More than 70 recipients of The Game Awards’ Future Class are calling for a statement to be read at next week’s The Game Awards, on their behalf, in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza, amid the ongoing Israel-Hamas war.
More than 70 recipients of The Game Awards’ Future Class are calling for a statement to be read at next week’s The Game Awards, on their behalf, in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza, amid the ongoing Israel-Hamas war.
And neither of those will happen at games events with an open letter.
The goal for something like the Gaza conflict is to change public opinion. You do that by being very visible and getting on the news consistently enough for people to decide to look more into it. The protest at government buildings isn’t intended to change policy makers’ minds directly, it’s to get media attention in a place that has symbolic significance to viewers, and that change in viewer opinion is what policy makers care about.
At the same time, meet with reps in their offices to discuss mutually beneficial options. For something like Gaza, that means getting humanitarian aid to Gaza, which doesn’t require the politician to flip on their support for Israel, but still shows a shift toward supporting Palestinians. As public opinion starts to change, push for ceasefires to establish humanitarian aid corridors, peace talks, etc. None or that requires the rep to abandon support for Israel, you’re just pushing for peace.
Imo, that’s how you get change. Open letters that most people will ignore do nothing but rile up people who have already formed an opinion on one side or the other.
I wonder if maybe having a game awards show that will be covered in the news read this letter would be a good way to get on the news
Nah, it’s a fluff piece that’s only going to get posted to places like Lemmy.
Whereas if they’d been protesting outside the event, it would be all over CNN and Fox and MSNBC, right?
Maybe, depending on how large the protest was. I think chances are better if they did it at a state capitol or something.
Understood. FWIW I wasn’t planning on reading about Gaza this morning, I was just reading game news and now they’ve got me thinking about Gaza at least.
Reps aren’t actually listening to you at all, they’re just trying to shut you up. So in this example they’d agree with you in person, then maybe provide limited aid in Egypt while continuing to fund the Israeli military.
They can do their jobs first, and then the protests will stop. Do not assume good faith.
I’m not. I’m proposing a mix of diplomacy (lobbyists meeting with reps) and public demonstrations (protests to get popular support). If bigger and more frequent the protests, the more the lobbyists can get from reps.
When a bill is considered, that’s the point where individuals should get involved. Calling/emailing doesn’t do much, but showing up at public hearings absolutely does, and a regular member of the public has way more sway there than a lobbyist. The goal here is three-fold:
An open letter isn’t a protest, it’s virtue signaling. Instead of that, actually protest.
That is assuming good faith. They will not engage in diplomacy with you, or work with you to draft legislation. They will lie to your face for as long as you’ll let them. They. Do not. Work. For you.
You can call this protest not an Actual Protest or whatever, but it made this conversation happen where it otherwise wouldn’t have. When we take to the streets, we’ll be told that we’re still “virtue signaling” 🙄 and the right time and place isn’t blocking traffic.
This conversation only happened because someone who already agrees with the topic posted to a site where the majority already agree with the topic. That’s the only reason we’re discussing it. An open letter only scratches the backs of supporters, and nothing else. It’s worthless.
Real change happens on the streets with protests (think Civil Rights movement, Vietnam protests, etc) and with lobbyists on Capitol Hill. It doesn’t happen with open letters, social media posts, or emails to reps.