The season of protests
Protests, protests, protests. This really seems to be the only thing we whiny, bleeding-heart liberals know how to do these days. Only problem is, they really don’t work that well.
Have you ever noticed that all of the anti-war protests haven’t done, well … ANYTHING? We’re still in Iraq. We still haven’t sent a timetable for withdrawal. The president still can’t say “nuclear.” But still, we get e-mails and see flyers advertising the newest reason why we should show up at the Union to send a message that people have gotten extremely good at ignoring. For example, I filter all e-mails with the word “protest” in it to a special “protest” folder, where they can be easily deleted.
Am I suggesting we just sit back and relax while thousands of innocent civilians are killed? Of course not. I, to some extent at least, have a soul. But the thing is, the more we assemble ourselves at mass protests, the less impact they have. Our chance to make a point by assembling has long since passed.
Here’s a great example: the protest during the Republican National Convention in 2004. Did anyone happen to notice that BUSH WON THE ELECTION? Apparently not, because these futile displays of dissatisfaction have continued, and with alarming regularity.
But isn’t it just so much easier to assemble and preach about how much we’re doing than to actually ACCOMPLISH anything? Because that’s what most of these anti-war protests seem to really be about, and that is what is truly disgusting about them.
Instead of having people take an active interest in politics (like persuading them to vote, for instance), these protests really just make Democrats, and liberals in general, into a party of complainers. All that accomplishes is making us sitting ducks for conservative talking heads, like Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity, who can slander us at their leisure.
The time for action has indeed arrived. A message does need to be sent to those in power that if they refuse to stop the violence against innocent Iraqis and Afghanis, we will remove them from power.
How, you ask? The midterm election on Nov. 7 is one great solution. Maybe more than 50 percent of the population could get off their collective ass and actually try to take back what should be theirs: the government. You could also get all of your community to write letters to your congressmen, demanding that we stop the slaughter.
But wouldn’t it just be easier for us to assemble on the Quad, act indignant for a few hours, give ourselves a pat on the back for being so involved, go home, and act like we’re morally superior to everyone else? Remember that when you see people assembling at around 12:30 Saturday afternoon outside the Illini Union for the “National Day of Action Against the Iraq War.”
— Carl Zielinski
Comments
Do you really think that people who protest are not going to vote? The point of protests is to get people to vote, and not protesting is not going to get more people to vote. The idea that protests don’t do anything so we should just all shut up and go home and sit on our ass all day is not the right one. I don’t find it alarming that people continue to protest. I find it reassuring, and with the current administration’s track record, so should you. The idea behind a protest is to send a message. You say that voting is enough. But, as you pointed out, Bush won the last election, so voting is clearly not enough. I believe that a large protest is a more effective message than a letter to a congressman. Perhaps the government has gotten better at combating protesters since the ’60s. That does not give us an excuse to back off of them. Do we need more than just protests? Of course we do! But the idea of not protesting something just because Rush Limbaugh hurt our feelings and called us whiny, bleeding-heart pinkos is not the answer.
Posted by: Jacob Druker | November 6, 2006 5:59 PM