Use social media. But use it in the right way — don’t flame people who disagree, persuade or ignore them. Instead, circulate information, pressure people into acting and joining, coordinate actions. Make social media a platform for real-time mass communication about doing things, not just feeling things.
What To Do Now
Squarely Rooted
12827

Regarding this and also your paragraph on “policing the dialogue”:

Perhaps it’s a case of an Oxford-or-not comma situation, but are you saying “don’t disagree, but do persuade, do ignore”, or are you arguing against trying to persuade those who disagree?

More generally, it often sounds like you’re saying that we, the public, should fight and resist instead of trying to include. Is this your intent? I can see both sides in many cases: inclusion has a better chance of making more people not-unhappy in the short run, whereas telling them “no” while mobilizing and then waiting for their demographic to shrink proportionally will leave a large mob of angry white people for the foreseeable future, but may end up in a better long-term situation. What do you think? When do we (try to) include, and when do we resist?

A single golf clap? Or a long standing ovation?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.