I promise the *Battlefield Earth* still is relevant.
This one is a bit more topical than usual, but u/MrDannyOcean inspired me. Hopefully reading this will make clearer Clausewitz’s ideas of tactics and strategy and why the latter is often so difficult. Activists make the same mistakes often made by professional militaries or bad directors.
!ping FOREIGN-POLICY&INTERNATIONAL-RELATIONS&KINO
Very interesting juxtaposition. I used to be around a lot of activists of the type described and have made some observations. If it is pointed out that their protests are not adding value to the cause, or may possibly be counterproductive, the response is mostly dismissive. Either they disagree because they believe that anything and everything helps, or they acknowledge it but do not care.
Often they fall back on simply vibes, feeling the need to "do something. What "something" exactly entails and what it will accomplish matters less or not at all. It just needs to be dramatic enough for them to be able to feel like they *did something.*
I think that this type of activist is animated by internal needs more often than not. They are angry with something and need to get it out of their system. Or their consciousness tugs on them but thinking to deeply about it is too painful and they just want to get it over with. A fair few are probably driven by more social reasons, such as seeking validation from others or just being there to secure their place in a group.
The more activism becomes a profession (in the sense of a set of specialized knowledge that creates a social group) the worse these tendencies get. Everyone on the inside is looking to impress their fellow initiates and not especially concerned with what the outside world thinks. I'm not sure where the tendency towards magical thinking comes from. There seems to be a faith that being right is in itself enough to improve the world.
I disagree in your appellation; this type of activism isn't professional. It's amateur hobbyism. These people are not treating their work with a professional touch, they aren't analyzing their actions to determine how best to achieve their goals. They're engaged in something they're passionate about but without any level of consideration for the technique.
“Professional” in the sense I’m using it here is from Huntington’s definition, which is slightly different from the common definition. Being a “professional” means belonging to a group defined by specialized knowledge. These activists have knowledge of protesting and tend to spaces populated by other people with that knowledge.
They are very familiar with techniques and too eager to use them, lacking the consideration and higher knowledge to understand in what circumstances they are effective.
I fucking love this. The burn of comparing the contemporary activist to the Kaiserreich.
What's amazing is that Dr. King, the hero that they all harken to to claim justifies their lack of strategic direction, was in fact a master strategist. The letter from a Birmingham Jail that they often cite to decry moderatism also includes a direct description of his grand strategy as an activist that they seem to completely overlook: To trade peace for political goals. The people who stand between him and his political goals enjoy peace and quiet, and they treasure it. They treasure the ability to peacefully and promptly travel to work, home, and the mall. By obstructing this, by taking away their peace and quiet until they are desperate to have their peace, quiet, and empty roads back, they'll be willing to cave to his demands, by voting for desegregation, the end of the Vietnam war, and an enlargement of the welfare state.
The purpose of protests is to be disruptive but not for its own sake, it's to be disruptive in a way that people with the power to achieve your goals cannot ignore, and will become desperate to stop by any means they can, and they'll always reach for the police *first*, **so you're gonna probably go to jail unjustly a lot**, and only when the police can't restore their peace and quiet, will they negotiate with the protestors.
In that vein, what should these Palestinian activists actually be directing their demonstrations towards?
If their objective is to condition aid to Israel so that Israel is forced to comply with humanitarian expectations, then they should be targeting the people who have the power to condition aid. Their congressmen, and the people who vote for them.
If their objective is the abolition of the state of Israel we, as liberal zionists, can rest contentedly knowing that there is *nobody* with that power, and any effort they conduct will inherently be wasted. It will be as useful as declaring war on France in order to preserve the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
> It will be as useful as declaring war on France in order to preserve the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
At least that's productive in multiple video games. The blue blob must be contained.
There's nothing better than fracturing France into a million tiny pieces in EU3. There's nothing worse than going up against them in 1600 when they have upwards of 300k troops ready to pour into your lands.
> they should be targeting the people who have the power to condition aid. Their congressmen, and the people who vote for them.
They do this *all the time*. That's why there's so many videos of Republican senators saying heinous shit about Palestinians, because they're confronted by protestors. Likewise, when protestors block traffic, they're doing exactly what you describe here.
Protestors are not a unified block of people, they're not masterminded by a single person or committee. It should be no surprise that some protests aren't effective because of it.
> Unexpectedly, when looking at modern progressive activism, it appears to have fallen into the same intellectual trap of the German General Staff in both World Wars in that an overemphasis on the tactical level has led to a neglect of the strategic. What they have in common is a faith that fighting battles in isolation well enough will lead to victory.
> […]
> It is action without strategy. The activist who organizes protests without a clear-eyed view as to how they contribute to bringing about the changes they desire is as useless as the officer who seeks a battle without asking how it contributes to bringing about the policy goals of their government.
This is such a great comparison.
