, Bennett is claiming that the intentions of the good white person doesn’t really help but creates another form of social tension while in Small Change by Gladwell the comparison of two groups and their intensions were challenged. How can a person sit behind a computer and rage about social change? Easy, just do it, the problem is that she twitter revolutionists are aimed at one community and the dinner sit in’s are aimed at the power. I do agree that the intentions of people are often skewed and it takes the person, group, or community to realize the effects of it all, but I do think that there is a certain understanding that a person has to attain by making mistakes.
ReplyDeleteI agree that these readings were paired because they discussed “good intentions”. I agree with with Gladwell when it comes to actually show what you’re talking about. Your actions speak louder than words. Even though, you’re tweeting about the movement…very little can happen about the situation. However, social media is a powerful tool to use today by using it to spread awareness, but that’s all you are doing. You have to actually go out and do things, to see changes in the world. Sitting behind a computer screen and typing about change…is very easy. Twitter is almost like a mask for the writer, instead of an actual face in the situation.
ReplyDeleteI agree withy our first paragraph, those tow very same points stuck out like a sore thumb to me as well. Although, I don’t agree with you and your first statement in your second paragraph, starting with, “I agree…”. You really think every time some one “fucks up” they meant well to begin with? HA, that’s just like someone saying, “Just kidding, I knew that” when they clearly didn’t.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, how can I not agree with your third paragraph, you summarized the reading nicely. I agree withy your point at the end, “The only other good point…” I felt this way while reading too. I feel like Gladwell doesn’t think we can make huge changes to our social environment because social medias, out posts on twitter aren’t going to change the world. And I agree with that, moves need to be made, haven’t your ever heard of “actions speak louder than words”?
And then lastly, I like to agree with your final paragraph. Great closing! I have no idea why… but it kind of reminds me of what my MASS COMM professor always says, “If you didn’t vote, then you have absolutely no room or right to complain; what do you expect? You didn’t participate. It’s as simple as that.”
In “I Don’t Know What to Do with Good White People” Brit Bennett tells her families stories of racial incidences and how they have affected them all. The major idea in this reading is the questioning of if “good” white people act morally right to satisfy themselves or do so because it’s the right thing. Bennett expresses how her friends often congratulate themselves for deleting racist Facebook friends. Bennett then talks about the gray area of people’s intentions she states, The problem is that you can never know someone else's intentions. And sometimes I feel like I live in a world where I'm forced to parse through the intentions of people who have no interest in knowing mine” (Bennett). This is an important idea because it shows the daily struggle of being a minority. In “Small Change: Why the Revolution Won’t Be Tweeted” Gladwell talks of the history of racial justice and the power of sit-ins and peaceful protests. He then talks of the frequently used media outlet today—Twitter. Many people feel safe to post their political ideas on Twitter. It’s fast and your opinion can safely be shared to the masses from one’s own home. Although, this type of protest does not have as high of risks as old forms of attempted revolution. As the cliché saying goes, actions speak louder than words. It’s more powerful to do something than to just quickly post a 140 character tweet. I think these two readings are paired together because they have the underlying theme of what people are saying or doing in order to contribute to social justice. I think both of the arguments are well made and have plenty of supporting evidence.
ReplyDeleteThomas did an excellent job on pointing out the main points of the essays. The first being about the "good-intentions" of whites, and the second being about the power of activism thru social medias. Although these two might seem a pretty different, they tie together because the first article "I Dont Know What to do With Good White People", the author speaks out about how she feels that white people "want to" help but are really are just stopping the word from being spread. While the second one talks about how those (possibly white) people on social medias are making it harder to make a difference. Because there is no hierarchal organization in social medias to guide a "revolution" then all these things that people are saying are going in one ear and out the other. I agree with Thomas in a lot of his blog, but also feel he could talk more about these men who "meant well". How can they mean well in their attempts to shoot a child. Regardless of what they believe, they should investigate the situation a little more before pulling the trigger. Overall, the two readings did a nice job in pointing out the flaws in social activism. One being how whites are just blindly pretending everything has changed and the other being the need for central authority in social media activism.
ReplyDeleteBoth readings focused mainly on the intentions and differences within social activists groups and people. I see where Bennett is coming from by saying that we should questions one’s efforts and intentions whenever they are acting on something. However I don’t think it’s fair that someone who claims to have good intentions shouldn’t be supported or marked off as ignorant. Failure is a natural thing and anyone who is depicted as ignorant for it just isn’t right. But I do get what he’s saying. Gladwell makes a great point about the actions being taken for social justice. Although social media has a powerful influence in this generation it’s still just the internet. A lot of people use social media but sitting at home posing as if you have a strong will to make a change won’t really change anything. In Birmingham, King led his campaign into one of the most racist cities in the US and there was a lot going on there at the time of the protest. In order to make a real difference you have to hit where it hurts so that people have no choice but to hear you. Sitting on social media ranting is going to get anyone’s attention. They can just log out and ignore you.
ReplyDelete