Stupid protests, right and left
Published March 21, 2003
I thought I could not possibly see a dumber protest than the pouring down the drain, by restauranteurs bar owners, and winos throughout Red America of bottle after bottle after bottle of French wine a few weeks ago. An empty gesture, I urged my "Freedom Fries"-eating comrades; the wine is already paid for, the French have your money, and you're not even going to catch a buzz. Dumbest. Protest. Ever.
Or so thought. But now I think we have a tie.
I am told that some antiwar protesters in San Francisco have staged a "vomit-in" to graphically illustrate how "war makes them puke." They appear to have ingested quantities of milk tinged with red food coloring and vomited in unison on some federal buildings! And this is supposed to be a dramatic gesture, bold and arresting. Which it might be if we can ever stop laughing at them.
The puke-a-thon is particularly amusing since, I am sure, many of these same people spend a lot of the rest of their time railing about America's culture of conspicuous consumption and conspicuous waste, about mounds of disposable diapers in landfills, about excessive packaging, about the extra food that gets tossed out behind restaurants every day that could have gone to Food Not Bombs.
But these concerns are trivial compared to the chance to puke in front of a TV camera to protest a war that even now is setting a people free, removing a man who, let's not forget, could have prevented all of this by just packing a suitcase and taking a vacation in Jordan, feeding villagers in Iraq their first proper meals (OK, MREs, but at least they're nutritious)... I bet the residents of Safwan would love to show their gratitude to those San Franciscans who vomited untold gallons of milk on their behalf.
I know, I know, gestures like these feel good, and draw publicity for the cause, and bring people of like minds together. But there are so many more constructive things to do with the time and effort that goes into orchestrating such demonstrations of ire.
Don't hate the media, become the media, Lydia Lunch once advised - and here we all are. Never again will news and information be a top-down, tightly controlled, one-way flow. We are all the media.
The same works for public policy. Every year in this country there are elections. Every year, these elections suffer from dearths of quality candidates, coherent and meaningful dialogue, constructive efforts, and voter turn-out.
It doesn't have to be that way.
I sat for two years in my little ol' hometown and griped and carped and pointed fingers before finally waking up to the reality that the only real way to effect change is to get my hands on the gavel. So I ran for office and got elected. I'm 33 years old, a baby in a town full of geezers, and it's an uphill struggle every day to bring about meaningful change, but let me tell you, it's a lot easier to make that struggle, and make it worthwhile, when you have the authority.
You can do it, too. It's not a show.
- Stupid protests, right and left
- Published: March 21, 2003
- Type:
- Section: Politics
- Filed Under: Culture: Media
- Writer: Kate Sherrod
- Kate Sherrod's BC Writer page
- Kate Sherrod's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
I don't get it, Kate. Are you saying that running for office (or voting) are the only legitimate methods with which to practice democracy? Why would we have the freedom to assemble if the Framers didn't feel it was important to democracy?
I find it interesting that a common type of criticism that pro-war folks are offering of protesters is the discovery of some miniscule piece of alleged hypocrisy.
I.e., shutting down traffic is hypocritical--it will add fumes and increase global warming. You didn't say this, M. Simon did.
But I'd put your comments in the same category: Vomiting wastes food, therefore protesters are being hypocritical.
By this line of thinking, virtually any action could be criticized as hypocrisy. The picket signs waste paper and kill trees. The megaphones waste electricity. Marching uses up shoe leather, which kills animals.
The only thing left is inaction.
>I don't get it, Kate. Are you saying that running for office (or voting) are the only legitimate methods with which to practice democracy?
No, but I do think they're the best, most effective ways.
>I find it interesting that a common type of criticism that pro-war folks are offering of protesters is the discovery of some miniscule piece of alleged hypocrisy.
>By this line of thinking, virtually any action could be criticized as hypocrisy. The picket signs waste paper and kill trees. The megaphones waste electricity. Marching uses up shoe leather, which kills animals.
*I* find it interesting that in this day and age so many people have concluded that hypocrisy - the failure to consistently live up in every thought, word and deed to ethical and moral principles that are by their very nature imperfectly attainable - is now the worst of sins. It isn't. Hypocrisy is a normal human failing.
I frankly don't care if the wine dumpers (right wing) or the puke patrol (left) are hypocritical. I do care if they're silly, wasting their good time and energy on empty gestures, alienating potential supporters of their causes (did any of the SF protesters ask that poor woman in the SUV whether or not she supported the war?), or subjecting others to potential harm.
We still have a functioning democracy and the freest society mankind has ever known, one that is the envy of the rest of the world (which is why migrations tend to go Westward), and it still more or less works. It's a good system, but not a perfect system (and that's all we can hope for being the flawed human beings that we are) - but it could still be better, especially if people stop automatically assuming that they're disenfranchised and take to the streets to riot when they disagree with what's going on, and start putting the system to work for the people whom it is supposed to serve. It's really not that hard.
But, as my pals like to quote with great frequency, "Democracy is three wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner." This time the wolves said go to war. Next time, maybe they won't. Best chance for that outcome is - not to have the same wolves in power.
Sorry Kate, three wolves and a sheep, etc. is not democracy, it's dictatorship. In democracy there are no sheep, since, as you're modelling, human beings do have a choice, unlike sheep who seem to me to be predestined.
Neither bulimia nor anorexia can be much helpful by way of protest, as they express despair and frustration, no less than they mirror a culture of greed and excess.
When I was a child my grandfather taught me to kiss the piece of bread that happened to fall.
In Israel this week again a convoy of food is collected and brought to the occupied territories by way of protest.
It does not create immediate change, but what does?
I have a question for the vocal anti war crowd, and I would like some kind of honest answer, becouse I honestly want to know: did you peopprotest the following: Iraq invasion of Kuwait; Iraq gassing of the Kurds; horrible atrocities commited during the civil wars in places like the Congo and Sierra Leone; the Chechen (sic?) wars going on now; genocide in Bosnia; the coup in Jamaica; the brutal tactics of South American drug Cartels; (for those of you old enough) the Tienamen square massacre; Iraq invasion of Iran; and all that's just off the top of my head. Please, someone tell me, because if the answer is what I suspect it is, that you people only protest what your own country does, than you are all hypocrites whose opinions are less than worthless. The same goes for protestors in other countries- are they equal opprotunity complainers or is it only because it's America. Someone tell me.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/3996)
there was an interesting article in yesterday's boston globe about the silly extremes to which boycotts can be taken.