No, I speak to the point and that is the same as yours, Ake. Direct confrontation is outdated and useless. New methods are necessary and must be found.

But I also have expanded upon the theme.

Those who would cause change MUST MUST MUST stay focused upon the end and not be diverted with other (perhaps equally valid) issues. And it is not necessary to win every battle -- pick the big ones and win them, you can then go back and mop up the little ones.

Storming the streets makes good video, but bad publicity.

Look at the recent election: the rule of "divide and conquer" was used extensively against Kerry (Nader was marginal and marginalized from the start). "Divide and conquer" was used against Dean. Whenever a politician can make a statement which distracts his opponent from his message, the politician wins.

Example: "We should feed the hungry!" "Who's going to pay for that?" A valid question, but not the point of the first statement. In response, you get bogged down in details that have little to do with your assertion that we should feed the hungry.