In my previous post on the legitimacy of activism, I leveled a broadside against what I see as the thoughtless, visceral, emotional nature of activism. Of course, such a generalization is dangerous simply because it risks lumping the legitimate, rational, intellectual support of an important cause in with the kind of activism I wrote against.
In thinking more about and discussing the idea of activism further, I came to realize that the problem might not be with activism itself, but rather with the kind of activism. Really, then, the problem is with the activists and how they choose to deal with their activism.
Given that fact, I believe that it is important to define the difference between legitimate activism and the kind of activism that I derided previously. I believe the most effective way to create that definition is by assigning those definitions less ambiguous terminology.
The people who engage in legitimate activism immediately define activism as something different. Such people tend to be rational and informed, less prone to excitability, and more capable of delivering their message in a way that does not offend most people who do not already support their view.
Such people are often described as advocates for their chosen cause, a word that already conveys and intellectually higher value. Therefore, I propose to call legitimate activism advocacy instead, simply to give it a name different from the kind of lunacy that defines most other activism.
Frankly, if we had more advocacy and less activism, far more useful work would probably be done by our governments and institutions. When people present their causes and beliefs in a calm, rational, informed, and factual manner, other people are far more likely to listen, understand, and accept the presented view.
In fact, I believe how a cause is presented by its supporters is an accurate test of its legitimacy. People do not need to be made aware of or convinced of legitimate causes by wild-eyed raving and screeching voices. If a cause has legitimacy, the facts of that cause will convince others, not shouting. I believe that test alone defines the difference between activism and advocacy, making each one easy to spot.
