Comments on: Protesting 101

By: The Mahablog » Metta Sutta

The Mahablog » Metta Sutta — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:26:23 +0000

[...] I’m accused sometimes of being opposed to protesting and direct action, most recently by this guy, because I’ve criticized the way some protesters conduct themselves. I’m not against protesting; I’m against protests that are as serious as sideshow carnivals. I’ve had it with people dressing up in silly, often vulgar, costumes to call attention to themselves. I’m tired of participating in antiwar protest in which large numbers of people are pushing opinions, many of which I do not share, on issues other than the war. I’m weary of aging adolescents who still think “Buck Fush” is clever. See Protesting 101, and also this vintage post from the late, great Steve Gilliard, who described standard leftie protest behavior as “the spoiled child, tone deaf approach to politics.” [...]

By: The Mahablog » The Summer of Love

The Mahablog » The Summer of Love — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 21:30:00 +0000

[...] I have no idea whether Sheehan will be able to channel and focus the groundswell of anger in this country for impeachment, or whether this will be yet another ineffective replay of 1960s demonstration tactics. A majority of the public supports impeachment of Cheney (at least), and so the energy is there, it’s just a matter of whether Sheehan (and others) can acquire and demonstrate the skill to focus it. If you’ll forgive the very crude analogy, it’s a bit like watching neanderthals about to figure out how to use fire, for the first time, wondering if this will be the time that they get it, if they ever do. [...]

By: Chauncey

Chauncey — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:01:59 +0000

I hope, as people rallying for a cause, we all agree on what we are trying to do. We are trying to gain passion for our shared conviction. The most effective way to do this is to inspire people. By inspiring others, we give them motivation to change. As we all know, changing one’s behavior is extremely difficult. I have had a hard enough time adopting an exercise routine given to me by my physical therapist. What has moved me enough to cause me to dedicate my actions towards peace? I was inspired. I was inspired by leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, and Malcolm X. I was even more inspired by the non so called leaders around me. The compassion from my family and friends inspired me to try and extend that to the rest of the world.

“FUCK BUSH!” sends a clear message suggesting disfavor, disgust, impatience, and ultimately Hate. If what you are wanting is to simply proclaim where you stand, I presume this as effective. However, if your disgust, impatience, and hate has matured into love, wisdom, and understanding— your heart is filled to its brim with the motivation to inspire others of your realization. You can do that by educating people from an approachable viewpoint. I completely understand and agree with your need to express yourself. Peace, Chauncey in WA (actingresidue@msn.com)

By: The Mahablog » Where Is Everyone?

The Mahablog » Where Is Everyone? — Sun, 28 Jan 2007 17:37:12 +0000

[...] I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again — good public protests are good public relations. Protest movements of the past were effective when they called attention to an issue and gained public sympathy for it. And the secret to doing this is what I call the “bigger asshole” rule — protests work when they make the protestees look like bigger assholes than the protesters. Martin Luther King’s marches made white racists look like assholes. Gandhi made the whole bleeping British Empire look like assholes. [...]

By: The Mahablog » Augment the Objections

The Mahablog » Augment the Objections — Tue, 16 Jan 2007 16:09:31 +0000

[...] Yesterday was Martin Luther King day. Whenever I write these cautionary notes about public protests, someone brings up the big civil rights marches led by Martin Luther King in the 1960s. These protests had a spectacular effect on public opinion and helped bring about much positive change. But those marches were disciplined. As I wrote here, the marchers wore suits and dresses (I learned recently that MLK directed the marchers to dress this way; it didn’t just happen). They marched in a solemn and orderly manner. They waved many American flags. Their chants and signs didn’t contain language you couldn’t repeat to your grandmother. [...]

By: The Mahablog » Naughty Words and Pictures

The Mahablog » Naughty Words and Pictures — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 19:33:40 +0000

[...] First, verbal abuse is abuse, and abuse is not communication. The use of hostile and abusive language does not strengthen whatever point a writer or speaker is trying to make. Indeed, it is more likely to be counterproductive to that point, for several reasons. Yes, it can feel good to heap abuse on someone who has angered us. Likewise, we might enjoy reading a verbal punching of someone we don’t like. But readers who don’t already share that dislike will be turned off by the aggressive rhetoric, and will stop reading. [...]

