• qarbone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 days ago

      Do you take charge in effecting political/societal change for yourself (and your community)?

      Or do you disagree with the other guy’s requirements for what constitutes someone who does not want to be led?

      You kinda just said “no.”

        • qarbone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          As examples (as “taking charge” can take multiple forms across mutiple goals): table and/or moderate meetings to come to consensus on goals, coordinate members for coordinated actions toward social goals, source funding for operations if funds are needed, speak on behalf of your group (or coordinate group messaging) toward other groups. To name a few generic things. Specifics depend on what you want done.

          To try and sum it up: “taking charge” is providing impetus, and potentially aligning community power, toward making headway to some social/political goal.

          • ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 days ago

            English is not a language of domination and hierarchy you need to be careful to avoid expressing that.

            You might say ‘initiative’ if you were being careful and conscious.

            • qarbone@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 days ago

              I don’t know what exactly you mean by “English is not a language of domination and hierarchy” or how that really relates to what I was saying or what I originally asked you. “Taking charge” is a extremely common idiom in English.

              I will concede that “take initiative” is a more neutral phrase, but you have turned to nitpicking my diction, even after I spent another full comment explicating the meaning and intention of the original question.

              So it is my turn to ask what you mean by sidestepping my question? If you are uninterested in answering the question, just say so. I have done with someone else in this very post. But don’t think you can confuse me with literary legerdemain. You don’t answer questions by saying “you could’ve phrased it better.”

              • ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                5 days ago

                Sorry was originally writing that sarcastic because I assume nobody is literate and I should at least be having fun.

                If I completely rewrite what you asked and assume the best, sure in some cases. Its not exactly what I want, but close enough. But you didn’t actually write what I’m responding to here, so…

      • Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Elected officials are public servants, not leaders and should be following the will of the people, not telling the people what that will should be.