What are the most successful methods of activism, direct action, and influence?

Question

How have others been successful in changing the way others make decisions, vote, think, act, and live?

Answer 1

Protests and demonstrations don't convince me of anything.  However, video footage is very convincing.  I stumbled across a video on you tube, where Charlize Theron talked about puppy mills (I didnt even know what a puppy mill was at that time).  I was so horrified by what i saw, it changed my life and made me spring into action immediately.

Answer 2

In "Poor Peoples Movements: Why They Succeed, How They Fail" by acclaimed social scientists Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward, the authors argue that the most successful social movements are able to achieve the most by attracting attention to their cause, primarily through the disruption of daily life, and through the maintenance of their message, in order not to be co-opted into the system. Piven and Cloward warn the social movements should try to the best of their abilities to not become enbroiled in internal politics, power struggles and beuracracies, which take time and energy away from achieving results through disruptive protests, which they encourage.

This is in many ways like a marxist anaysis of thesis antithesis and synthesis as well as class conciousness.

The g*y liberation - q***r movement would also concede that there is little to be gained when one just becomes another actor in the table, but the strategy should be to dismantle the system.

While Structuralists like Peter Stone argue that the key to effective policy change, which is after all what social movements are all about, only happens when the agenda setting stage of policy is widened. By including more players its possible to get more ideas into the picture. The problem is, stone concedes, that some systems are built so that agenda setting is private or in closed circles. In such cases when you can't even get the ear of a congressman or a hearing at city hall, protesting may be necessary.

good question.

Answer 3

In addition to the Piven and Cloward book, I would also recommend "The Whole World is Watching" by sociologist Todd Gitlin - he explains how the social activists of the 1960s were able to use the mass media during certain time periods, and how that same media was used to destroy them and their ideals later. Nevertheless, the lesson remains that if no one can see your activism, then it will not influence very many people - that's why I ultimately disagree with Tolstoy when he said that too many people were concerned with changing the world rather than with changing themselves (he wrote in a much different time). Change ourselves, sure - but change the world also.

It's not enough to Emancipate Ourselves from Mental Slavery, as Bob Marley says - but it's a good beginning. But then, we have to follow through, and start a social movement for change. If we, as Americans, do NOT start doing this and keep our rebellion solely internal, then we will complaining about how awful the Democrats and Republicans are until our dying days, and our childrens' dying days, and our grandchildrens'. This is the dangerous truth that the State and Big Business do not want you to accept.

Answer 4

Popular misconceptions are more powerful than the truth.

The example:

Economists have, for many years, said among themselves that higher fuel prices are like a tax on everything.  To an economist that means that higher fuel prices have a similar effect as a sales tax on the price of everything in the economy because it raises prices across the board.  It does not mean that some evil entity is taxing everything you do or buy.  The comparison is merely intended to show how higher fuel prices slow sales of all products and services in the same way that taxes do.  

Recently an economist said "higher fuel prices are like a tax on everything" when he was a guest on a television news program.  The news-reader took up the quote without understanding it and repeated it.  I have since heard it many times on other news networks.  It has become a part of popular economic philosophy.  News-readers only qualification is that they look good; they are not required to understand what they are saying.  

I have also heard people, private individuals, take up the phrase.  Now that it has become a part of common culture, how do you correct the misconception?

If people have come to beleive something that is not true just because they heard it repeated in the news a few times, it becomes ingrained into their world-view.  

The theory:

If a few news anchors begin spreading a "fact" that would appear true to the untrained mind, the public would accept it without thought.  It is necessary to coerce people, or even to convince people.  A false fact on a popular news program is enough to cause people to start thinking and acting in ways that do not always make sense.  The public will not object because they will not even realize they are being manipulated.  

Now consider what Shopenhauer wrote about will.  You are wasting your time if you  try to reason with people when you have to deal with their will.

The application:

If you can control the news media, you can control the people.  It is evil.   It is Machiavellian, but it is more effective than trying to convince people of the truth.  Instead of convincing anyone, manipulate their beliefs about the world and you can manipulate their will.

Answer 5

Become a well informed ,honest,activist.

Answer 6

I have written an article regarding this topic.  Please take a look.  This is a method I frequently use when influencing others

Answer 7

blogs, petitions, safe protests, youtube.

really just get realized, and if what you're doing is seen as right then you'll get the praise you want from the peope who are willing to give it. :)