Why do we demonstrate at all?

[MissHoneychurch]

It doesn't seem to bring anything these days. The politicians do what they want to do, no matter what. Look at the worldwide demonstrations against the war in Iraq in 2002 and 2003. Look at the demonstations now in France.
The people go on the streets (and not only a handful) but what does it bring?

"We the people" ... who of the politicians cares????

[Crazy Guggenheim]

1. I think it does more good to pressure our politicians.

:popcorn: :popcorn:

[MissHoneychurch]

2. But they don't seem to care

[Crazy Guggenheim]

4. Then they have to be "called out". Maybe on radio stations like AAR,

I hate to say this but withhold campaign contributions. Organized LTTE campaigns.

[msgadget]

6. Duh, of course they don't - not yet

they won't until protesters show resolve and consistently show up like a bad rash. Keep those sneakers handy, HoneyChurch! :hi:

[NMMNG]

3. I've wondered the same thing

When we're dealing with neofascist leaders who just don't give a damn what the public really wants, because they are in the business of telling the public what to want (or else), are protests, e-mails, letters and even votes worth a damn? :shrug:

[Heidi]

5. We demonstrate not only to influence public policy,

but to influence the hearts and minds of regular folks just like us. And history has shown that when enough hearts and minds are influenced, politicians are forced to take heed, if only to settle the unrest among the masses.

Excellent topic, gf. :thumbsup:

[msgadget]

7. Hearts and minds of regular folk - great answer!

:patriot:

[MissHoneychurch]

12. I know that demonstrations are able to change things

I took part of those in 1989 in Leipzig, East Germany. But I just think that if the government back than had decided to not allow those demonstrations they would have used the army against the people.

[Heidi]

15. That's happened in the US before:

using the National Guard to quell rioting, but it only made things worse, I've heard. (That was a little before my time.)

[Peter Frank]

8. The Answer is Visibility (external and internal)!!!

Even if the press doesn't cover some demonstrations -- the people demonstrating are demonstrating to each other that there is a community of thought!

Do you think that the first demonstration against the Vietnam war turned the tide of public opinion, internally & externally???

Don't demonstrations demonstrate a willingness & opportunity for like minded people build an influential gathering around common principles?

[MADem]

10. It took FOREVER to influence the Heartland

Massive demonstrations, at college campuses, in cities, at conventions, at the Capitol, and still, nothing...not until the death toll got so unacceptable, until the "Silent Majority" finally decided that the war was bullshit, when THEIR kids were coming home in boxes or FUBARed permanently. Then, suddenly, those hippies had a point!

But the ole journey of a thousand miles, she always starts with that one single step, eh??

[Peter Frank]

14. Thank you for knowing this MADem ...

You must also know that the demonstrations galvanized the demonstrators before the demonstrations made sense to the nation.

[MADem]

18. Oh sure, the only doubters were those folks you couldn't trust

The poor bastards who were over 30! That was a catchphrase of the time "Don't trust anyone over 30" because they were "the establishment." It caused a lot of people who were in the 30-range to lie about their age!

The young were very focused--I often repeat Tip O'Neill's admonition that "all politics is local" because it IS. When you have a low draft number, or know someone with one, it tends to get very personal.

That lottery event, where they pulled out the numbers and associated them with dates, was probably the highest rated program in terms of viewers to that date!!


Rep. Alexander Pirnie draws the first capsule
draft lottery for the Vietnam War.


This guy has some interesting stuff up on the old draft lottery system, including the dates and numbers: http://www.landscaper.net/draft.htm#Sept.%2014%20'Wins'%20Draft%20Lottery

[MissHoneychurch]

17. So how many more have to die in the Iraq

before the majority decides it is enough? OK, I guess the majority of the U.S. is against the war. But why aren't there as much demonstrations these days as there were in the late 60s and early 70s?

What is wrong with the people these days? Why are we not as political as the people were back then? What changed?

[VolcanoJen]

19. It's a different world, and there's a huge difference between now...

... and the late '60s - early '70s.

I do feel that if Americans felt more personally connected to this war, they'd turn out en masse to protest it. Americans today are even more attached to their way of life than they were in the 60's, in my opinion.

The difference? There's no draft. It's rare to know a family who has sent a son or daughter to Iraq. It directly affects a small portion of the population. That fact helped make the war easier to sell in '03... Hey! You won't have to fight it!!

