Sunday, February 28, 2016
Naive or Malicious?
Case A: Say you want to get people talking about an important issue in the Democratic party, and well over 90% of the Democratic party agrees with you.
Case B: Now imagine that you want to change the general public's behavior, but currently, fewer than 1% of your target audience shares your views.
Do you see a difference in these two situations? Would we really pursue the same tactics in both situations?
This is so drop-dead obvious to me that I am utterly flabbergasted when people point to something that seems to have worked in Case A as if it has any applicability to Case B, let alone claiming that it justifies absurdly destructive actions.
Seriously – naive, or malicious? It sure feels like the latter.