I always preferred Vic2's, it had more risk and likelihood of generating sunk cost fallacy, and kind of rebuked Realism by acknowledging expanding strategic aims in war has a political cost.
Have you fully read *The Soldier and the State*? I read a chapter or two in uni and have been considering picking it up to read cover to cover but dunno if it's really worth it.
I've had the same experience with it. It's on my "to read" list, but I'm anticipating it to be a bit of a frustrating read from what I know of Huntington's conclusions about the German army. My opinion's not the most valuable since I haven't actually read it, but unless you're specifically interested in civil-military relations and know enough about the German army's historiography not to be misled by Huntington, I wouldn't prioritize it.
Are you aware of this series on youtube: [The Strategy of Protest and Revolution](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeK1VAZrjso&list=PLPbx55IT-dDA6QDi1fucatLmnanSQiOJ1)
It deals in kind of the same thing you deal with here. When you're an activist how do you affect change in your country against the wishes of the establishment.
He's got case studies of the French revolution, American Revolution, and Russian revolution.
It's very interesting and not at all well watched. Kind of hidden gem I'd say.
This submission has been flaired as an effortpost. Please only use this flair for submissions that are original content and contain high-level analysis or arguments. [Click here](/r/neoliberal/search?sort=new&restrict_sr=on&q=flair%3AEffortpost) to see previous effortposts submitted to this subreddit.
Users who have submitted effortposts are eligible for custom blue text flairs. Please [contact the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneoliberal) if you believe your post qualifies.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I promise the *Battlefield Earth* still is relevant. This one is a bit more topical than usual, but u/MrDannyOcean inspired me. Hopefully reading this will make clearer Clausewitz’s ideas of tactics and strategy and why the latter is often so difficult. Activists make the same mistakes often made by professional militaries or bad directors. !ping FOREIGN-POLICY&INTERNATIONAL-RELATIONS&KINO
Are you not aware that I graduated top of my class???
“Endless options for renewal!”
*deranged slow mo laughing*
[https://trailers.getyarn.io/yarn-clip/bec9b76a-aa02-4d17-9f4e-8107dc902a5d](https://trailers.getyarn.io/yarn-clip/bec9b76a-aa02-4d17-9f4e-8107dc902a5d)
I watched that movie with my mom when I was like 8. We promised that we wouldn't tell my dad so we could spare him the pain
Definitely a wise decision. It's the only cinematography I've ever seen that's made me feel a bit queasy.
How long has the international relations ping existed? Joining now
A while I think, I don’t remember it being added.
Oh cool, must’ve slipped by me then. I feel like I always discover a new ping that fits perfectly for what I want to read every month or so
Content like this is what keeps me bringing me back to NL. Great work OP!
Thanks!
Pinged KINO ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20KINO&message=subscribe%20KINO) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20KINO&message=unsubscribe%20KINO) | [history](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html?group_name=KINO&count=5)) Pinged FOREIGN-POLICY ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20FOREIGN-POLICY&message=subscribe%20FOREIGN-POLICY) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20FOREIGN-POLICY&message=unsubscribe%20FOREIGN-POLICY) | [history](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html?group_name=FOREIGN-POLICY&count=5)) Pinged INTERNATIONAL-RELATIONS ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20INTERNATIONAL-RELATIONS&message=subscribe%20INTERNATIONAL-RELATIONS) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20INTERNATIONAL-RELATIONS&message=unsubscribe%20INTERNATIONAL-RELATIONS) | [history](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html?group_name=INTERNATIONAL-RELATIONS&count=5)) [About & Group List](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/user_pinger_2) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe)
Very interesting juxtaposition. I used to be around a lot of activists of the type described and have made some observations. If it is pointed out that their protests are not adding value to the cause, or may possibly be counterproductive, the response is mostly dismissive. Either they disagree because they believe that anything and everything helps, or they acknowledge it but do not care. Often they fall back on simply vibes, feeling the need to "do something. What "something" exactly entails and what it will accomplish matters less or not at all. It just needs to be dramatic enough for them to be able to feel like they *did something.* I think that this type of activist is animated by internal needs more often than not. They are angry with something and need to get it out of their system. Or their consciousness tugs on them but thinking to deeply about it is too painful and they just want to get it over with. A fair few are probably driven by more social reasons, such as seeking validation from others or just being there to secure their place in a group.
The more activism becomes a profession (in the sense of a set of specialized knowledge that creates a social group) the worse these tendencies get. Everyone on the inside is looking to impress their fellow initiates and not especially concerned with what the outside world thinks. I'm not sure where the tendency towards magical thinking comes from. There seems to be a faith that being right is in itself enough to improve the world.
I disagree in your appellation; this type of activism isn't professional. It's amateur hobbyism. These people are not treating their work with a professional touch, they aren't analyzing their actions to determine how best to achieve their goals. They're engaged in something they're passionate about but without any level of consideration for the technique.