[MADem]

21. Because our kids are not being ripped away from us, is why

There IS a backdoor draft going on now, we know that, but that is hugely different from discovering that, because your kid just happened to be born on 14 September, he isn't going into the family business, he's NUMBER ONE in the Lottery and he's going to the Armed Forces Processing Station for induction and shipment to Vietnam. And he has NO CHOICE in the matter, save you tossing him in the car and driving him to Canada, or finding another friendly country where he can hang out, and you can support him for the rest of his life, because he ain't never coming home. It was NO WAY OUT...people were STUCK. And it all came down to your birthday. Random drawing, a lottery, only the prize was a trip to the exciting far east.

Back then, there was no choice in the matter. You got the unlucky notice, you went. The more that went, the more that didn't come home, the more the anger built...

[Robeson]

9. It's seems futile, I know. But if we don't try anything, we could...

...see a thousand years of serfdom that was the dark and middle ages. That, alone, should make us fight against the darkness. History has shown, that it can be stagnant. We always have to fight against that.

[MissHoneychurch]

13. I know

not doing anything is worse.

[northofdenali]

11. Publicity, publicity, publicity!

In addition to espousing our causes, showing support for each other and educating those around us, there is the publicity that a march generates.

Publicity also brings with it pressure on those in office, making them acknowledge that there are those of us working like hell to make sure they do as we ask, one way or another!!


Even with the Chinese oligarchy still alive and well, virtually everyone remembers Tienanmen Square.

Even with those in office who would like to turn back or totally forget history, virtually everyone remembers

[MissHoneychurch]

16. But honestly

what did Tienanmen Square bring the Chinese? Yes, everybody remembers it but the Chinese people are still surpressed and not trying to do it again.

[realisticphish]

28. I suppose

you could argue that the current move towards capitalism is a result of the student movement, but it seems more likely to just be a response to economic needs

[VolcanoJen]

20. Thing is... it's working.

To some effect, it really is. And we're fighting an uphill battle, against a mainstream media that continues, even struggles, to defend and prop up the President.

The demonstrations, the signs on the highway, the bumper stickers, the blogs... the grassroot effort to inform Americans has worked. Take a look at the polls; we don't have the mainstream media to thank for them.

Maybe the demonstrations aren't as immediately effective, the way they were in the late 60's, but it's a different time, a different climate, a different world... but considering that America was attacked on 9/11, not even five years ago, and the President has appallingly low approval ratings speaks to the efforts of the underground.

Don't ever stop. Buy a bumpersticker, too.

[In_The_Wind]

22. We attempt to sway the elected officials to do our bidding.

However, it does seem that once in office many politicians forget their empty promises.



















MOTHERS don't let your children grow up to marry politicians!

[dabenpb]

23. Demonstrations will not work

as long as the middle class (going lower each year) chooses to report to work so they can pay their bills. People are still more concerned about themselves than the nation or the world. Results will not happen without large and/or sustained demonstrations. This will not happen until most Americans are hit at their selfish center. It is really sad that a bunch of highschool students mobilized more than the adult population -- i give them great credit. The only thing that I see that will wake middle america is a recession/depression -- losing their homes to rising interest rates on the ARM, stagnating wages and rising gas,healthcare,food, etc.

If we really want to make a statement, without getting off our collective asses, we could at least boycott paying taxes. How many people would it take to not pay taxes to shut down govt until they start to listen?

[MissHoneychurch]

27. Do you know the Threepenny Opera by Bertolt Brecht?

In one song they sing "First comes the food, then the morale" (translated freely). It is true in a way. People are not going on the streets if they have to use all their power and mind on how to feed their families.

[newyawker99]

29. Hi dabenpb!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Lexingtonian]

24. To unite all the people who agree with us.

They're not magic. They don't make converts in of themselves. They don't change polling percentages by themselves.

Minorities have less power than majorities. That's how it is.

When a cause with a majority demonstrates, politicians cave in a hurry. When a minority demonstrates, they check the polling numbers and check with their pals.

[DarkmoonIkonoklast]

25. Why? Because Silence IS complicity...

..... and, to paraphrase that great political philosopher Seven-Of-Nine, "I might lose, but I will NOT comply!"

