Activism and its various methods have always been a subject of passionate debate. With the increase in social media activism, many have drawn attention to its problems as a forum for intellectual discussion and debate. Because the world of internet activism is still being explored, the rules of the medium have not been as fully dictated as with others, making it a potentially difficult method of communication.
For many, like myself, Twitter is their de-facto social media. I spend what many would probably consider an unhealthy amount of time on the website. As an unofficial Twitter expert (that is, someone who tweets far too often), I am well acquainted with the now notorious “woke” Twitter subculture. Ranging from big name accounts like DeRay McKesson to smaller ones with only a few dozen followers, social justice has become a major part of the social media website, for better or for worse.
Don’t get me wrong — I am as bleeding-heart liberal as it gets. I am absolutely the type to follow DeRay, Ta-nehisi Coates and all 23 NPR accounts. Yet, the divide between militant and active involvement on Twitter has widened to a point where I am hesitant to align myself with “woke” or social justice Twitter.
Whether or not Twitter activism is a useful method of activism is hotly contested. It would be remiss to overlook the genuinely good aspects of utilizing the website as a forum for political beliefs. By opening up channels for people who wouldn’t otherwise be able to physically participate in protests, rallies and campaigns, online activism plays an important role. The importance of scale in grander projects like #blacklivesmatter and #lovewins is integral to their success. Celebrities, like Stephen King, often use Twitter verification — which promotes their tweets above non-verified users — to bring many political issues to attention. Currently, campaigns like #metoo are being talked about both off and online, appealing to a larger audience than smaller grassroots movements can.
But, therein lies the key: how do you use the forum dedicated to large audiences for grassroots-type efforts? This is the most common issue with localized Twitter activism and its various methods. As more and more people use Twitter as a platform to enact global level change on local levels, the effectiveness of its activism drops.
Twitter activism on a local level, whether at school or not, is often far less effective than large scale efforts. For the young activists who spend their time devoting their accounts to retweeting and tweeting about social issues, activism can play a major part in their social presence. Yet because of its distance from physical social change, the line between performative and genuine activism seems to be growing thinner.
It’s not uncommon to see accounts full of retweets from celebrities and organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), but whether or not people actually contribute to the movement is unsure. Its purpose plays into the aforementioned necessity for large numbers in social activism, but retweets seem hollow when compared to actual quantitative change. Instead of working toward concrete goals in addition to social media boosting, many fall into the trap of armchair activism, or slacktivism.
Slacktivism is defined as “actions taken to bring about political or social change but requiring only minimal commitment, effort, or risk” and it often comes up when talking about online activism. Because of its removal from the physical world, it is often an easier way of attempting to bring about change because the risk is much lower. For example, people are less likely to face alienation from supporting different viewpoints if they are discussed online. Twitter activism often feels complacent and hollow for this reason. Performative activism works in that it makes the person in question look better to their peers for beliefs they do not hold and actions in which they did not actually take part. Its passivity leads to important issues being seen as less important than they are because they are bogged down in a marsh of retweets and hashtags used to “show” one’s dedication to the cause.
Performative activism has another side to it: militant activism. While, historically, militant activism has been used in a number of productive ways, the online era brings a new meaning to it. Because physical proximity is no longer necessary, the consequences for politically charged harassment have gone down. This is a major issue for all sides of the political spectrum as some activism turns into heated and senseless arguments over issues rather than constructive dialogue. Militancy additionally can come off as performative because of its newfound relative ease: it’s easy to get into internet fights but it’s hard to have civil debates.
As Twitter is the perfect forum for community discussion, it becomes difficult to know where to draw the line. Because so many opinions are broadcasted at once over its various public channels that struggles seem to be public property. Instead of listening to others discuss the issues that affect them directly, some Twitter activists prefer to make their own content, tweeting long threads about issues that do not concern them personally. I’ve seen tweet threads from white users, who genuinely do wish to just see a better world, that cover issues specific to groups of people (i.e. police brutality). Their voice, while appreciated on some level, actually works in the opposite manner of what they wish to achieve: edging out those who need their voice projected most from the conversation. While many seem to operate on the basis that the more voices there are, the better it is for any concern, this is not true. Talking over those affected by the issue simply because there is a platform for your specific voice silences those that truly need to have their thoughts shared.
Twitter activism is an undeniably powerful tool when used correctly. It has the power to bring social issues to mainstream audiences, rather than just a niche group of the politically active. Yet, with its use, there comes a level of self-awareness that is necessary to ensure effective activism. Rather than simply retweeting or talking over affected parties, those interested in activism should make physical strides to enacting change. Change cannot happen simply due to a photoset, a catchy slogan or a nice pastel graphic — it comes from actual political knowledge and action.
