In politics, controlled opposition takes the form of the rare politician that appears to promote freedom while actually participating in the massive political system that controls us. I think the reason controlled oppositional actors are allowed to exist is that it keeps alive the belief that the system is good if only the right people are elected. They also serve to distract, redirect and drain valuable energy from people trying to create non-political change.
I am new to the intactivist space and feel saddened that controlled opposition is probably going on here as well as politics. It is partly for this reason that I am not more active. I don't even know what to do for fear I will just waste my time or make things worse.
A friend commented recently in utter confusion "I don't understand...how can anyone be FOR the cutting of baby genitals"? I had no answer for her.
I think there is a danger in worrying too much about micromanaging the people in your own movement (this is what many intactivists are preoccupied with doing; go on Twitter and behold the hormonal shitstorms of so called "activists" at each others' throats), and thus not spending energy on doing your own work. People are generally untrusting and most people are balancing multiple interests or have conflicted and thus tenuous convictions, which can lead to a lot of finger-pointing that may not really be pragmatic. There is a lot of that going in the intactivist movement, some of it quite obvious and some of it more subtle, but it seems that for the most part, the average person aligned with our cause feels that half of the people in the movement aren't acting in the best interests of the movement despite their stated intent.
The vast majority of the conversations I see in this movement and also other issues/movements, particularly in social media bubbles, are a series of shouting matches, nail-biting and anxiety about the intentions of the people around them. While sometimes one can make a very compelling case that an individual or group is not acting in the best interests of the movement, I see an overarching failure of people to effectively communicate, and their accusations remain no more than just that, and are unactionable, whilst the conflicts completely hamstring everyone involved and wear them out before they ever leave social media and interface with neutral audiences. The duty of each activist is to remain focused, and to practice communicating more selectively and only engaging with rhetoric or strategy that is actionable.
It is easy to figure out who controlled opposition is! 1.) Look at who or what they were associated with in the past and 2.) Follow the money!
I would say that the Biden's Obama's Clinton's are controlled opposition. But they don't even hide
Everything is under their (elite psychopaths) control, who are just playing games with us, as their SLAVES/PAWNS in the Game..
In politics, controlled opposition takes the form of the rare politician that appears to promote freedom while actually participating in the massive political system that controls us. I think the reason controlled oppositional actors are allowed to exist is that it keeps alive the belief that the system is good if only the right people are elected. They also serve to distract, redirect and drain valuable energy from people trying to create non-political change.
I am new to the intactivist space and feel saddened that controlled opposition is probably going on here as well as politics. It is partly for this reason that I am not more active. I don't even know what to do for fear I will just waste my time or make things worse.
A friend commented recently in utter confusion "I don't understand...how can anyone be FOR the cutting of baby genitals"? I had no answer for her.
Good post this.
Also see:
https://dpl003.substack.com/p/the-gatekeepers-club
I have seen people who fit Mr. Marotta's agendas.
I think there is a danger in worrying too much about micromanaging the people in your own movement (this is what many intactivists are preoccupied with doing; go on Twitter and behold the hormonal shitstorms of so called "activists" at each others' throats), and thus not spending energy on doing your own work. People are generally untrusting and most people are balancing multiple interests or have conflicted and thus tenuous convictions, which can lead to a lot of finger-pointing that may not really be pragmatic. There is a lot of that going in the intactivist movement, some of it quite obvious and some of it more subtle, but it seems that for the most part, the average person aligned with our cause feels that half of the people in the movement aren't acting in the best interests of the movement despite their stated intent.
The vast majority of the conversations I see in this movement and also other issues/movements, particularly in social media bubbles, are a series of shouting matches, nail-biting and anxiety about the intentions of the people around them. While sometimes one can make a very compelling case that an individual or group is not acting in the best interests of the movement, I see an overarching failure of people to effectively communicate, and their accusations remain no more than just that, and are unactionable, whilst the conflicts completely hamstring everyone involved and wear them out before they ever leave social media and interface with neutral audiences. The duty of each activist is to remain focused, and to practice communicating more selectively and only engaging with rhetoric or strategy that is actionable.
Here we go again, another secret operation which is so far out into the open that few can see it.