It's good to know The Left has its priorities straight. Here's an article from today's WaPo on protests planned for Bush's second-term inauguration.
The Jan. 20th inauguration -- shaping up to be one of the most heavily secured and expensive in history -- will be the scene of small and large demonstrations. Organizers from dozens of local and national groups are planning marches, rallies and acts of civil disobedience on Inauguration Day and the days before and after......The battle between protesters and authorities has already begun. One group, International ANSWER, is preparing to sue the National Park Service over access to the Pennsylvania Avenue NW inaugural route. Demonstrators also are complaining about Secret Service restrictions on parade-route signs and displays, including a ban on puppets, papier-mache objects, coffins and signs more than three feet wide, 20 feet long and a quarter-inch thick.
....the antiwar cause is one banner among many. Bush has been a popular target for left-leaning activists since he took office. Their anger has not subsided over the years, and the administration's policies at home and abroad have galvanized activists in antiwar, anti-globalization, pro-environment, pro-labor, abortion rights and AIDS movements.
Some protesters said they are coming to Washington to oppose what they consider U.S. efforts to overthrow democratically elected leaders in Haiti, Venezuela and elsewhere. Some are coming because of the administration's support of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Others say their main reason for attending is opposition to the USA Patriot Act or alleged Election Day fraud.
....Other organizers are hoping a simple, silent gesture gets their message across. At least 10,000 protesters are expected to stand along the parade route and turn their backs as Bush goes by, said Jet Heiko, 31, national organizer for the Turn Your Back on Bush event. "It's something that's universally understood as being a symbolic statement of defiance," Heiko said.
And symbolism is what this is all about, isn't it?
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at January 3, 2005 09:40 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.rosenblog.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/637
Protest activity has typically had one of two general objectives: to mobilize potential supporters for serious political activity, or to inflict costs on opponents as a prelude to serious negotiation.
The current fashion in leftist demonstrations seems to serve neither goal. The demonstrations grow larger and larger, but magnify only their own impotence, draining political energy into some kind of theatricality. I am genuinely puzzled about what they think they are accomplishing.
Has anyone read any really good explanations of the current strategy of protest? Obviously they have a huge cost in terms of public relations. What is the "payoff" supposed to be?
Posted by: Tom Rekdal at January 3, 2005 05:45 PMExcellent questions, Tom. I believe the "payoff" for many such protestors is essentially personal. They want to show themselves and others they have a conscience, and "won't stand" for certain things. Having (literally) demonstrated their conscientiousness, they are then able to feel better about themselves.
Mission accomplished. If they're in a hurry, a bumper sticker will always do, which is why you see so many vehicles around Seattle with five, six or even more.
Posted by: Matt Rosenberg at January 4, 2005 05:37 PM