Social psychology suggests ‘March for Our Lives’ is unlikely to change anything. Here

[stjames1_53]

Social psychology suggests ‘March for Our Lives’ is unlikely to change anything. Here’s why.
— Aaron Pomerantz


This article was originally published on FEE.org on March 28, 2018.

Like many recent political movements, March for Our Lives was marked with grandstanding, emotional appeals and the moral outrage that have come to define modern political protests. The mainstream media promises, however, that “this time, it’s different,” and this march for gun control (let’s be honest about its intentions) will change America and eventually end the gun debate.
Social psychology, on the other hand, tells us that movements like March for Our Lives are unlikely to change anything. This is because, despite their bold rhetoric, these movements operate entirely on what is called a high construal level, or being defined by features which all but guarantee that no matter how much outrage there may be, no concrete, workable solution will emerge.

In here is the meat, and it's damned good reading... Construal

Engaging gun control advocates on the lower construal level will not be a cure-all, especially in the face of such powerful, naive idealism and the high degree of polarization surrounding this topic. No matter what we do, the March for Our Lives is unlikely to end gun violence, but will instead become more polarized, insular and, ultimately, more of an echo-chamber. However, by operating on a low construal level, gun rights activists can create an organized plan of action, understand the dangers that their pattern of thinking poses for decision making and do their best to ameliorate these dangers before even more ineffective, emotionally driven legislation becomes a disastrous reality.

— Aaron Pomerantz

https://personalliberty.com/social-p...nything-heres/

It's something some are aware of, but other's might like the read as well.

[DGUtley]

I think that much like the original tea party ideals were co-opted by the wacky right, the wacky left will take over. We're already beginning to see it. Soros and the gang are stepping in and they'll expand it and it'll kill it. You'll see the left over-reach and the public will turn on them. Americans (not the pretty ones in the coffee houses in the liberal enclaves of this country -- but the ones with the dirty hands in flyover country) are already suspicious of any attempts to regulate firearm ownership by those that tell us they are smarter than us -- even though they may (in principle) think that maybe we should think about doing something. When they overreach, we get a strong backlash. It'll happen. Look at the response to Clinton's ban on assault weapons. Look at the response to Obamacare. The left (and the right) can't help themselves -- they overreach.

[Peter1469]

Extremism only is successful if you have the power and the balls to take over.

The left in the US have neither.

[Chris]

I think that much like the original tea party ideals were co-opted by the wacky right, the wacky left will take over. We're already beginning to see it. Soros and the gang are stepping in and they'll expand it and it'll kill it. You'll see the left over-reach and the public will turn on them. Americans (not the pretty ones in the coffee houses in the liberal enclaves of this country -- but the ones with the dirty hands in flyover country) are already suspicious of any attempts to regulate firearm ownership by those that tell us they are smarter than us -- even though they may (in principle) think that maybe we should think about doing something. When they overreach, we get a strong backlash. It'll happen. Look at the response to Clinton's ban on assault weapons. Look at the response to Obamacare. The left (and the right) can't help themselves -- they overreach.

Only approximately 10% of the marchers in March for our Lives in DC were teenagers.