Am I cynical or just lazy?
Published by punkass marc May 19th, 2008 in Human Rights, A million ways to mortgage the futureI love everything that went down over Phyllis Schlafly’s honorary degree from Wash U. Kids got angry and organized, and while Darth Vader still got her parchment, the protest raised gobs of awareness. Something tells me schools will think twice about endorsing the work of other hatey mcbigots in the future.
But isn’t it weird that this is the biggest protest story of recent months? There’s some devil’s advocacy in the following clauses, but given that our planet’s pretty well fucked and all the first world powers do is keep raping it, isn’t it odd that our best work in the US comes in the form of interfering with a degree that’s not even real?
Again, that’s some contrarian horsepucky. I’m not *actually* carping about the work done there at all. But it got me thinking about one of my pet topics: why aren’t more people in the US taking to the streets over the big issues? We have pockets of people trying to organize larger events and protests, but they don’t appear to be gaining any national momentum — at least on the scale of the problem and/or the number of people who feel the same way and want change. So where the hell is everybody?
Yeah, I’m anti-war. And stuff.
Any of you reading this might be great freedom fighters, but what makes the rest of us Joan and Joe Averages do so little in the face of such menacing threats as US War(s) in the Oil Places, Global Warming, and Global Warming 2: Boiling Season? Clearly, when people believe they might have a chance to affect change, a movement can gain real momentum. The Schlafly opposition certainly showed that. Is it as simple as people believing their efforts would be pointless, or is that a cover for our national laziness?
Or perhaps I’m missing the cause entirely. Any insights would be appreciated in the comments.
It’s whether or not people believe they might have a chance to affect change. Most people love to help fight good fights, but they don’t think anything they do will make a difference.
Right now I’m helping collect books for a specific village in a country in Africa. It changes a lot about how people contribute when they are giving books to a specific village as opposed to a monolithic charity. With the big charity, most people never feel sure where the books went, but in this case they know this one specific shipping container will go to one specific village where people have almost nothing to read, and not surprisingly, people are much more motivated to look for anything they can spare to send.
I almost loved everything that went down re the Schlaf and Wash U. I still don’t love it that Rev. Jeremiah Wright had his honorary degree rescinded but she didn’t have HERS rescinded–I cannot follow the logic, period, unless the logic is that the Rev’s agitation was against the ruling class and the Schlaf’s was against the oppressed and of course the powers-that-be are gonna punish the former and reward the latter…eeeewwww, I SO don’t wanna believe that!!
I think the reason the Wash U. protest happened was because it directly affected the students protesting. “The War” most directly affects the troops participating in it, and them protesting is not only not feasible, it’s illegal. “The Economy” is such a monolith, while it directly affects a whole helluva lotta people, what precisely is one supposed to protest..? And where? And whom? Betcha we could get a whole army of Joes and Joans motivated and pointing in the right direction if we could give them all the same, concrete, simple person to hate…
PS. I also love the cat pic.
I vote that you’re cynical *and* lazy. Me too– I’m waving to you from my glass house right now, I’m sure you can see me.
In terms of old-fashioned street protests, one unfortunate fact is that if it’s about an easy target such as Phyllis Schlafly, it’ll get coverage; but if it’s about something which the folks in power actually cares about, like, say, impeachment or war, there usually ends up being a defacto media blackout. Unless there’s violence (probably incited by undercover police), in which case the angle ceases to be the protested issue, but rather “look at these crazy radical librulz.”
I was in London in 2003 during the run-up to the Iraq War, and I marched in the giant international protests on February 15th. (Actually, I’m ashamed to say, the only protest I’ve ever taken part in.) I remember reading the next day in the paper about how hundreds of thousands of people had marched in America, too. And I thought at the time, “Rock on!” Because hundreds of thousands of Americans actually motivated to get off their asses for a good cause at the same time, how often does that happen? But then I found out that in American newspapers and TV, it got below-the-fold coverage and minimal photo and video play. That was kind of a shocker for me.
So when you say, “Why doesn’t anybody protest the big stuff?”, maybe the question really ought to be, “Why won’t the media cover the people protesting the big stuff?”
Helen, you’ve got a point about specifics making it easier to rally around an issue. I think another issue is that I think people don’t like to be depressed. They usually unconsciously filter their input and skip over things which might make them a little bit uncomfortable. Hey, I do it too. My, I can really see the weather good from this here glass house! (By the way, check out this funny item from Chris Floyd, who tried a creative way of combating this.)
I do think it’s the feeling of powerlessness to change anything that’s the culprit. As if it wasn’t hard enough for us “regular folk” to effect change before, it’s only gotten harder as we’ve gently slid into a civil-liberties-deprived “soft dictatorship” over the last seven years.
So how do we attack the problem? Does this mean we just only go after easy targets like Phyllis Schlafly?
Lisa K, I think your comparison of Wright v. Schlafly’s honorary degrees is right on target, even if you so don’t want to believe it.
As for your proposed solution of finding the right person to hate, I don’t think it’s quite enough. Just think how many people hate Bush and Cheney. (Okay, that’s two people, but still.) It would do our republic so much good to impeach and press criminal charges either of them anytime before the end of the year, to send the message to our NEXT president that, no, they can’t just do whatever they please. But even though the public has a historic dislike for our current one (28% approval for how long now?), I still don’t think it’s going to be enough to actually make the effort feasible. Because, the bottom line with that is not how many people support it, but how many people in power (including and especially Democratic in the legislative branch) have a vested interest in making sure no impeachment/criminal proceedings ever actually happen.
