Saturday, October 01, 2005

This is why I generally don't like 'organized' protests

You just can never trust what anyone is saying there.

Too many people at these types of demonstrations don't give a damn about the truth as long as the image they create helps their cause. These are the same people who hand "No Blood for Oil" signs to their 5 year olds to hold because they believe it will have more of an emotional impact*.

Of course maybe I could be wrong about this. Maybe a guy who is on record donating to the DNC for the past 7 years really is a Republican.

Of course this type of protestor 'dishonesty' isn't limited to North America. Peter Brierley, for example, is one of a group of military families who uses his sons or daughters or siblings death to protest the war (you probably already know my opinion of the use of that particular tactic). The problem with Mr. Brierley's claim is that his sons death, while tragic, was in fact the result of a traffic accident in Kuwait and not a consequence of the war. He was not stationed in an active war zone and his death, except in the most roundabout way, can not be related to the war itself. He was a Lance Corporal on active duty in the British military deployed, as many thousands of other soldiers are, to a friendly country. If his father wants to protest the war, I would have no problem with that at all, but in trying to use his son's death to try and give added weight to his particular views, he steps over the line.

And don't even get me started on the jamboree type protests. Free concerts may be a great way to get people together to hear you, but if you've ever seen the cleanup required after an 'environmental' concert you would know that they aren't really there for the message.

*It might just be me but I can't help it when I see these kids holding signs at protests to see the comparison between their parents actions and those of the Middle Eastern protestors who hand their kids automatic rifles to wave in the air.


Blogger Paladiea said...

Free and organized protest is the right of every citizen. In fact, many people say that protests are key to democracy because the people (who are supposed to be represented) can voice their opinions. If one bans said protests (like China) they effectively are well on their way to suppressing dissent. And dissent is a good thing, unless you're a robot. Or a dictator.

October 02, 2005 6:00 p.m.  
Blogger Bic said...

This seems to be a running theme with your replys, for the record, again, I am not calling for the banning of protests, just as I was not calling for the banning of Cindy Sheehan, I am merely pointing out the reasons that I dislike the behaviour/motives of certain groups of people, in this case those protestors that either outright lie or are hypocritical in their actions.

They're still free to get out there and protest all they want, I'm just pointing out that they mustn't believe in the strength of their arguments if they have to lie in order to try and win people over to their side.

October 03, 2005 12:31 a.m.  
Blogger Paladiea said...

What can I say? I'm a strong believer in civil liberties hehe.

October 03, 2005 2:38 p.m.  
Blogger Paladiea said...

And I'm sure that many of them are, you shouldn't tar everyone with the same brush. I've been like WTF are they doing here at protests before, some people just hijack protests to get their own message across, which sucks.

October 03, 2005 2:40 p.m.  
Blogger Bic said...

Who you choose to assosciate with says a lot about who you are.

Even if you may not agree with the actions taken by some of the other groups taking part in your particular protest, if you do not at least attempt to distance yourself from them you are as guilty as they are. Distancing could include everything from actively trying to get them to leave your group to just verbally denouncing them, and not one of those half-assed "they went too far but I understand why they felt that way" type statements that are so popular today.

The problem with almost any protest, is that they rely on large numbers to give the appearence of power. Just look at the crowds at a most anti-war protest (just choosing that because it is the central theme to most protests nowadays). While sure, you have many people who are truely against wars in general, you also have very large portions, and sometimes even the majority, who are only speaking against the wars for their own reasons.

For example, the Communist/Socialist parties that are always present generally could care less if there is a war going on, as long as it does not in any give the US more power or allow them to spread the concept of democracy.

If you, as an organizer, allow these types of people to take part in your march/gathering, you also have to take some responsibility for their actions. The one problem with the above example is that most 'anti-war' marches are actually led by these types of groups and the true "no war" advocates are in fact the outsiders.

In the particular cases from my post, my point is that you cannot allow someone to become a face of your cause based on a lie or ommission of fact and then later try to ignore it afterwards when they get caught. If you are not out on the front lines stating that you disagree with their actions, you are as good as condoning it. If you knew about it before hand then there is no defense.

You just can't have your cake and eat it too.

October 03, 2005 4:55 p.m.  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Who Links Here