Plural Activism: An Introduction
My goal for this essay is simple: that I will make no assumptions.
I want every argument I make, every statement of significance, to be backed by facts. When possible, facts in the form of scientific evidence and publications, and when there is an absence of these, in the form of an irrefutable anecdotal consensus.
The reason for this is because social justice movements fall the moment that the warrant for their cause, the evidence backing their call to action, waivers. The fight to preserve creationism in public schools was lost for this reason. Likewise, “separate but equal” legislation fell when racial equality activism was accompanied by a government investigation that found how unequal segregated schools were.
My point is that activism and social movements must have an impeccable warrant if they are to be successful. We need strong arguments, strong leaders, and a strong community in order to have a strong cause and, eventually, a strong movement.
The cause I speak of is for the destigmatization of plurality. In this essay, I will overview how plurality is perceived by both the public and academic communities, why these views are misguided, and what we can do to change them.
To clarify, the purpose of this essay is not to project tulpamancers as being the victims of relentless societal oppression. Far too little of the population knows about, let alone actively oppresses, plurality for there to be such a thing. However, with what interactions that plural systems and the concept of multiplicity do have with outsiders, it is apparent that plurality and behaviors associated with it are, almost universally, seen as problems. In fact, even much of the medical, scientific, and academic community has a stigma against plurality.
Why does this stigma exist?
Discussion ¬