I disagree with you, Andrew. This is exactly the time for the sort of discourse that has a hope of being listened to, and thus a hope of leading to "changes of heart".
Look at an example from the other side. Fred Phelps drove far more people away from his cause than he converted to it with his message of gay-hate. Likewise, those who hold "Love Trumps Hate" signs while demonizing bigots, racists, and homophobes in hateful terms convert no one from bigotry, racism, and homophobia.
Demonizing the other side DOES NOT WORK, no matter how just one's cause is. No human being is a demon beyond redemption. All human beings, on all sides of any issue, are prone to turning off their empathy when they feel threatened. So non-threatening persuasion and discourse--which is a two-way street, including each side listening to the fears and concerns of the other--is the only way to get others to turn that empathy back on again.
Non-violent protests need to use non-violent language, too (yes, even in a climate in which the media ignores protests until they have footage of something burning), if the protesters want to persuade their opponents that violence will not come to them if they cease hostilities. You can't change a heart that fears you. And you can't persuade someone that their fear of you is irrational if you are attacking them, whether literally or just verbally.
|
Threaded Mode
