I have come up with the definition of activism, as I was writing to a friend via e-mail. It puts individual political views in perspective with the attitude with which the activist approaches political issues to spin off political views.
“The activist is forced to take issue with the current system and in order to vindicate his rage/ambition/engagement he needs to propose an alternative framework in which the conditions of life (material and non-material) are reflected upon. Such new framework is subject to scrutiny and criticism by others, which can be encouraged, but the activist expects, ultimately, an amended framework that includes certain conditions and meets certain expectations, or else no engagement seems to be needed, and blind rage and undirected excitement continue against the current system. The human mind can not and will not dwell in the rejection of all frameworks without the suggestion of a new framework. It needs organization and support from the popular base to get enacted. The acknowledgement of the weaknesses of each framework might lead to an unbounding skepticism, which leads to inaction and the implied acceptance of the continuation of the framework of the status quo. The activist does not denounce theory. In fact, he needs a theoretical framework to suggest reasonable action working toward favoring the goals of such framework. But he does not intend to dwell too much in the discussion of the radical changing of the proposed framework, because this skepticism delegitimizes action, for no action of human beings- under such view- can be made right. The activist would then become a passivist. An activist believes in the good nature of human beings or in the absence of good human actions (genocide, war, strife etc.) at least recognizes the motivation of a good nature in general. For if man thinks he can’t do good, he wants no system he has created to remain standing, which will not change the circumstances of the present. The passivist is forced to reject all frameworks and finds no positive end in human activity. There is no utopia, no hope, no activism, and perhaps despair. The vast majority of the people are neither in the activist nor passivist mold. (Most powerholders, by the way, can be lined up with the activists to the extent that the popular or dictatorial legitimacy that confirm their power strengthens the impression that man can achieve something and thereby something good.) Most people are ignorant, meaning unreflective of the debate which ever topics (political and non-political) people would be affected by.”