Last week, Slate columnist Will Saletan offered some advice to abortion rights activists:
It's a crucial moment for the abortion rights movement. Don't blow it.
Marches attract passionate advocates and concentrate them in one place. They foster the illusion that you and your sisters who have filled the National Mall represent a cross-section of America. You don't. Most Americans hate abortion and don't consider themselves feminists. You need the votes of these people. Praise abortion, shout about patriarchy, and you'll alienate them for another decade.
Saletan is no doubt shaking his head in sorrow after the recent march through the capital that ended with a rally at the National Mall. Though the numbers were impressive (estimates range from 500,000 and 800,000 people) it will undoubtedly end up being judged an unmitigated disaster. The protesters not only made light of abortion and decryed patriarchy but included both prostitutes and anarchists for 'choice."
Saletan should have advised them to call the whole thing off. In our time, protest marches, like war, are best avoided whenever possible.
Certain events have a way of irrevocably transforming the political landscape. The phrase 'post-9/11", for example, has become a form of shorthand which invokes all the shifts in policy, thinking, and attitude since that infamous date. The history of political protest has its own special date, not as ominous or well-known, but yet one that reflects a line of demarcation from the past: December 2, 1999 -- The Battle for Seattle.
Even now, almost five years after the event, it is difficult to recall just what the WTO protests were about. The media, who were justifiably at a loss to understand what was happening, claimed it was an anti-globalization rally. But it wasn’t. Not really.
(Digression: I was on recruiting duty in that area until a year before the riots and had spent a painfully inordinate amount of time with the youth of Washington state. Now I don’t want to unfairly stereotype an entire region, but I think I'm on safe ground to claim that the young people had a proclivity to accept the most radical and incoherent nonsense imaginable. I'd hesitate to say that they believed these ideas because that would involve some form of thought and, to be perfectly honest, I don’t think their THC soaked brains would've been capable of such mental activity. (In case you think I’m being unfair, let me remind you that this is the same area that gave us 'grunge", a pop culture movement based on nothing more than poor personal hygiene.))
For the protests to have been about globalization would have required both that the protesters have understood what globalization is and then have formed some ideological position in opposition to it. This illusion was shattered for most of us by the scene of a young rioter throwing a newsrack through the window of Niketown…while wearing a pair of Nikes.
No, the protests weren’t about any particular idea other than the idea of protest. Most of the protesters in ‘99 were born after the glory days of the civil rights-era March on Washington and the Vietnam anti-war protests and had a tinge of nostalgia for something they had never experienced. In the absence of a noble cause of their own, they simply latched on to whatever was available. Like Marlon Brando's character in The Wild Ones, they respond to the question of "What are you rebelling against?" with 'What have you got?" If all you've got is anti-globalization they simply shrug and say, 'We’ll take it."
But after the tear-gas faded and the broken glass was swept away, the world realized that the end of an era had come. No longer could protests and marches be used as medium for serious political discourse. The events would either be co-opted by the radicals and turned into a spectacle (anarchists at an abortion rights rally?) or simply devolve into an onanistic act of self-righteousness (Whoopi Goldberg waving a coathanger).
Protests had always had a element of theater about them; Seattle just brought that element center stage. The post-Seattle landscape would be altered in such a way that the medium could no longer contain the message. The event would forever after overshadow the message. Political marches lost their ability to inspire and motivate and became nothing more than a form of performance art for the middle-class.
My motto has been for awhile: "Never trust an anti-globalization protestor with Hello Kitty on their backpack."
Joe, are you sure the "What are you rebelling against?", "What have you got?" exchange wasn't in "The Wild Ones" - between one of the townsfolk and Lee Marvin's character.
Actually. Marlon Brando's character said it. And considering the dumb "political" causes he has supported, it fits.
It is amazing to see how much coverage this march gets, when the only correspondents offering heavy coverage of the March for Life were from stations like EWTN.
Estimate actually ranged from tens of thousands (Fox news) to 200,000 (Park Service). The higher numbers are propaganda from the death marchers.
There are some very interesting reports from pro-life demonstrators who were there, and the vile abuse they saw, and the many things that they saw that were characteristic of the death march that the national news didn't show.
Bob and Kati,
Thanks for the correction. I should have checked that quote rather than relying on my fading movie-trivia-stuffed memory.
i don't see any any way how seatlle has killed protesting. it has only gottten bigger, broader,a dn more organized since then.
people's only outlet is to protest these days with the conservative christians taking everyone's rights away for their own definition of freedom. and democracy equals capitalism.
God Bless McDonalds.
Conservative Christians for mo dick n bush in 04!
Dear ducknbush,
You waster of good logic. re: "...the conservative christians taking everyone's rights away for their own definition of freedom."...sounds alot more like the Tower bomber's agenda to me. Xians are much more willing to "live and let live" than Atta et al were.
Steve's allegations of media bias in favor of the marchers are baseless, and Fox is the last place to go for objective reporting. Liberals and the "far left" are reviled daily on Fox, but I never hear them attack the religious right. Their dramatic underestimating of the attendance underscores their unreliability. Every estimate I have seen reported supports the range Joe relates. Sometimes we believe what we want to believe.