Still, that’s all the more reason to agitate even more. Forward ho!
On a related note, has anybody besides me noticed that the petition to get Uwe Boll to stop making movies has received more signatures than Rep. Wexler’s petition to initiate impeachment proceedings against Dick Cheney?
(I’m having trouble doing two hyperlinks, so here’s Wexler’s site the old-fashioned way. The petition’s now several months old, it’s worth signing if you haven’t already. wexlerwantshearings.com)
Good points, all of these! Direct impact (as per LKS) and the dissemination of info (per Quin) do seem to also go hand in hand — if something directly affects you and yours, you’re a lot more likely to get info about what to do and how to help, as well as gauge if it’s working or not.
I wonder if you made it really easy for people to walk right out their front door on a free day to step into line at a protest against something big and evil (pick your poison), how many would do it? I wonder if the idea of protest is dead (in part because of the media issues Quin raises)?
I don’t think protest is dead. But it is slumbering. Don’t worry, with the economic convulsions yet to come America’s way, I predict the proles will be rising again in a way that will be impossible to ignore for long.
Of course, that’s when the government crackdowns really begin. I picked up Naomi Wolf’s “The End of America” the other day. Haven’t finished it yet, but– yeah. We’ve got some exciting times ahead.
In the meantime, I had an interesting idea. Inspired by the wonderful day when a mob of Ron Paul fans chased Sean Hannity through the streets.
The next time anti-war protesters take it to the streets, how about instead of choosing a symbolic place like in front of the UN Building or the Washington Monument, where they’ll be ignored, AGAIN… Why not take our thousands of bodies and march right in front of the offices of, say, The New York Times or CNN? THAT might get some attention. If only because rival news outlets would love it.
I think people don’t think they can change things. Global warming especially is a problem you can’t fix with personal action—even if you killed yourself to get your “carbon footprint” to zero, it wouldn’t really make a difference.
Plus, on the left, there’s just a lot of ego-driven assholes. And they are too busy engaging in circular firing squads and holier-than-thou preening to get anything done. I’ve certainly been guilty of feeling like riding my bicycle, for instance, is a better bit of anti-global warming “activism” than anything else because a) it strokes my ego and b) it’s something I really can be effective at.
I also agree that people’s altruism is much easier to garner if they can put a face to the person they’re helping. This is why conservatives who argue that charity should replace government services are full of shit. It’s not that people are bad, it’s just that we’re wired to see altruism in a certain light. It only makes us feel good if we can picture a direct person. Thus the hurricane victims got all these donations, because they were on TV and you felt like you could relate to them. But the faceless mass of homeless people who need those donations all the time are shit out of luck.
Just curious– being stationed in another country as I am– just how much media play with real names and faces did the cyclone damage in Myanmar/Burma get in the states?
As for the holier-than-thou ego-driven assholes, they exist in every movement everywhere of all time. We just feel more annoyed by the lefty ones because we identify with their same causes. The trouble is, the more important a cause seems (such as, for instance, keeping our planet from passing a global tipping point in the next very few years beyond which civilization as we know it has no chance of survival), the more self-righteous preeners it will attract. But if it’s either live with that and keep on fighting anyway, or just give up altogether… Well, I guess a lot of people have already given up. But I still hold out hope that there are still ways left to fight. For a couple of years yet, at least.
Has anyone here checked out 350.org? It’s an organization with the single specific focus of planting the number 350 (parts per million of CO2 in our atmosphere) in the public’s consciousness, worldwide, over the next year and a half. That’s supposed to be the magic number which will preserve civilization in any recognizable form. (Right now we’re at 385ppm.) The idea is to help focus the public’s lay the groundwork for world-wide support of a global warming Marshall Plan, which may be our only hope.
It’s true that we’re probably well and truly fucked anyway, but I think it’s a number worth spreading around.
The economy is a big factor. People who are working their asses off to stay afloat don’t have time to protest- the prosperity of the 50s to the 70s was an anomaly.
On the other hand, as more people are working their asses off and NOT staying afloat, and more people can’t find work at all, then we’ll start seeing more protests.
And yes, visibility of the existing protests is a huge factor. Last summer, a huge immigrant rights protest went down in LA and police broke it up with rubber bullets- and if not for blogs, I’d have never heard of it. I knew a lot of people besides myself were pissed off at the 2000 selection of W- but until I saw Micheal Moore’s movie, I had no idea that Bush’s inauguration caravan route was so strongly protested that he couldn’t even get out of his car.
Media blackout’s a bitch. Quin’s right: rather than trying to get attention from government, since they don’t care anyway, protests would be best aimed directly at the media themselves in a way they can’t ignore. Make them the target, they become part of the story- their egos alone will drive them to cover it. And it’s not like they’re not already a huge part of the problems, including the war, the economy, the environment, the non-responsive political system, etc.
I’ve been requested to write a little something to test whether my comments are, indeed, being eaten when they get too long or include hyperlinks.
RobW, thanks, I agree. I’d certainly love to see a major press protest given a try some time. I’m also curious to know if it’s ever seriously been considered (or tried) before by a group with any numbers at all.
Speaking of interesting ways of protesting, did anybody happen to see how George Monbiot attempted a citizen’s arrest on John Bolton for international war crimes? George Monbiot, who I was already a fan of for his writing at the Guardian, is my new hero.
Of course, the problems of American media blackout STILL pertain. A quick google revealed only one major American media source covering the story. Bizarrely, it was FOX News. Maybe because they were able to take the tone of “check out those kooky librulz!”
Well, there it is. I guess everything’s in working order now.