By: maha

maha — Fri, 05 May 2006 11:47:07 +0000

Don’t help us unless you live here for awhile and become acquainted with the right-wing whackjobs who run the place. There’s a well-entrenched distrust of all things foreign here. The word “socialist” is practically forbidden in political discourse because it sends a big chunk of the electorate running and screaming for the trenches. A pack of European socialists coming here to help us protest would inflame the right-wingers and persuade the moderates that we’re anti-American subversives. Even mainstream news media here paints moderately liberal democrats as flaming extremist communist loonies, and so the first hurdle we have to overcome is persuading people that we are not crazy, not extremists, and not unpatriotic before they will even consider what we have to say. Any displays of anger or vandalism set us back, and foreigners in our midst would just about kill the cause altogether.

It’s nuts, but that’s how it is here in the “land of the free.”

By: Elizabeth

Elizabeth — Fri, 05 May 2006 11:14:22 +0000

I am actually beginning to form the opinion that European socialists should stop going to solidarity brigades in Guatemala/ Mexico/ Palestine/ Lebanon, those kind of places. We should concentrate our effort on the U.S. It all comes down to you guys, and it looks like you definitely could use some help.

Or you could go with the suit thing.

Good luck.

By: maha

maha — Fri, 05 May 2006 01:02:18 +0000

As long as you people keep insisting on interfering with the rest of us, calling the few countries that refuse you to station your soldiers on their soil “axis of evil” and warring against them.

I have dedicated a large part of my time and energy for the past six years opposing the Bush Administration, the war in Iraq, and any future military misadventures the Bushies might get us into in the future. These days I am doing this full time. As a small part of this effort I have taken part in several mass demonstrations in New York City and Washington. I am not opposed to speaking out.

But you don’t live here. You don’t understand my country. The kind of demonstrating that might work in France backfires here. I’ve seen this time and time again. The antiwar movement against Vietnam — in which I took part — actually backfired and prolonged the war. I have seen this with my own eyes. And much of the demonstrating that is done here now is ineffectual because of the way it is done, which is the point of my post.

Trying to devaluate peoples opinion with the frase “If you don’t think this is a democratic country, don’t live here.”,

That’s not what I said. You don’t live in the UNITED STATES, which is not the only democracy in the world. I was responding to the palpable hate you feel for the U.S. when I said if you don’t like it here, leave. I’m not going to try to talk you out of what you feel. But you don’t understand this country at all. I know you think you do, but you don’t. That’s OK. As I said, you don’t have to live here.

But don’t presume to dictate to us how we should work against the war, because if we did things your way, we would not only fail, we would ensure that the right-wing extremists running Washington right now will become even more powerful. I doubt that’s what you want.

By: Elizabeth

Elizabeth — Fri, 05 May 2006 00:04:20 +0000

Maha: I do not live there. And I’m glad of it. That’s not the point, however. As long as you people keep insisting on interfering with the rest of us, calling the few countries that refuse you to station your soldiers on their soil “axis of evil” and warring against them. Staging coops in countries that whishes to democratically choose their own economic policy, occuping nations on bogus allegations, upholding trade-embargoes on contries that don’t submit to your bullying and arrogance, well, you can’t even try to insist that we should not have our opinion about your policies.

Who started the civil war is definitely besides the question. It’s about resluts, dear. And you’re not trying to argue that the war did not imply violence. (of course the North could have tried the suit/politeness-stratagem. It would probarbly have worked wonders.).

I’m not advocating violence (and, seriously, thank you for not implying it). I generally do not think it’s a good idea, and I generally do not think that it is normatively justifiable. Whether it actually, descriptively, *works* is another question entierly. But the question of resorting to violence and the question of “Let’s all wear suits and act like upper middle class” are two quite different questions. That the U.S. population considers the liberals as elite is a *big* problem for you guys already. I don’t think rallying in suits is going to solve it.

Trying to devaluate peoples opinion with the frase “If you don’t think this is a democratic country, don’t live here.”, seems to me a perverse strategy of exlusion and unwillingness to actually have a democratic, open debate. But since you’re probarbly wearing a suit while writing it, it *must* be both serious and legitimate.