What Happens Next?

Michael Allan continues to think about accessible conversations.  Nothing new in that, but now he's wondering, "How does it connect with activism?"

What is activism?  Maybe it is political action that is taken where society affords no means of action - especially where the authorities would rather no action be taken.  So the activist breaks with convention, going beyond what is expected of a citizen, and maybe break the rules in the process.

Michael Allan (who is no activist) offers this late contribution to the session: He suggests: When conversations are accessible, there will be no need of activism.  All of us can then take responsibility for whatever bothers us, concerns us, gets us fired up. The conversation alone (if truly accessible to all) will afford us the means to act.  Do you follow?  Here's an example of what it might be like.

Even when acting in concert with all the rest of society, however, in a broad consensus that's held together by a grand conversation - accessible to all - there may be an element of danger in the act itself, and in its consequences.  It would not come from breaking the rules, and being thrown in jail, but rather from inadvertently doing harm to ourselves and others. (Sorry to ramble.  I'll continue rambling about this, here... ) 

What else is happening? Add your own...