Theories of behaviour, choice, and action have long presented an “act” as a kind of bottleneck of meaning‐making, where the action is either a cocktail of partial preferences or the survival of one over the rest. I argue that action is often something very (if subtly) different and propose “ambivalent action” as a category of moral action defined by the actor's conflicting intentions, in which the conflict is reified (not resolved) by the act. Situated in past and contemporary context, the term is an interdisciplinary bridge, with links from classical (if vague) theoretic treatments of “ambivalence” to new sociological analogies in the realm of quantum physics. I explore this duality through the case study of #BlackoutTuesday, a social media movement connected with global protests against police brutality and racism. The black square that characterized the movement is best understood as ambivalent action, as an act of two‐fold narrative‐making: “both” silence and speech. The “success” of an ambivalent action in remaining in two narratives at once is determined by the audience.