We can’t divide words and deeds

The internet has been full of people disagreeing with each other for as long as I’ve been aware of its existence. But one particular category of comment has been annoying me more than usual lately, and perhaps this is the best place to explain why. It’s this:

“You talk all you like, but I prefer action.”
"Why don't you ditch the rhetoric and actually do something?"
"Feel free to keep whining, but I'd rather get on with things."

Etc, etc. The point being made by the commenter is essentially this: “You’re wasting your time talking to people on the internet, while I am going out and actually doing things. Therefore I am better, and also I win the argument.” (Naturally, the commenter rarely sees the irony of using the internet to tell other people that they spend too much time on the internet.)

But my problem with the action-not-words argument isn’t the hypocrisy behind it. My problem is the false division of words and deeds. Why? Because in so many important areas of life, it is impossible to draw a clear line between “talking” and “action”. I’m talking about all sorts of areas: politics, feminism, law, education, advocacy, counselling, urban planning... When does talking become action, and vice-versa?

I was recently selected by Witney Green Party to stand as a district council candidate for Witney East, where I live. “Standing” is a nice physical-sounding verb, so is that action-y enough for People On The Internet? (Of course, Americans call it “running”, which sounds even more delightfully action-ish.)

I was selected at a meeting of the local party (lots of talking). For my candidature to be legally valid, I had to collect signatures from ten local residents, so I had to knock on a few doors and ask people to endorse me. (I guess that’s just more talking, really.) I’ve also written copy for a leaflet explaining why I want to be on the district council (but writing is just words, so I suppose it’s still not action) and the local party has organised the leaflet design and printing. (But pretty pictures and phone calls aren’t action, are they?) During the lead-up to the election I'll be knocking on doors, handing out my leaflets and asking people to vote for me.

I think almost everything I’m doing could be dismissed as “not real action” by a lot of internet commenters, but I know what it feels like to me. Making the decision to stand, talking to local people, helping to create a leaflet, even doing the tedious paperwork: it all feels like positive action.

The same goes for a lot of worthwhile unpaid work. The recent Quality in Publishing meeting was organised by the NUJ branch secretary with phone calls and emails. The meeting itself was essentially three experts talking, followed by other people talking. Does that mean that the job of organising and chairing it doesn’t count as action? And, if so, does that make it worthless?

Western society is set up so that many of the things we define as achievements involve at least some not-very-physical action, whether that’s defending a client in court, dealing with a stroppy customer, canvassing on election day or giving a friend a shoulder to cry on. Yes, there’s always the option of non-violent direct action (which incurs its own special category of Internet Wrath), but even that involves organisation, publicity, negotiation and lots of other word-y stuff.

It’s breathtakingly naïve to think you can split actions into “doing” and “talking”, and it’s idiotic to take that assumption further and declare that the “doing” is the only valid bit.

What I'm trying to say is: dismissing someone's point of view on the grounds that it's "just rhetoric" is itself a rather tired rhetorical device. Don't fall for it, please. Don’t try to justify yourself by listing your own actions, because that kind of internet commenter isn’t really interested. It doesn’t matter if you go on protest marches, work as a GP, volunteer in a homeless shelter or offer counselling to crime victims; they will find a way of dismissing it. If you tell them you pulled the Berlin Wall down with your bare hands, they'll just ask why you wasted time on symbolic posturing when you could have been building something useful instead.

So next time an internet commenter tries to undermine your carefully-written blog post on the grounds that it isn’t action, you might want to put some questions to them.

1. How are you defining "action"? (“Actually doing stuff” is not a answer. “Getting out and doing stuff” is also not an answer.)
2. Why do you assume that blogging and “action” are mutually exclusive?
3. What action are you personally taking?

Just ask those three questions. And, if you like, point them to this post.