[BitterCritter]

It makes me livid when people write that vigilantism is never right. It speaks volumes about how little nuance there is in their own lives. I think these same people would denounce civil disobedience in the time of the civil rights movement and would joke about Seneca Falls if they were born a century younger. The overconfidence disgusts me.

[tptacek]

Civil disobedience is not vigilantism. In fact, it is almost the opposite.

[tm-infringement]

I imagine that their point is not that they are the same, but that the attitudes correlate. The absolutist view about vigilantism, where they see no possible place for violence in any situation, could translate to the idea that one should protest quietly, preferably indoors and change will come soon enough™. Which seems to be the case [0]. He groups up completely different social movements ranging from the highly organized, reactions to an active conflict, to decentralized mobs, naming them "neotoddlerism". Saying that:

> The Civil Rights movement succeeded because it was guided by leaders who had clear, specific, and realistic goals, and were able to negotiate to achieve them.

Implying that Just Stop Oil doesn't fulfill these characteristics sans the prominent leaders. Their original objective seems to have happened [1] (JSO influence is debatable of course) and have defined new clear goals [2]. Lumping this with Israel-Palestine outrage on Twitter and the UK riots seems to make the criteria for not being effective social movements a.k.a "neotoddlerism" is "I don't like it / They annoy me".

Would this attitude result in "denouncing / joking about Seneca Falls" with era appropriate socialization? Doesn't seem that far farfetched.

0. https://substack.com/@gurwinder/p-147486907 1. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-65945... 2. https://fossilfueltreaty.org/

[BitterCritter]

You got my exact point and elaborated really well with even research on the guy! Thanks it means a lot.