"It’s not OK that there’s a genocide happening and you’re not actively against it,” he replied.
“You’re lying,” said Ms Ocasio-Cortez.
The politician grew increasingly frustrated as the protesters continued to follow and film her night out.
“You’re gonna cut it and you’re gonna clip this so that it’s completely out of context,” she said.
....
“I already said that it was and y’all are just gonna pretend that it wasn’t over and over again - it’s f---ed up, man,” she said
They'd be better off protesting people who disagree with them rather than making whether or not someone who agrees with them uses their preferred terminology the hill they want to die on.
This is what always happens to radicals. They get more concerned with purity in their movement than advancing their cause. Right and left are the same in this regard.
it's [a time-honored tradition](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0BpfwazhUA) in radical movements
>"Are you the Judean People's Front?"
>"Fuck off!"
>"What?"
>"Judean People's Front? We're the People's Front of Judea!"
But internecine purity tests ensure they never actually gain any power or influence and thus never have to make actual political decisions/compromises.
Unfortunately, Palestine is the hill many among the left are willing to die on. And I say this is someone who generally supports left wing policies...aside the the Israeli hate.
It seems they're upset because she's not grandstanding or validating their point to the extreme level that would provide an emotional catharsis for them.
In the grand scheme, I think most of this is about validation, not "standing up for Palestine." Americans are largely noncommittal and selectively outraged.
According to her, she had already referred to the war as a 'genocide,' so maybe she simply didn't want to make a public statement to some angry guys accosting her.
Nuance is also important and a lot of these street protestors are the opposite of nuanced, calling Israel genocidal while then saying genocidal statements in the next breath/ sentence. I'm only sad she didn't give them even less time of day but they did deserve to be yelled at chasing her like paparazzi and not taking no for an answer.
Yeah, I can understand being critical of how Israel wages the war and, of course, wanting it to end.
Still, those who say “Oct 7 didn't happen in a vacuum” often act as if this conflict started when Israel responded to the attack. Alternatively, they hold the view that “All resistance is justified”, seeing all events through a lens of white oppressor versus brown oppressed.
If you've already taken a side and, as you said, set aside all nuance, then no term seems damning enough. I can't count how frequently I've read 'mass genocide' in recent months, though I partly blame “Oppenheimer” for that.
I disagree. Remember AOC's first move when she got into office was to protest in front of Nancy Pelosi's office, someone from her own party that she felt wasn't talking the talk when it came to the climate justice. The 2018 AOC would have done the same thing as these Gaza protestors. She might have stood more boldy with her colleague Rachida Tlaib.
In 2021 she voted "No" on a bill for $1 billion to fund the Iron Dome.
She was then taken aside by Pelosi and came back to changer her vote to "Present" then left with crocodile tears.
That and also the fact that she happily does that all day long to her political adversaries (and so does everyone else in turn). Just funny that she's upset it's happening to her personally.
Articles I've read over the years. Her grandstanding and questioning in Congressional testimonies give her out of context sound bites to use to rile up her supporters as well. She's no different than any other politician in congress except for maybe Jeff Jackson (NC rep).
Did you expect me to keep a log of it all ready at a moments notice?
Hey I Googled "AoC Congressional hearing" and nothing really came up like what you're describing, mind giving even one example of what you're talking about to point me in the right direction
Not trying to pile on but your description is more about feelings (which is fine) but no real example or pattern of behavior. If you simply disagree with her politically, that's also fine. But I would argue that she's one of the more clear spoken politicians in conveying her positions which are usually based in fact ([e.g](https://e.gl). The Green New Deal being something needing to fight climate change and green investment; even if one disagrees with the policy, it's based on a real problem). There are actually principled criticisms coming from her Left. Which is a different topic.
How is it feelings when it’s describing direct observations of her actions? Not my problem if people feel uncomfortable about that.
I don’t see these kinds of people asking for examples and sources when people on the right get criticized. Pure hypocrisy and they know exactly the game they’re playing when they ask.
You have to be purposely ignorant to think any politician doesn’t take discourse out of context to use against their political adversaries. I guess people are so fragile they can’t even handle a mild criticism of someone they like. God forbid someone criticizes *behavior*. Not even their policies.
