Comments on: Activism

By: Donna Harati

Donna Harati — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 23:39:05 +0000

Hi Owen,
Although I agree with some of the points that “nose” raises in his comment, I am definitely not advocating for us to stop using the term “activism”. Rather, as you mention in your comment, I hope that we can broaden the scope in terms of how we interpret activism. I think it’s important to recognize that activism can consist of much more than stereotypical conceptions of what the word stands for. Broadening our interpretation of activism can lead to a more developed and effective approach to activism. Thanks for the comment!

By: Owen

Owen — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 18:30:38 +0000

I’m not sure there’s anything wrong with using the word activism. Just think of the opposite – inactivism. I think that leaves scope for a pretty wide variety of way of interpreting activism and having an input into the world we live in and the world we would like to see.

By: iain

iain — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 15:21:23 +0000

It does make sense. Almost as if people need to decide first if they are to be an activist on behalf of social justice – a very personal decision and process – and then translate this into goals, via their organization. But they will still be motivated by a specific problem and challenge, presumably? Look forward to discussing in the future.

By: nose

nose — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 14:31:52 +0000

I wish there was a better word to substitute for “activism’,the like that WIB are engaged in. This word has been used and abused by groups (e.g. some animal rights groups) to destroy laboratories,commit arsons,threaten or injure scientists and forestall scientific progress for both human and animal welfare. In some peoples’ mind activism and anarchy are synonymous. I think WIB,through peaceful advocacy( I like this word better)are demonstrating that activism is not, and should not,be equated with destructiveness. Thank you for bringing this subject up to the front. Your blogs are highly intelligent,stimulating and thought provoking. I wish you great success.

By: Donna Harati

Donna Harati — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 17:04:36 +0000

Hi Iain,
As an organization, WIB definitely sets specific goals that it wants to accomplish. For example, one of their main campaigns revolves around pressuring the government to officially commemorate Srebrenica on July 11th and to bring Ratko Mladic to justice. However, I think that on an individual level, many network members define their activism as much more than just participating in particular actions to achieve those goals. As Dragan said in the video, it’s not about getting your three lines of activism on your CV. Those goals exist, and they are fundamental, but I think that fighting for those goals has caused a lot of the individuals in WIB to develop a more personal definition of what activism means to them. Their activism begins to seep into every part of their lives, and it becomes a way of viewing the world in addition to a means to an end. I hope my interpretation makes sense.

By: iain

iain — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:07:14 +0000

“I’ve learned that most WIB members do not define their activism by particular actions they have taken but rather by the state of mind they inhabit and by the approach they take to the world around them.” I need some time to think about this, and digest your video. Does it mean that they do NOT set themselves specific goals to accomplish? if so, that’s a very different view from donors and most others in our goal-oriented world! Challenging idea, but very interesting.

By: David

David — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:29:56 +0000

word.