Marianne Williamson

Rank 16 of 47
|
Score 66
11/17/2024, 12:07:26 AM
X
In reply to:
meh vee
@mvwatsongmailc1
·
428d
@marwilliamson @jonfavs We won those rights by building large, vocal social movements that swayed large swaths of public opinion. No one is telling electeds to ignore broad-based social movements. They’re saying pay attention to where your voters are at, which is sort of the point of democracy?
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
428d
@jonfavs That means we would have rejected women’s suffrage as well as the civil rights movement. Great historical change is not always -or even usually - initiated by the majority. It’s often initiated by a small group of people considered outrageous radicals by the status quo of their…
Jon Favreau
@jonfavs
·
429d
Dems should resist any group or special interest that pressures them to take positions opposed by the electoral majority essential to win, whether that’s big corporations, rich donors, nonprofits, whoever.

This isn’t about blaming specific groups for defeat - it’s about what’s…
Mehdi Hasan
@mehdirhasan
·
429d
It’s a great quote, but the piece as a whole jumps on this new bandwagon of blaming ‘groups’ in the Dem coalition for defeat, and implying they control everything, rather than the billionaire class and special interests which have far more control on the modern Democratic Party.

The statement 'Of course. Both.' is a brief response in a larger conversation about political strategy and the role of social movements in shaping public policy. The conversation involves a discussion on the balance between adhering to the majority's will and recognizing the impact of minority-led social movements in achieving historical change. This is a substantive engagement with public issues, particularly regarding democratic processes and political strategy.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement itself is neutral and does not cause harm, but it is part of a broader discussion that could influence political strategies.
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not directly promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, but it is part of a dialogue that could foster these values by discussing the importance of social movements.
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement is a neutral agreement and does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+1]
  4. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement contributes to a discussion on political strategy, which can influence societal betterment by addressing how to achieve policy changes. [+1]
  5. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds free speech by participating in a public dialogue about political strategy. [+1]