i get it and the intention. but it was two gestures: pro peace, but also sending money to bigotry. it was read as both.
-
-
Replying to @nathanjurgenson
Politically speaking, the net effect is not sending money to bigotry. Buying ads is a kind of burning money, too.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
sure, but sending them money is understandably still seen, felt, and understood as a powerful and hurtful symbolic gesture
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @nathanjurgenson
Again, I started with lend them an office but the money is more akin to an ad in my mind.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @nathanjurgenson
A counter-donation wave is a good idea (where were people?) but I've seen political violence spiral so quickly past years.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @nathanjurgenson
The money is not a game-changer, but de-escalation is not something you do with assumptions of deserving others.
2 replies 1 retweet 8 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @BrucciWane @nathanjurgenson
Gestures aren't done like that--oh look we'll change this one person's mind.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
I'm a target of that discrimination, but anyway. My idea was Dems lend them an office..
-
-
I understand people are thinking of the money version, but in my view, that's not how things are won/lost.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.