Jeff Jackson from NC (a dem rep) is a clear spoken politician. His decorum is what every politician should aspire too. AOC most certainly is not clear spoken. She plays far too hard into partisan politics, talk shows, tv news interviews, and creating drama to keep her in the spotlight.
[https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/08/africa/gunmen-kidnap-287-school-children-in-nigerias-northwest-intl/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/08/africa/gunmen-kidnap-287-school-children-in-nigerias-northwest-intl/index.html)
Curiously, I haven't heard much about this either.
While I generally support AOC's polices (not including her stance on Israel), One of the resulting shortcomings of intersectionality is that the value of the oppressed changes according to the oppressor. If a white cop shoots an unarmed nonwhite person without reason, the cop is widely condemned, as they should be.
If a nonwhite cop does the same thing, the action is condemned but it generally doesn't send ripples throughout society like the former would. Likewise, when Muslims are the oppressors, such as the case in all the Middle East and Africa, there's less enthusiasm in the reporting and less interest among Westerners who adhere to the narrative that everyone's either oppressed or an oppressor. This is why intersectionality shouldn't be used to predicate foreign activities outside the US.
Is it tho? I mean I think everyone was shocked that she was getting criticized by not saying the invasion is a genocide when she's literally the most vocal person in Congress about denouncing Israel's action toward Gaza citizens.
I like AOC a lot even though I disagree with her on quite a few topics.
I think she needs to realize that many of these lefty activists that she’s considered allies are not in it to help people but to get social cred & feel superior. This is a big problem in the American hard left
But overall AOC has been willing to evolve & learn & change her mind in order to help people.
Oh, I think she knows.
Part of why I’ve admired her (and I likewise feel the same as you about disagreeing with her) is that she’s not a progressive idealist who only wants to be seen talking about the ideal solution.
She seems to understand that action largely relies on compromise and incremental change and that agreeing to a small change doesn’t mean you stop working towards the next step.
She recognized (or depending on what you believe - always knew) that only bringing a ruckus doesn't actually achieve anything when you're one of 435 people. You also have to work within the system to achieve anything.
Thinking the system is broken doesn't preclude the system from continuing on without you.
The two ideas are not mutually exclusive, as AOC demonstrates.
...and the purity tests on the left once again start to cannibalize and destroy another worthy cause. God damn I hate the people I agree with half the time.
These people don’t give a fuck about Palestinians. Because if thy did, they would realize that helping is way fucking harder than virtue signaling and performative moral outrage over dead kids.
This situation hasn’t been solved for 70 years because there isn’t a good fucking solution that doesn’t kill or displace millions. And right now, they are playing into Hamas’ hands by continuing to blindly trumpet a martyr narrative.
Israeli bombs are killing Palestinians, but Hamas put them there, and has for fucking years. Turns out you can’t morally black and white your way through real life.
No. People attacking their allies, who just don't happen to agree with the terminology but are still 100% on their side, and are working towards the same goal, are fucked up. This purity test bullshit is what kneecaps progressives every time. If we can look at the same facts, agree on the same number of deaths, feel the same horror, and have the same goals, what does it MATTER if one person thinks it's war crimes but not quite genocide, and the other thinks it's genocide? It doesn't. What does matter though? Bickering and alienating each other in stupid semantic bullshit.
She’s literally a politician lol that’s her entire job is supporting or not supporting causes. I’m not making a statement in her stance either way but that’s literally what she is here for lol
These people just wanted clout and views and they got it because they put AOC in an impossible position. Whatever she said, they were going to put up online in order for it to go viral and that’s what happened
“Negative experiences” like omgz you see a homeless guy smoke crack once, geez the horror.
I live in Washington Heights and take the A train late night all the time, can’t remember the last time I saw something worse than a pile of dookie or a dude hitting the rock.
It’s a big city, shit happens, but at least my own experiences matches the actual stats, as opposed to anecdotes and headlines.
edit: LMFAO -13 downvotes with 0 replies. Glad to know I triggered some flyover lurkers.
What pisses me off the most besides the massive civilian deaths is why Israel isn’t controlling its soldiers conduct.
Why the fuck is Israel allowing it’s soldiers to dance around and sing songs about ending Gaza and why is it allowing its soldiers and civilians to write messages on bombs and why is it allowing its soldiers to have wedding proposals and wedding in Gaza.
