You must log in or register to comment.
I mean, i get the idea of the comic, but i don’t know if i agree with the “incremental change” sign. In my experience things change gradually then all at once. Incremental change is usually a part of the process.
Republicans didn’t kill Roe all at once, it was a series of wins and losses over years until suddenly they were in a position to strip away rights from women.
I see what you’re saying… But, you don’t start your negotiation by asking for incremental change. To continue on your analogy, the anti-abortion activists have been demanding a full stop to it up-front since they started…
Change may sometimes only happen incrementally, but nothing worthwhile will happen if that’s all that’s asked for.
That’s makes sense
I have to disagree. Anyone who has ever tried to be a force for change knows if you don’t do it in stages it will blow up in your face. We can demand complete change but implementation should always be systematic.
Absolutely love the spirit of the comic, though. It’s exactly my type of humor.
Ohh so your comic is false then and activists don’t ask for incremental change?
Or it’s false and they do incremental change on the way to getting their demands met?
Quit blaming and demoralizing your own side.
No dumbass, he’s trying to HELP his side by making them not roll over before real negotiations have even started.
If you want your side to win, stop cheering when they lose, loser.
I really don’t get the point of the comic. People demand the change they can imagine and think is possible. If they heard more radical ideas and conceived of them as possible, I think these same people would support them. But mocking them doesn’t really help us get there. And in the mean time, yes, incremental change still helps people survive.
Way too many people might not explicitly say it, but they clearly unironically agree with these signs, based on their actions and what they say they do and don’t support.
Yes. I’m one of those. Violent overthrows of the current order usually only lead to one clique of oppressors being replaced with another one. “But this time it will be different, for sure!” isn’t a convincing argument.
Nah I’m with you there. I don’t think a violent revolution is likely to work for precisely the same reason you suggest.
But that doesn’t mean not advocating for bold change. Advocating for massive overhauls to how democracy is practised (especially in countries with an electoral system that frankly IMO shouldn’t even count as democracy—i.e. FPTP) and widespread disruptive protests to achieve your goals.
Sure. But that all falls under incremental change. Don’t get me wrong, I do think we really need to change the whole system from the ground up. But that will only work democratically, if the result is supposed to be better than what we have now.
Except for the American revolution, right? Or would you have been on the side of the loyalists?
You could ask the slaves that question. Also, that was more of a fight against foreign occupation than straight up revolution.
If congress passed a legal regulation for corporations to have more humane practices and standards in specific achievable terms, with punishments for misconduct, I would celebrate that immediately. There is no world where that sign isn’t my actual political philosophy. Same with incremental change, sure big changes are nice but I’ll take incremental every single chance we get. Anybody who mocks those two stances is a moron from my perspective.
Anybody who mocks those two stances is a moron from my perspective
I’ll point you to the OP’s comment:
you don’t start your negotiation by asking for incremental change
Change may sometimes only happen incrementally, but nothing worthwhile will happen if that’s all that’s asked for.
Yes, celebrate the incremental wins. But don’t start out stating that your preference is for mediocre incremental change.
I supported big changes like HR 1 For The People Act to try to get money out of US Politics, with all my heart, but fuck all came out of a large partisan bill when it can’t get through the senate.
Fight the power! But like, only if they’re ok with it.
What do we want!?
gradual change
When do we want it!?
in due time…
Disrupt and break shit. The tech companies shattered the job market and turned careers into gig jobs. They introduced hyper-efficiency to late stage venture capitalists who give exactly zero fucks about long term stability and impose mathematically impossible “constant growth” quotas on people trying to operate in the real world.
Maybe disrupting and breaking shit is just the chaotic, destructive force we need to save the world. “Change the paradigm” and save us all from ourselves.
That, or I forgot to take my meds.
I think you may find yourself in good company on this instance… Or maybe I forgot my meds too…
¯\(ツ)/¯
What you are describing is basically the Luddite movement.
And yes I agree.
You may enjoy Civil Resistance. it’s like protesting but you’re not begging your overlords for better conditions you’re demanding new overlords … wait a minute …
Change at yours earliest convenience, please!
I’m not an AI hater, but I am deeply unsettled by political AI content…
Are you sure this is ai or are you referencing something else?
I’m assuming it’s AI. That arm near the center isn’t attached to anything, and the faces just look off.
It’s almost like one of the signs is blocking their face. Like you might see in a protest.
It has a signature and it would make sense for an artist not to draw something hidden behind a sign, so it’s probably just a sketch
What do we want?!
Better pay!
When do we want it?!
Whenever it is politically convenient!
