Neil Marshall – Discussion #6

After reading “How to Think Like an Activist” by Wendy Syfret and watching “United in Anger” I would define activism as active participation in furthering a political or humanitarian cause or bringing attention to causes or injustices. I don’t believe that activism always has clear objectives. For instance, the example that was given of the “unsuccessful” Occupy Wall Street protest is an example of activism that perhaps did not have clear goals but served to bring attention to income inequality and corporate money’s corrupting role in politics.
“United in Anger” chronicles the Act Up movement’s fight to promote government action and awareness towards the then developing AIDS crisis. The movement largely sought to reform access to treatment and expedite drug approval processes, seeking transparency on all fronts. Their achievements in the face of an ever shifting adversary, as those involved in the fight fell victim to the disease, were astounding. They were able to collect and organize information to disperse to the community to spread knowledge, likely saving lives in the process, at a time when no one else was attempting to do anything to stem the crisis. These efforts rolled into them using various means to bring attention to the crisis, cleverly harnessing the media at that time to further their cause. These acts ranged from sit-ins, to marches, to infiltrating news broadcasts, and demonstrations against the Catholic Church. Largely they sought government involvement in addressing the crisis, one in providing access to proper care across all demographics afflicted, and two in gaining expanded access to drug trials of possibly life saving drugs. They not only demanded action, but also provided a wealth of knowledge and feedback from the community to government agencies that aided in fighting the disease. But each step forward seemed to provide new obstacles for them to tackle, but they persevered and found new ways to engage the public. In ’92 they carried out what I’ve always found to be their most viscerally moving act, the Ashes Action. It had taken Reagan seven years to publicly acknowledge the epidemic and two years into Bush’s presidency not much had improved. Taking death to the White House’s doorstep, throwing the ashes of their loved ones on the White House lawn, showing what the government’s negligence had wrought, I can’t even put into words really the power in using their mourning as protest. I think their greatest achievement was getting people to see the humanity of those dying from and affected by AIDS.
I feel my own involvement with activism has been limited. I think participating in the Black Lives Matter marches in 2020 may have been the first time I actively engaged in activism outside of donations, petitions, or ensuring I vote in midterm or local elections that influence policy. I’ve recently started my training to become a crisis counselor for the Trevor Project. I’m not sure if that strictly qualifies as activism, but for me it’s important to help an organization that advocates for LGBTQ+ youth. Within that there is definitely a fight to provide safe spaces and advocacy for those who fall all across the gender spectrum.

2 thoughts on “Neil Marshall – Discussion #6

  1. Catherine

    Hello Neil, I liked your definition of activism and I agree that activism does not always have clear goals. However, I think it should have because it’s important to bring attention to an issue but also fix it. About the “United in Anger” film, I’m shocked about the Ashes Actions, it’s crazy everything they had to do and the amount of deaths it took for this community to be heard. Also, it’s amazing that you are training to become a crisis counselor to help LGBTQ+ youth!

Leave a Reply