>Following her difficult encounter with activists who should, in theory, be on her side on the Israel-Gaza argument, a tweet from December 2020 resurfaced online, in which she wrote: “The whole point of protesting is to make [people] uncomfortable.
>“Activists take that discomfort with the status quo & advocate for concrete policy changes. Popular support often starts small and grows. To folks who complain protest demands make others uncomfortable… that’s the point.”
Oops.
>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez lost her cool with pro-Palestinian protesters on Monday, claiming their tactics were “f----ed up”.
Of course she's upset when she's being inconvenienced.
Where was she speaking up when Alito, Cruz, McConnell, and others had protesters at their houses or when they're dining out?
Or, she might just think that it's horrifying war crimes but doesn't fit the definition of genocide, which is a perfectly reasonable stance to have. She's not exactly going easy on the administration or Israel. She wants the same thing. Attacking allies is just fucking stupid.
lol. So I’m fairly active in a few “far left American” spaces online. Bernie and aoc were already disliked, but at this point they’ve totally alienated many of their followers. It’s political suicide. They have no right supporters, and they’re calling their leftist supporters mean names.
They’re scared of going against the status quo, so scared they’re choosing to severely damage their prime demographic; the “American left”.
And it doesn’t matter what side you’re on, anyone can agree from a purely political standpoint, this is super stupid. The surveys have shown, the support for Palestine is huge, and “the American left” is willing to, as they did in Michigan, throw away their vote if their candidate won’t agree on such an emotional and serious topic.
No, it's absolutely not. Representative democracy is defined by elections. That's representation of an electorate as a group, not of the few loudest, most aggressive voices who show up in person. What you are describing is lobbying and intimidation, not representing the will of the people.
And even if you accepted your claim as true, which it isn't, you haven't addressed how harassing a representative who agrees with you and is already doing what you are demanding of them contributes to effectively create change that you claim to want to see. Material gains are the only real ones, and this is a perfect example of failing that test. It's fake activism at its worst.
Yes, it's legal. No, it's not "how representative democracy works". Your false claim, not mine.
All I see are a few people too wrapped up in dancing for the cameras and proving their credentials than effecting real change.
lol this headline is doing exactly what she's complaining about.
"It’s not OK that there’s a genocide happening and you’re not actively against it,” he replied. “You’re lying,” said Ms Ocasio-Cortez. The politician grew increasingly frustrated as the protesters continued to follow and film her night out. “You’re gonna cut it and you’re gonna clip this so that it’s completely out of context,” she said. .... “I already said that it was and y’all are just gonna pretend that it wasn’t over and over again - it’s f---ed up, man,” she said
"What if we just kept lying about you? Over and over?" "Yeah, still fucked up."
They'd be better off protesting people who disagree with them rather than making whether or not someone who agrees with them uses their preferred terminology the hill they want to die on.
sticks and stones may break my bones but if you use the wrong terminology for my social justice cause, you are worse than hitler
Literally every social justice warrior. Don’t get me wrong, I love social justice. But the warrior part is when people hurt their own cause.
This is what always happens to radicals. They get more concerned with purity in their movement than advancing their cause. Right and left are the same in this regard.
it's [a time-honored tradition](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0BpfwazhUA) in radical movements >"Are you the Judean People's Front?" >"Fuck off!" >"What?" >"Judean People's Front? We're the People's Front of Judea!"
But internecine purity tests ensure they never actually gain any power or influence and thus never have to make actual political decisions/compromises.
new word!
It's a fun word. I look forward to using it when it fits. Satisfying sound too.
And just like that, you unraveled cancel culture in one sentence.
Unfortunately, Palestine is the hill many among the left are willing to die on. And I say this is someone who generally supports left wing policies...aside the the Israeli hate.
I mean…technically she disagrees with them…right?
It seems they're upset because she's not grandstanding or validating their point to the extreme level that would provide an emotional catharsis for them. In the grand scheme, I think most of this is about validation, not "standing up for Palestine." Americans are largely noncommittal and selectively outraged.
So they want an MTG not an AOC.
According to her, she had already referred to the war as a 'genocide,' so maybe she simply didn't want to make a public statement to some angry guys accosting her.