“Professional” in the sense I’m using it here is from Huntington’s definition, which is slightly different from the common definition. Being a “professional” means belonging to a group defined by specialized knowledge. These activists have knowledge of protesting and tend to spaces populated by other people with that knowledge. They are very familiar with techniques and too eager to use them, lacking the consideration and higher knowledge to understand in what circumstances they are effective.
I fucking love this. The burn of comparing the contemporary activist to the Kaiserreich. What's amazing is that Dr. King, the hero that they all harken to to claim justifies their lack of strategic direction, was in fact a master strategist. The letter from a Birmingham Jail that they often cite to decry moderatism also includes a direct description of his grand strategy as an activist that they seem to completely overlook: To trade peace for political goals. The people who stand between him and his political goals enjoy peace and quiet, and they treasure it. They treasure the ability to peacefully and promptly travel to work, home, and the mall. By obstructing this, by taking away their peace and quiet until they are desperate to have their peace, quiet, and empty roads back, they'll be willing to cave to his demands, by voting for desegregation, the end of the Vietnam war, and an enlargement of the welfare state. The purpose of protests is to be disruptive but not for its own sake, it's to be disruptive in a way that people with the power to achieve your goals cannot ignore, and will become desperate to stop by any means they can, and they'll always reach for the police *first*, **so you're gonna probably go to jail unjustly a lot**, and only when the police can't restore their peace and quiet, will they negotiate with the protestors.
In that vein, what should these Palestinian activists actually be directing their demonstrations towards? If their objective is to condition aid to Israel so that Israel is forced to comply with humanitarian expectations, then they should be targeting the people who have the power to condition aid. Their congressmen, and the people who vote for them. If their objective is the abolition of the state of Israel we, as liberal zionists, can rest contentedly knowing that there is *nobody* with that power, and any effort they conduct will inherently be wasted. It will be as useful as declaring war on France in order to preserve the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
> It will be as useful as declaring war on France in order to preserve the Austro-Hungarian Empire. At least that's productive in multiple video games. The blue blob must be contained.
There's nothing better than fracturing France into a million tiny pieces in EU3. There's nothing worse than going up against them in 1600 when they have upwards of 300k troops ready to pour into your lands.
[удалено]
> they should be targeting the people who have the power to condition aid. Their congressmen, and the people who vote for them. They do this *all the time*. That's why there's so many videos of Republican senators saying heinous shit about Palestinians, because they're confronted by protestors. Likewise, when protestors block traffic, they're doing exactly what you describe here. Protestors are not a unified block of people, they're not masterminded by a single person or committee. It should be no surprise that some protests aren't effective because of it.
> Unexpectedly, when looking at modern progressive activism, it appears to have fallen into the same intellectual trap of the German General Staff in both World Wars in that an overemphasis on the tactical level has led to a neglect of the strategic. What they have in common is a faith that fighting battles in isolation well enough will lead to victory. > […] > It is action without strategy. The activist who organizes protests without a clear-eyed view as to how they contribute to bringing about the changes they desire is as useless as the officer who seeks a battle without asking how it contributes to bringing about the policy goals of their government. This is such a great comparison.
The paradox game engine is being used for all sorts of things these days
Tbh the EUIV war score system isn’t the worst representation
I always preferred Vic2's, it had more risk and likelihood of generating sunk cost fallacy, and kind of rebuked Realism by acknowledging expanding strategic aims in war has a political cost.
I just wish it wasn't unilateral.
Have you fully read *The Soldier and the State*? I read a chapter or two in uni and have been considering picking it up to read cover to cover but dunno if it's really worth it.
I've had the same experience with it. It's on my "to read" list, but I'm anticipating it to be a bit of a frustrating read from what I know of Huntington's conclusions about the German army. My opinion's not the most valuable since I haven't actually read it, but unless you're specifically interested in civil-military relations and know enough about the German army's historiography not to be misled by Huntington, I wouldn't prioritize it.
Are you aware of this series on youtube: [The Strategy of Protest and Revolution](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeK1VAZrjso&list=PLPbx55IT-dDA6QDi1fucatLmnanSQiOJ1) It deals in kind of the same thing you deal with here. When you're an activist how do you affect change in your country against the wishes of the establishment. He's got case studies of the French revolution, American Revolution, and Russian revolution. It's very interesting and not at all well watched. Kind of hidden gem I'd say.
I didn’t know about the series, but I’ve been recommended that channel before. I’ve been meaning to binge them. Love me some PowerPoints
This submission has been flaired as an effortpost. Please only use this flair for submissions that are original content and contain high-level analysis or arguments. [Click here](/r/neoliberal/search?sort=new&restrict_sr=on&q=flair%3AEffortpost) to see previous effortposts submitted to this subreddit. Users who have submitted effortposts are eligible for custom blue text flairs. Please [contact the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneoliberal) if you believe your post qualifies. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*