Believe what we tell you or shut up you unpatriotic hippie scum!
dicknbush:
good one. almost as good as your chosen name, which displays all the subtlety, wit, originality, and maturity of middle school fart jokes.
and anyone who can say that modern protest marches are faithfully in the tradition of Civil Rights/Vietnam era protests is either ignorant of history or intentionally blind to it.
no, they are better than the older protests and much more organized. the police have better weapons too, like shock grenades and better tear gas. got gassed myself last april.
more fun for everyone. expect more.
Yes, and the newer protests also have much better funding from communist organizations.
And it's true that they are much better organized. Protesters are paid and bussed in from all over.
I could organized a protest against green grass if I paid people and then bussed them in.
"Estimate actually ranged from tens of thousands (Fox news) to 200,000 (Park Service). The higher numbers are propaganda from the death marchers."
I refuse to believe that Fox News estimated the range in the tens of thousands. Not even Fox News is that dumb. Do you have any support whatosever for this statement?
"Yes, and the newer protests also have much better funding from communist organizations."
Oh no, Mommie, the commies are coming!
"Protesters are paid and bussed in from all over."
Really? Like those a-holes the RNC bussed in to Florida during the 2000 Election?
"I could organized a protest against green grass if I paid people and then bussed them in."
I'm going to protest the St. Louis Cardinals. Those red uniforms make me very suspicious, especially after 9/11.
Mr. Math:
Please tell me that you are just ignorant of what's been going on in the last several years. I hope you are not really that stupid.
I'm not going to do your homework for you but I will give you a head start. Go find out about Workers World Party, International ANSWER and United for Peace and Justice, just to get you started. These are some of the big time movers and shakers behind many of the protests around the world in the last several years.
And then, when you are done with that, I would like you to sit down for a few minutes in a nice quiet room AND GET OVER THE 2000 ELECTION ALREADY!
"I would like you to sit down for a few minutes in a nice quiet room AND GET OVER THE 2000 ELECTION ALREADY!"
I'm "over" the 2000 election, David, but I won't forget the interesting tactics those holier than thou thugs at the RNC used to steal it.
In any event, I have no time to sit down. For your safety and mine, I need to immediately contact the FBI and have them investigate my neighbor. All he does is watch public TV. We all know what that means.
OK, OK, I get it. You ARE that stupid.
You and reality just don't see eye to eye.
btw - You are NOT over it. You brought it up. Not me.
Dear, Marine91 and Mr.Ryan could you please stop feeding the troll (and I don't have to say who it is)?
Septeus and David! My two favorite neo-McCarthyites.
Say, David, was the Worker's World Party behind the protest against gay marriage in SF last weekend? I notice those folks were all wearing red shirts AND they were mostly Asian. That made me very nervous indeed for reasons that I'm sure are obvious to you!!!
I like this quote from Joe:
"Political marches lost their ability to inspire and motivate and became nothing more than a form of performance art for the middle-class."
You sound like a poor loser, Joe, when you dismiss last weekend's pro-choice rally that way. It's quite clear that it was very inspiring and motivating for a lot people. I'd expect better from one of our best than sour grapes.
"In case you think I’m being unfair, let me remind you that this is the same area that gave us “grunge”, a pop culture movement based on nothing more than poor personal hygiene."
Gee, and all this time I thought it was a reaction to the fossilized state of commercial pop music at the time. I vaguely recall "grunge" being called "alternative rock" at one point. But surely I am mistaken because Joe Carter never smears entire parts of the country or groups of people unless he has a good reason to.
"Grunge was based on nothing more than poor personal hygiene." -- Joe Carter
You heard it here first, folks.
I think I'll go spin my Catbutt record and see if it sounds any different in light of this fascinating new paradigm.
Mr. Math (or should I call you Alex):
Starve troll!
Let us all know when you decide to give reality a try.
David, You're barely ok with the double "s" version of bused, since buss - with the double "s" means "to kiss, especially in an unrestrained or playful manner," and I don't think that's what you meant.
It took me less than a minute to locate a Fox News story reporting attendance at the anti-abortion march in the "hundreds of thousands."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,118081,00.html
Isn't it ironic that people need to lie about Fox News stories to bolster their claim that Fox News is lying to them?
I merely took Steve's word for it; I did not make the claim regarding the attendance reported by Fox. I maintain, however, that Fox is a biased and unreliable news organization. Want irony, Rod? How about "fair and balanced"?
Why not simply admit your mistake?
Attacking Fox News' reporting standards as a response to having been caught spreading a falsehood about them strikes me--at best--as hypocritical.
Re-read the posts! At 8:49 Steve said that Fox had reported attendance in the tens of thousands. I had no reason not to believe him, since he is apparently a Fox fan. My response to Steve's post assumed that Steve had correctly reported Fox's reporting. That assumption was my error. I did not originate the statement. Sheesh! Try to keep up.
Rothchild,
Ryan is right. Steve was the guy who spun out the crap about Fox's numbers. Mr. Math called him on it right away but (no surprise) Steve left the building.
You should know by now that one does not need to make stuff up about Fox in order to show that they are little more than a mouthpiece for the RNC (not that any of the other networks aren't, but whose keeping track? Oh yeah. I am.)