Lame & Tame: protest marches don't work anymore!
Michelle Malkin called it an "anti-war dud," and Ann Althouse wondered why it is that these war protests are so tame.
There are a couple of reasons for this.
First, I'm an activist myself, and know that this is simply not any effective way to work for change anymore. This kind of "protest demonstration" was devised in pre-internet days, when it was truly the only way to get a point across to as large as group as possible. Now there are more productive means of doing this, that don't include any public showing off.
This kind of behavior can actually dilute or distort the intended message. Especially when the message does not include any reasonable solution. Below are a few comments on protest demonstrations:
Here at Common Dreams:
The big demonstrations that have become so popular are not only ineffective; they actually make matters worse. By channeling the time, energy, money, and creativity of so many activists into an exercise in futility, these demonstrations and their preparations deflect activist attention from the urgent task of fashioning actual (rather than symbolic) challenges to the corporate world order and the military power that sustains it. Moreover, these demonstrations leave people — activists and regular citizens alike — more rather than less comfortable with the existing order. Watching or reading news reports about the event, citizens feel good about living in “a free country.” Mollified by making the news, participants go home feeling like they have done their part. Indeed, judging from the comments they make to reporters, personal comfort appears to be the primary reason many people attend these events. “I know we can’t stop the war,” goes the usual litany, “but I couldn’t live with myself if I didn’t show my disagreement.” Thus, the performance of dissent becomes an end in itself rather than the means to an end.Frameshop
There was a time when packing hundreds of thousands of protesters onto the National Mall was the be-all-end-all of a political movement. Those days are over. In the age of 24-hour cable media, it is far more effective to think of a protest in terms of one person's picture reproduced a million times in the media, then to think of a protest in terms of a picture of one million people shown only once in the media.Marching To Irrelevance - David Corn
Three decades after Vietnam, perhaps it's time to rethink the utility of mass demonstrations. Back in the 1960s, such events had the power of novelty. Never before had so many citizens protested a war. That was news. And in the days before daily polling that is regurgitated by cable news, newspapers and blogs, these demonstrations were necessary signs that something was happening here—or there. But today, anyone who bothers to read newspapers knows that a majority of Americans believe the war in Iraq was a mistake. Thus, the news footage of an anti-war demonstration carries less impact.
Note they are all leftish commentaries disagreeing with their own movement.
Second, and this may be reaching a bit, but I'm thinking a certain number of those who organize these things are stuck in the '60s, and are simply reenacting the good old days. I've noticed quite a bit of self-aggrandizement going on in the anti-war camp, and I suspect a more-vigorous approach might be beyond some of the oldsters. ;>)
Also note I'm no spring chicken myself. But my kind of activism is based in results and solutions. This gets me into trouble sometimes with the more-radical elements of the men's movement, but there it is.