We live in a society that fears, shames and represses anger. Anger expressed appropriately is a perfectly healthy and reasonable response when faced with injustice and oppression. Repressing anger only leads to dysfunction.
I don't see much rationality or reason in anger. Politics driven by emotional states, particularly anger, generally leads to worse outcomes. The best results have always come from more rational discussion from cooler heads. Maybe we should be encouraging more of that and less anger
We can debate emotion/rationality polarity, but my opinion is still that reactionary anger (whether understandable or not) is counter productive to good governing decisions.
On the side of those who govern or the people who demand things from them? The civil rights movement, eg, was driven in no small part by righteous anger. Many movements for rights and inclusion are.
Sure, and the people screaming at a black girl trying to attend school were similarly driven by righteous anger.
Do you think it was the anger or the calm marches, the resolute civil disobedience, the finding common ground? Anger is a motivator, but if you let it drive it takes you to dark places
Like I write in the piece, the reasons for anger and the form it takes matter. There’s no equivalence between racist and anti-racist anger. The former is bogus. The latter is righteous.
Comments
Do you think it was the anger or the calm marches, the resolute civil disobedience, the finding common ground? Anger is a motivator, but if you let it drive it takes you to dark places