The only thing I disagree with my Quaker friends on is the slogan speaking truth to power. First of all, power already knows the truth; they don’t have to hear it from us; it’s a waste of time and the wrong audience. (ii)
The Huffington Post says that we can no longer afford to practice a “nonchalant type of acceptance” (i). But if tolerance is not good enough, then what else can we do? I thought I’d share what the sociologist Aldon Morris says from a recent article in Scientific American. His message is quite different from what we hear from conservatives in which they often ridicule protest and subversion.
There are three ways of conceptualizing the tactics and strategies employed by social activists attempting to make a change in the culture. Aldon Morris is endorsing the third theory of social change. If there is evidence that his theory works, then why do conservatives protest about protesting? I can come up with several hypotheses, but it is best framed as a struggle for power.
Whichever tactics are employed, the ultimate goal is to disrupt the society sufficiently that power holders capitulate to the movement’s demands in exchange for restoration of social order. 
Verbatim from “From Civil Rights to Black Lives Matter” found in Scientific American
- influential resource mobilization theory: It argued that the mobilization of money, organization, and leadership was more important than the existence of grievances in launching and sustaining movements—and marginalized peoples depended on the largesse of more affluent groups to provide these resources.
- political process theory: It argues that social movements are struggles for power—the power to change oppressive social conditions. Because marginalized groups cannot effectively access normal political processes such as elections, lobbying or courts, they must employ “unruly” tactics to realize their interests. As such, movements are insurgencies that engage in conflict with the authorities to pursue social change; effective organization and innovative strategy to outmaneuver repression are key to success.
- indigenous perspective theory: It argues that the agency of movements emanates from
- within oppressed communities—from their institutions, culture, and creativity. Outside factors such as court rulings are important, but they are usually set in motion and implemented by the community’s actions.
- Movements are generated by grassroots organizers and leaders—the CRM had thousands of them in multiple centers dispersed across the South—and are products of meticulous planning and strategizing.
- This also frames social movements as struggles for power, which movements gain by preventing power holders from conducting economic, political, and social business as usual.
- Tactics of disruption may range from nonviolent measures such as strikes, boycotts, sit-ins, marches and courting mass arrest to more destructive ones, including looting, urban rebellions, and violence.
In order for movements to develop, a people must first see themselves as being oppressed. This awareness is far from automatic: many of those subjected to perpetual subordination come to believe their situation is natural and inevitable. This mindset precludes protest.
 Morris, Aldon. “From Civil Rights to Black Lives Matter”. Scientific American
(I). “Americans who are poor, female, of color, queer, disabled, or not Christian cannot afford to practice the nonchalant type of acceptance-of-any-and-all-opinions when the opinion of many hardline social conservatives is that it would be preferable to exclude these people from the conversation altogether.” Huffington Post
ii). This quote is from Noam Chomsky. This quote is applicable to anyone that has power or control over you as it’s the perception that they give off. I’m not a radical that is endorsing overthrowing the government, so please don’t misinterpret this.