,
5 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Just my opinion:
Costumes and stunts have a critical role at the start of a movement, especially when that movement focuses on something that's failing to capture public attention.
They energize volunteers and create visibility for something that would otherwise not get noticed.
Costumes and stunts have a critical role at the start of a movement, especially when that movement focuses on something that's failing to capture public attention.
They energize volunteers and create visibility for something that would otherwise not get noticed.
However, when a movement reaches a certain size the challenge moves from energizing volunteers and getting noticed, to challenging the counter-narrative... and the opposition always creates a counter-narrative.
The counter-narrative for Remain is (unfairly) that it is a dilettante movement of the inner-London student and hipster set, unrepresentative of real (fuck this term) UK working people.
That it is a group of people for whom the protests are the point, and Remain an excuse.
That it is a group of people for whom the protests are the point, and Remain an excuse.
While this is a bullshit charge, it is a narrative the media instinctively leans into because it supports preconceived notions of a liberal elite in London out of touch with hardscrabble coal miners in the home counties.
An endless overcompensation for getting 2016 wrong.
An endless overcompensation for getting 2016 wrong.
The decision by @GuitarMoog and #R4OR organizers to deliberately define an aesthetic which pushes back on this narrative is, in my view, a smart tactical choice.
I understand why some activists feel attacked by it, but it's a localized choice, not a broader condemnation. /fin
I understand why some activists feel attacked by it, but it's a localized choice, not a broader condemnation. /fin
