{"items": [{"author": "mr-hire", "source_link": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/AnkJbcC54pr3RLeMH#d3nCrieMHQAKwrzS3", "anchor": "lw-d3nCrieMHQAKwrzS3", "service": "lw", "text": "The secret of this post is that it's not about dance at all.\n", "timestamp": 1575122197}, {"author": "Robert", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100124527208312?comment_id=10100124545786082", "anchor": "fb-10100124545786082", "service": "fb", "text": "That third strategy sounds like (according to what I've heard) how BIDA came to be.", "timestamp": "1575131220"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100124527208312?comment_id=10100124545786082&reply_comment_id=10100124546170312", "anchor": "fb-10100124545786082_10100124546170312", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Yup!", "timestamp": "1575131706"}, {"author": "Wang", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100124527208312?comment_id=10100124555556502", "anchor": "fb-10100124555556502", "service": "fb", "text": "\" While trusting you to arrive early and unlock the building doesn't seem like it should translate into trusting your view on questions like whether the dance should book more newer callers, it does seem to work that way.\"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiosyncrasy_credit ?
Conforming to existing practices in one area builds a form of social credit that you get to spend elsewhere.
Also, I suspect any kind of work \"behind the scenes\" will screen out the most out-of-touch ideas. A lot of people are just deeply, deeply wrong about the organization's constraints, values, and options, in a way that quickly improves once they work a few shifts.", "timestamp": "1575136999"}, {"author": "Stuart Anderson", "source_link": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/AnkJbcC54pr3RLeMH#4kP3Q2j3kZcMGRyqd", "anchor": "lw-4kP3Q2j3kZcMGRyqd", "service": "lw", "text": "Entryism is ethically bankrupt.
If you wouldn't want entryism done to the groups you care about then don't do it to the groups of others. ", "timestamp": 1575138167}, {"author": "Zack_M_Davis", "source_link": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/AnkJbcC54pr3RLeMH#i84BotxNuv5S2eR3Y", "anchor": "lw-i84BotxNuv5S2eR3Y", "service": "lw", "text": "→ How do you distinguish between entryism and other forms of in-group politicking? I thought \"entryism\" is when actors who don't already have a stake in a group, seek to join the group and gain power in it, in order to \"turn\" it for their agenda (which is unrelated to the purpose of the group). But I read the OP as talking about existing members of the group pursuing an agenda that's genuinely relevant to the purpose of the group.\n
Unsurprisingly, there may be a Sorites problem here\u2014if you were already a casual member of the dancing club, and suddenly decide to become more involved because of your interest in Society-wide bathroom convention reform, that's a lot like entryism even if it's not the \"pure\" case.\n", "timestamp": 1575139713}, {"author": "mr-hire", "source_link": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/AnkJbcC54pr3RLeMH#Rcaadpsjs9pqjEamD", "anchor": "lw-Rcaadpsjs9pqjEamD", "service": "lw", "text": "→ → Yeah, it feels hard to distinguish \"bringing in more interested members\" from \"bringing in more interested members that agree with you.\"\n", "timestamp": 1575159703}, {"author": "Stuart Anderson", "source_link": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/AnkJbcC54pr3RLeMH#jd2vY7s5wTtbZExNr", "anchor": "lw-jd2vY7s5wTtbZExNr", "service": "lw", "text": "→ → As you point out, whether something is entryism or politicking isn't particularly clear. I look at what OP has written - that they had a popular vote go against them, that they refuse to accept that, that they want to increase their level of authority by bad faith action, that they're coordinating an agenda with allied individuals, etc. - as indicators that OP is new to the group. This is conduct that is essentially antisocial within a group, and the antisocial get weeded out over time.
As to OP's agenda being relevant to the group, the no vote and OP's reaction to it suggests otherwise. I also seriously doubt that OP just one day decided to be an identity politics activist out of the blue. This ideology is basically a non-theistic religion and is pushed with all the zeal you'd expect from any bible thumper. That being said, people have a right to their beliefs, and if those around OP choose to associate with OP whilst OP acts on those beliefs then there (probably) isn't a problem here. Quibbling about bathrooms and wording at a dance isn't really that big of a deal in the scheme of things.