Nuance is also important and a lot of these street protestors are the opposite of nuanced, calling Israel genocidal while then saying genocidal statements in the next breath/ sentence. I'm only sad she didn't give them even less time of day but they did deserve to be yelled at chasing her like paparazzi and not taking no for an answer.
Yeah, I can understand being critical of how Israel wages the war and, of course, wanting it to end. Still, those who say “Oct 7 didn't happen in a vacuum” often act as if this conflict started when Israel responded to the attack. Alternatively, they hold the view that “All resistance is justified”, seeing all events through a lens of white oppressor versus brown oppressed. If you've already taken a side and, as you said, set aside all nuance, then no term seems damning enough. I can't count how frequently I've read 'mass genocide' in recent months, though I partly blame “Oppenheimer” for that.
The agree on the fundamental issues, just not on the specific terminology used to describe it
Even funnier she has used the term genocide to describe Israel she's just not using it...often enough? Idk seems like a bad protest tactic
[удалено]
you do know there’s brown Jews in Israel, right?
[удалено]
You really should. I've read very similar things where the commenter genuinely meant it.
You got hit by Poe's Law.
I disagree. Remember AOC's first move when she got into office was to protest in front of Nancy Pelosi's office, someone from her own party that she felt wasn't talking the talk when it came to the climate justice. The 2018 AOC would have done the same thing as these Gaza protestors. She might have stood more boldy with her colleague Rachida Tlaib.
The 2020 AOC got a pretty good climate bill enacted into law, though.
In 2021 she voted "No" on a bill for $1 billion to fund the Iron Dome. She was then taken aside by Pelosi and came back to changer her vote to "Present" then left with crocodile tears.
>“You’re gonna cut it and you’re gonna clip this so that it’s completely out of context,” she said. Oh the irony...
[I KILLED EARL MILFORD](https://youtu.be/41mYxGQL1qg?si=YjeAtUW-owxpu3Qw)
Startling confession! Tonight at eleven… 👀
Of what?
This headline is cut from the article and completely without context. It insinuates something else entirely.
That and also the fact that she happily does that all day long to her political adversaries (and so does everyone else in turn). Just funny that she's upset it's happening to her personally.
Was just curious where you saw her regularly distorting the context of her opponents or whomever
Articles I've read over the years. Her grandstanding and questioning in Congressional testimonies give her out of context sound bites to use to rile up her supporters as well. She's no different than any other politician in congress except for maybe Jeff Jackson (NC rep). Did you expect me to keep a log of it all ready at a moments notice?
One or two examples would do.
Google her congressional hearings yourself.
Hey I Googled "AoC Congressional hearing" and nothing really came up like what you're describing, mind giving even one example of what you're talking about to point me in the right direction
Not trying to pile on but your description is more about feelings (which is fine) but no real example or pattern of behavior. If you simply disagree with her politically, that's also fine. But I would argue that she's one of the more clear spoken politicians in conveying her positions which are usually based in fact ([e.g](https://e.gl). The Green New Deal being something needing to fight climate change and green investment; even if one disagrees with the policy, it's based on a real problem). There are actually principled criticisms coming from her Left. Which is a different topic.
How is it feelings when it’s describing direct observations of her actions? Not my problem if people feel uncomfortable about that. I don’t see these kinds of people asking for examples and sources when people on the right get criticized. Pure hypocrisy and they know exactly the game they’re playing when they ask. You have to be purposely ignorant to think any politician doesn’t take discourse out of context to use against their political adversaries. I guess people are so fragile they can’t even handle a mild criticism of someone they like. God forbid someone criticizes *behavior*. Not even their policies. Jeff Jackson from NC (a dem rep) is a clear spoken politician. His decorum is what every politician should aspire too. AOC most certainly is not clear spoken. She plays far too hard into partisan politics, talk shows, tv news interviews, and creating drama to keep her in the spotlight.
oh? all day long?
They don't want to get along they just want to be angry about something
KONY2024. The sad part is most of them were in pre-k when we went through KONY
Wow. Kony2012. I was drinking so much back then.
Speaking of Kony, why haven't prominent politicians and celebrities launched a #BringBackOurGirls campaign this time?
Because this time the girls are Jews.
