Q&A on outreaching the fluffy/spiky debate to the fluffys

You’re bringing in the idea of “fluffy” and “spiky”. And you think both have merit. Have been working with bridging this often hostile divide for more than 30 years in hundreds of campaigns on the ground and online. The best outcome you can hope for is “diversity of tactics/strategy” You’re also drawing attention to the…

As with most metaphors (and real life) the definition is not exact

* Fluffy – asking/pressuring for change though the system * Spiky – fucking shit up to enact change and directly and sometime ethically using “violence” to property – not to people. * Beyond spiky the is WAR where direct harm to people happens – that’s outside the metaphor. It’s interesting to take a few moments…