Question #1: For your blog, in addition to reading the two of these, review at least two videos from the ACT-UP Oral History Project. Then write about the question of direct action. Can it be justified? Under what circumstances? What tactics do you feel are legitimate? Are these rules different for different causes? ACT-UP was operating in an environment where the people they were advocating for were literally dying around them. Does that change your impression of the tactics?
I think the ACT-UP Oral History Project worked because of the way it confronted the issue of AIDS head on. It discussed how they worked to help bring about change by uniting with people who felt change needed to happen. This people each told their story about how they work for that change in addition to their story they shared their face. Each person who told their story was essentially different for the other either by race, sex, or sexual orientation. The diversity of the story tellers helped show that everyone should care just like they have. In other words, AIDS affects everyone infected or non-infected.
Also playing on the fact that it gets very personal that they know people have died or are dying of the disease their stories hit harder. These stories and views become more personal as well as emotional. They all show how their stories play a huge part in remembering how AIDS was taken before and the difference that it is today. AIDS is now a disease that the world is fighting against unlike before when AIDS was kept in hidding so the public wouldn’t know; now the world has decided to face it for what it really is a deadly disease that kills many.