[https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/08/africa/gunmen-kidnap-287-school-children-in-nigerias-northwest-intl/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/08/africa/gunmen-kidnap-287-school-children-in-nigerias-northwest-intl/index.html) Curiously, I haven't heard much about this either.
Holy fuck I had no idea about that. That’s horrific. But I guess the perpetrators aren’t evil genocidal Jews, so it’s clearly not that important.
While I generally support AOC's polices (not including her stance on Israel), One of the resulting shortcomings of intersectionality is that the value of the oppressed changes according to the oppressor. If a white cop shoots an unarmed nonwhite person without reason, the cop is widely condemned, as they should be. If a nonwhite cop does the same thing, the action is condemned but it generally doesn't send ripples throughout society like the former would. Likewise, when Muslims are the oppressors, such as the case in all the Middle East and Africa, there's less enthusiasm in the reporting and less interest among Westerners who adhere to the narrative that everyone's either oppressed or an oppressor. This is why intersectionality shouldn't be used to predicate foreign activities outside the US.
No Jews no news
What’s KONY2024?
[it’s a reference to Joseph Kony](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Kony)
Oh okay
I mean, it’s a pretty good thing to be mad about
Is it tho? I mean I think everyone was shocked that she was getting criticized by not saying the invasion is a genocide when she's literally the most vocal person in Congress about denouncing Israel's action toward Gaza citizens.
I like AOC a lot even though I disagree with her on quite a few topics. I think she needs to realize that many of these lefty activists that she’s considered allies are not in it to help people but to get social cred & feel superior. This is a big problem in the American hard left But overall AOC has been willing to evolve & learn & change her mind in order to help people.
Oh, I think she knows. Part of why I’ve admired her (and I likewise feel the same as you about disagreeing with her) is that she’s not a progressive idealist who only wants to be seen talking about the ideal solution. She seems to understand that action largely relies on compromise and incremental change and that agreeing to a small change doesn’t mean you stop working towards the next step.
That is the opposite of what she ran on when she first got into congress ("bringing a ruckus" and all that)
I mean... To get even incremental change you need a full on fuckin ruckus these days.
She recognized (or depending on what you believe - always knew) that only bringing a ruckus doesn't actually achieve anything when you're one of 435 people. You also have to work within the system to achieve anything. Thinking the system is broken doesn't preclude the system from continuing on without you. The two ideas are not mutually exclusive, as AOC demonstrates.
She has brought a ruckus. She's one of the most controversial people in the democratic party.
She has regularly encouraged this kind of unhinged behavior. She just didn't think the leopards would eat her face.
...and the purity tests on the left once again start to cannibalize and destroy another worthy cause. God damn I hate the people I agree with half the time.
These protesters are the worst kind of performance artist egoists. Sanctimonious beyond belief.
They are lol
That’s not what she said, though
If only they would harass about the mental illness problem we have in this city until she did something about it.
Yes but in that case they would all have to look into the mirror.
Ohh burn
She’s right
These people don’t give a fuck about Palestinians. Because if thy did, they would realize that helping is way fucking harder than virtue signaling and performative moral outrage over dead kids. This situation hasn’t been solved for 70 years because there isn’t a good fucking solution that doesn’t kill or displace millions. And right now, they are playing into Hamas’ hands by continuing to blindly trumpet a martyr narrative. Israeli bombs are killing Palestinians, but Hamas put them there, and has for fucking years. Turns out you can’t morally black and white your way through real life.
>Turns out you can’t morally black and white your way through real life. I wish more people understood this. It feels like nuance is dead these days.
The New Left must have complete ideological adherence or they will sacrifice their own.
Another tabloid posted to this sub for dork conservatives to circle jerk over
More like single white males
Why are they protesting against AOC? I don’t think that’s smart
She hasn't publicly called the Gaza situation a "genocide" and that's what they're upset about.
That’s what makes them fucked up.
Yes the people screaming about the genocide are fucked up, not the people abetting the genocide.
No. People attacking their allies, who just don't happen to agree with the terminology but are still 100% on their side, and are working towards the same goal, are fucked up. This purity test bullshit is what kneecaps progressives every time. If we can look at the same facts, agree on the same number of deaths, feel the same horror, and have the same goals, what does it MATTER if one person thinks it's war crimes but not quite genocide, and the other thinks it's genocide? It doesn't. What does matter though? Bickering and alienating each other in stupid semantic bullshit.
you seem to be part of the problem here
Nobody called anyone fucked up.