All that being said, I don't know OP, I don't know the situation, and it's none of my business.", "timestamp": 1575286954}, {"author": "jkaufman", "source_link": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/AnkJbcC54pr3RLeMH#X6BRn9DwQtyXgrE7h", "anchor": "lw-X6BRn9DwQtyXgrE7h", "service": "lw", "text": "→ → → \n
they had a popular vote go against them\n\n
I wrote \"If you had a vote you'd probably be in the minority\". To take this specific example, we publicly planned a vote, saw that this was overwhelmingly preferred, and decided to switch. But if we had had the vote five years earlier I think we probably would have had different results.\n
Everyone I can think of who is pushing for the examples I gave in the post was a dancer before they started having that belief. Contra dance is far too niche for it to be worth anyone's while to try to come in from outside as a non-dancer and change it to be more the way they want.\n", "timestamp": 1575288055}, {"author": "Stuart Anderson", "source_link": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/AnkJbcC54pr3RLeMH#ymZ6CuiA235DCxhNW", "anchor": "lw-ymZ6CuiA235DCxhNW", "service": "lw", "text": "→ → → → If this is a post about strategy then strategy can be discussed. It's not a vanity post from my perspective, but even if it is I'm not married to authorial intent.
As for any group being too small to infiltrate for gain, that hasn't been my experience. It only takes 3 members for entryism to occur, as only one needs to defect from the established order. You see this in cases of adultery within a social group all the time. Lots of people lose their partner and their 'best friend' at the same time.", "timestamp": 1575783816}, {"author": "Robin", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100124527208312?comment_id=10100124679478162", "anchor": "fb-10100124679478162", "service": "fb", "text": "Good ideas here. I can relate. I've become active within the League of Women Voters of MA, and their decision-making model for League positions (platform that can be advocated for) is consensus-based. I put forward a recommendation to study Family Voting at their state convention last June, which got good reception considering that I hadn't done much outreach in advance, but not enough. So, now I'm building sweat equity and working on a presentation that I could make to local Leagues throughout the state. I'm also helping to get the word out to younger people about the League. (membership is free for full-time students, and organization voting eligibility is for those over age 16). I'm glad that some folks already see the connection between women's suffrage and children's. I'm also building relationships with experts and continuing to develop my own understanding about the problems and possibilities of children's disfranchisement. I sure hope to not have to begin again with a new organization, but time will tell.", "timestamp": "1575216872"}, {"author": "Ben", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100124527208312?comment_id=10100124731199512", "anchor": "fb-10100124731199512", "service": "fb", "text": "Seems like you are missing the important case of \"you think X would be good, but actually X is bad, and it would be better if you failed in your attempt to push X'. It is very important that bad ideas can be rejected, rather than just making it easier to change things in arbitrary directions.
You sort of mention this, but don't seem to acknowledge that this contrasts with the rest of your argument, here:
\" I think some of this is that doing the work to make something happen builds ownership, which gets people to make thoughtful decisions that are better for the long-term health of the community.\"
The mechanism of action is supposedly that involvement makes you more aware of what would be good to do; it is improving the quality of the ideas you put forward, not making you more effective at promoting them. You might join hoping to promote X, but then as you become more experienced you should realise that X is in fact bad.
Also, it seems a little disingenuous (entryist) to start volunteering out of a motivation to foist change that the organisation didn't want, rather than out of a genuine desire to help. (I realise that from your perspective you are trying to help, but from the point of view of the existing organisation you are acting adversarially).
When we promote change using logical arguments, we benefit from the asymmetric advantage that truth has in rational debate. When we promote change using social manipulation, we lose this advantage, so it seems much more likely that change will be a random-walk through policy space, favouring the socially powerful and rhetorically skilled.", "timestamp": "1575240617"}]}