..Everyone has made great points, and it warms this old crusader's heart to hear (okay, read) these words of determined non-compliance. I'm not sure I can actually add much to the debate, Miss Honey (GAWD! I love how that sounds! :loveya:) but, as one who was maced and tear-gassed on the Mall in 1970, who was on several lists (including, so I was informed, Mr Nixon's "Enemies" list) and was, for several years (and as far as I know, still am) on the FBI's "Subversive Surveillance List, I think I can offer a relevant observation or two...

..Yes, as we "revolutionaries" were taught back in the 60s, successful political movements involve a certain "calculus of popular activism"... specifically, movements seek to attract a hard core of about 1% of the populace as actual "Soldiers of the Revolution", and another 15-20 percent into active support, figuring that no more than 20% of any given population actually, actively supports the regime... This figure is, apparently, the "flash point" number at which the remaining 60% of the populace which remains, for any number of reasons (good and sufficient to THEM, even if to no one else!) "on the fence"... once the majority sees one in five of their fellows actively opposing the "Status Quo Ante", they are inclined to give, if not credence to their message, at least, honest attention.

..At this point, so say those who study such things, a revolution has, at least, a chance of success.

..This was, as I understood it, the situation in Cuba during the rebellion which overthrew Fulgencio Batista, and placed Fidel Castro at the head of the Peoples' Republic of Cuba. The rebels were fed, sheltered and helped to evade the Army and Police forces by something like 10% of the campesinos -- the farm workers and others who lived on, and off of, the land. Che Guevara, Argentinian-born child of privilege, Moscow-trained and widely considered the strategic mastermind behind the home-grown Castro, knew that any revolution would require, not the "Urban Intelligentsia" (who had too much invested in the corrupt system-that-was), and not the urban workers, who saw themselves having too much to lose (and no real benefit) in openly opposing their meal ticket... rather, the rebels worked in the rural areas, fighting those battles which they knew they could win, in order to a) keep morale high among those already involved in Resistance, and b) hearten those who were cowed into submission with evidence that their Masters were not, all-powerful, that they were, after all, vulnerable...

..This, I believe, is the true validity of public protest, of public opposition: as a statement to those who are, for their own valid reasons, unwilling to resist, that resistance is NOT futile, that the Establishment is NOT omnipotent, that honor and justice are still worth standing (yes, and dying) for... and that Everyone is NOT "doing it"!

..You still might lose, but you'll never be beaten... all "they" can do is kill you.

..Miss Honey, does this help at all? Of course, if you were on the barricades at (what?) 14, I suspect you already know the answer.

[baby_mouse]

26. I'm turning more and more to this question...

I think the one remaining point in it's favour is that being on a demonstration fires up the individuals to do other organising work later on, and to firm up the position in the "converted" camp. A feeling of solidarity strengthens the ideal.

However, there are an increasingly large nunmber of bad points:

1. Nobody really pays any attention other than grinning policeman and media jocks. The rest of the populace, including the sheeple and the politicians ignore it completely.

2. It provides the police with an excellent opportunity to arrest people for no particular reason.

3. It provides the police with an excellent opportunity to devalue the image of the demonstration by planting moles and causing disturbances, the better to discredit the movement.

4. It provides the police with an excellent opportunity to photograph and film "troublemakers" so that they can make trouble for them later. It doesn't really matter how much "trouble" is made in the first place, so long as there is a feeling of some indefinable problem being "tackled" *forcefully*. Or covertly, they love that.

5. It provides photojournalists with an excellent opportunity to insult peacful protesters, throw things at them, trip them up or push them and then photograph them to get "the shot". Which, believe me, they do.

In all, these days demonstrations are just a big, fat target.

I favour boycotts and *actual lifestyle change*. This can't be tampered with or avoided or circumvented or recuperated. Demonstrations are basically ignored these days because there are so many of them, constructive change CANNOT be ignored, or spun, or spectacularised. The Situationists fucked themselves and everyone else when they tried to enter the Spectacle to change it. The Spectacle is the Spectacle and it *always* encourages passivity, which is bad, no matter HOW post-modern or ironic you make it's twisty-turny "messages".

Stop driving.

Switch off your TV.

Find out who sells you things made off the backs of slave labourers and stop buying from them.

Etc.

[xmas74]

30. kick for the lizard!

[Wapsie B]

31. As ineffective as it may seem to some people

you need to be able to show opposition to the status quo. repugs would love a world where everyone went to work, did their jobs quietly, never questioning a thing in their world. The way I look at it if all a demonstration did was to piss off the repugs it's served it's purpose. Show the korporatists that we won't just quietly go along with the program.