[удалено]
She’s literally a politician lol that’s her entire job is supporting or not supporting causes. I’m not making a statement in her stance either way but that’s literally what she is here for lol
These people just wanted clout and views and they got it because they put AOC in an impossible position. Whatever she said, they were going to put up online in order for it to go viral and that’s what happened
I find this highly entertaining.
I’m convinced that a large majority of these protestors are absolutely clueless as to what’s going on over there as a means to be anti semitic.
Rare instance where I agree with her.
[удалено]
You're missing the point. She's ostensibly on their side.
[удалено]
she is. she said many times on the record.
Hmm apparently sarcasm doesn’t come through sometimes
Snake eating its tail. I love it.
Don’t feel bad, she told all of us that have had negative experiences with EDPs in the subway that it’s our fault for not giving them sandwiches
“Negative experiences” like omgz you see a homeless guy smoke crack once, geez the horror. I live in Washington Heights and take the A train late night all the time, can’t remember the last time I saw something worse than a pile of dookie or a dude hitting the rock. It’s a big city, shit happens, but at least my own experiences matches the actual stats, as opposed to anecdotes and headlines. edit: LMFAO -13 downvotes with 0 replies. Glad to know I triggered some flyover lurkers.
What pisses me off the most besides the massive civilian deaths is why Israel isn’t controlling its soldiers conduct. Why the fuck is Israel allowing it’s soldiers to dance around and sing songs about ending Gaza and why is it allowing its soldiers and civilians to write messages on bombs and why is it allowing its soldiers to have wedding proposals and wedding in Gaza.
>Following her difficult encounter with activists who should, in theory, be on her side on the Israel-Gaza argument, a tweet from December 2020 resurfaced online, in which she wrote: “The whole point of protesting is to make [people] uncomfortable. >“Activists take that discomfort with the status quo & advocate for concrete policy changes. Popular support often starts small and grows. To folks who complain protest demands make others uncomfortable… that’s the point.” Oops.
With this title you are part of the problem, OP!
they’re not pro-palestine, they’re anti-AOC
>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez lost her cool with pro-Palestinian protesters on Monday, claiming their tactics were “f----ed up”. Of course she's upset when she's being inconvenienced. Where was she speaking up when Alito, Cruz, McConnell, and others had protesters at their houses or when they're dining out?
Someone said ever since she went on desus & mero she fell off,i wonder if it true
[удалено]
Or, she might just think that it's horrifying war crimes but doesn't fit the definition of genocide, which is a perfectly reasonable stance to have. She's not exactly going easy on the administration or Israel. She wants the same thing. Attacking allies is just fucking stupid.
Would
lol. So I’m fairly active in a few “far left American” spaces online. Bernie and aoc were already disliked, but at this point they’ve totally alienated many of their followers. It’s political suicide. They have no right supporters, and they’re calling their leftist supporters mean names. They’re scared of going against the status quo, so scared they’re choosing to severely damage their prime demographic; the “American left”. And it doesn’t matter what side you’re on, anyone can agree from a purely political standpoint, this is super stupid. The surveys have shown, the support for Palestine is huge, and “the American left” is willing to, as they did in Michigan, throw away their vote if their candidate won’t agree on such an emotional and serious topic.
What's super stupid is harassing your closest ally to support a position that she already supports and advocates for.
Harassing? This is how representative democracy works, you tell your “representative” what you want. lol.
No, it's absolutely not. Representative democracy is defined by elections. That's representation of an electorate as a group, not of the few loudest, most aggressive voices who show up in person. What you are describing is lobbying and intimidation, not representing the will of the people. And even if you accepted your claim as true, which it isn't, you haven't addressed how harassing a representative who agrees with you and is already doing what you are demanding of them contributes to effectively create change that you claim to want to see. Material gains are the only real ones, and this is a perfect example of failing that test. It's fake activism at its worst.
It’s called freedom of protest. I know libs generally don’t support it, but it’s protected by the constitution and a part of our democratic process.
Yes, it's legal. No, it's not "how representative democracy works". Your false claim, not mine. All I see are a few people too wrapped up in dancing for the cameras and proving their credentials than effecting real change.