Some thoughts on Lloyd, Russia and aggressive activism:
I think Lloyd forgets it was only the organisation that was under ban in Russia. Believing as a Witness is not under ban... so refusing blood won't get you in trouble per sa. for the naysayers I always think Imagine if Watchtower had been stopped before your family had joined...how good would that have been?! There are arguments against the methods Putin uses, but that doesn't necessarily make the end result bad.
I think Lloyds conflating Russia with his grudge against aggressive activism in that video was more born from not being centre stage.
Anyway how does he define so called aggressive activism? Was the ANC aggressive? Was ML King? Gandhi?! Yes! By Lloyds measure they were! Even a "sit in" would count as aggressive.
I don't believe all activism must be physical. That documentaries or written articles are not effective or don't contribute.The pen really can be mightier than the sword. I would certainly say Barb Anderson's campaigning website and Marc O'Donnell's work on CSA for sure count as effective activism.
What about Lloyds"Passive" activism? Does it exist? Perhaps signing an online petition would count, for example. Or as Kim mentioned making you tube videos.
But is it really "activism"? Or is it mainly information with some opinion? And If it is activism is it effective?
Just because I don't see it as activism doesn't mean i discount all Lloyds work as unimportant. The video he made about the Dutch reclaimed voices, for example, was excellent because it got the information out. But was it activism? Or was it about activism?