Some recent @Philanthropy pieces dig into debates about disruptive protest. They mirror a dynamic I see all the time in animal advocacy. Grassroots activists often over-index on certain tactics, often being drawn to the aesthetics of protest. At the same time, some funders and big orgs are overly fearful of direct conflict or disruption. But protest is just a tool. So is lobbying, litigation, storytelling, dialogue, and everything else. None are inherently good or bad. Each has strengths and tradeoffs. The goal isn’t to speak truth to power or find consensus for its own sake. The goal is to win. That means being strategic, flexible, and open to a wide range of tactics. An apparatus needs to exist to capture grassroots energy and convert it into policy change, and pressure is almost always required to push change over the finish line. Funders and activists alike should stay focused on outcomes. I’m glad to have @navigationfund supporting a very wide range of organizations and tactics!