Letters to the Editor

• Che

  [Read the article: Lewis Libby owes his freedom to our corrupt political elite]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  So don't tell me that massive street protest is irrelevant or worthless or ineffective. You don't know what you're talking about.

  Were it not for generations of massive street protests, women in this country would not have the vote, there would be no protections for labor, there would still be widespread legal racial segregation, much of the progressive reform of the 20th century wouldn't have happened, we would likely still have a draft, and on and on.

  I appear to have touched a nerve with you. Allow me to illustrate that I do, in fact, know what I'm talking about.

  In every period of societal upheaval that resulted in real societal/political/legal change, what lay beneath protest movements was a real and credible threat of economic or political retaliation against powers that be. The actual act of shouting in the streets, unless seen as a potential physical threat to government or financial institutions, was more a symptom of the substantive threat underlying the movement.

  Take the civil rights movement, for example. Anyone knowledgable of civil rights history will tell you that the most significant gains were made when people began boycotting businesses and municipal services, to demonstrate their economic importance. In other countries, angry mobs often demonstrated a physical threat to the government. In those countries, also, the perceptions of other, more powerful governments and their people made a far larger impact on the government targeted by the protests, and often other animating, political and economic dynamics were therefore set in motion. In the United States, as has been proven again and again, the administration takes pride in breeding the contempt of other nations. Also, our government will likely never physically fear the mob, as its military and police resources are too immense.

  You cite Futility as a Myth, but I posit that it is partially the product of the modern protest movement's own failings. Laying in the street in black clothing, white makeup, and fake blood makes for great comedy, but not a very compelling message to bystanders. It's true, giant paper mache puppets depicting Cheney lording over a globe may make for a momentary chuckle, but know that not just protest sympathizers are laughing at the effort. Allowing every conceivable political cause - no matter how ridiculous and factional - to march under the umbrella of genuine greivances only marginalizes those grievances and makes an inviting media target.

  Do not confuse past protest movements for the mockery that has been created by a few radical organizations today. Also do not confuse the organizational leadership, political climate, and media of yesteryear with those of the current era. The game has changed fundamentally, as have the players. This requires new tactics and a more comprehensive approach.

  Perhaps more than that, though, this requires an actual understanding of what made past grassroots movements so effective. I am talking about a savvy focus on the substantial economic and political threats that a movement could pose, rather than a fixation on theatrics, scale, and meaningless inclusion of distracting (and stupid) causes.

  You seem to have mistaken me for some kind of mindless consumer of false assumptions, Che. I didn't grow bitter over contemporary protest efforts because I was subjected to the radiation of some "Futility Myth." I base my beliefs on my direct and active experiences with such efforts, a painful knowledge of what it lacked compared to successful past efforts, and an awareness of how consolidated and crippled our mass media has become.

  I've got to go for now...

  Permalink Wednesday, July 4, 2007 12:12 PM