 |
|
Like peas in a pod. |
The picture above (emailed to us as a tip) was snapped at the “Stop the U.S.-Israeli War” rally in San Francisco on August 12, 2006 (via Zombietime). It features a large mpuppet of Gandhi holding up a poster carrying perhaps his most famous quote. To the right is a large picture of Hizbullah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah. One of these men called for a long non-violent struggle against a military oppressor and a colonial economy, and the other calls for unguided rockets to be rained down upon the enemy and civilians. I keep hoping that at least some people at the rally may have been disgusted by this. I believe protesting the war of the past month is a very worthwhile activity but this kind of image just undermines the cause and negates the relevance of some of these protests.
but there are very many groups involved in these rallies that are not islamofascists or anti-semites.
granted. but the key is that some nasty elements are present in non-trivial numbers. i think that sometimes issues matter more than political “gotchas,” but there needs to be more reciprocity before we can practice what we preach.
Certainly, it was front page news here..
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?story_id=501688
It seems the speaker, a local communist rabble-rouser, got a lot of support from the crowd though there was obvious dismay from those genuinely pro-peace. Note it took place outside the Israeli embassy so the sympathies of the mob was clear.
I propose there be a protest police that goes around the crowd, accosting anyone who’s turned up with the “wrong” posters, placards, puppets, or any other type of (preferably alliterative) protest-related paraphernalia. These loons should know that they are not welcome, and only protesters with messages that fit with mainstream parliamentary politics should even bother to turn up. All placards and protesters should refer to US strategic interests when speaking against the bombing of Lebanon. All protest publicity should contain printed instructions clearly stating the political demographic which the protest is for. Anyone who turns up despite having explicitly told to stay away should be beaten up on the spot. We can’t have protests at which anyone can turn up and put forward their views in public, even if they are probably totally marginal to the thing, were not given a platform from which to speak, and were probably being viewed with derision by many other protesters themselves.
But seriously, I sense an implication in several posts that such protests should create an equivalence between a state which is well-funded, armed to the teeth, and which has occupied Lebanon before; and a movement which reflects, and acts on, a widespread desire in Lebanon to resist Israeli military action and get their troops off Lebanese sovereign territory. I’m not too impressed with the stiff religious moralism which Hezbollah espouses, their Iranian funding, or their “armed struggle” strategy, but their national liberation rhetoric, and action, commands a great deal of popular support, and this is only increasing at the moment. Add to this the fact that they don’t just let off rockets, but feed the poor, educate children, run media outlets, and (I read in some recent news source) constitute Lebanon’s second-largest employer, and perhaps we can see how they built up this support. Maybe this guy with the Nasrallah poster just can’t think of any other alternative? Going to the protest would have been one way for him to be exposed to better ideas, surely. That’s the thing with protests: anyone can go. If their minds are changed from the experience of attending, then great. I really think that’s the way to understand this.
Gandhi, by the way, was “non-violent”, but had no qualms about calling off the movement from time to time, and exposing his own followers to the violence of the colonial state in the process. He did this after the Chauri Chaura incident, condemning his own “violent” supporters, but basically leaving them exposed to a violent state crackdown. So it’s OK if “we” die because of “their” violence, but “we” must never be violent against “them”? “We” just have to nobly wear the loss of life? Food for thought on the issue of non-violence, and perhaps on the question of national/religious resistance movements in contemporary times as well. If anyone’s interested in Chauri Chaura, Shahid Amin’s book Event, Metaphor, Memory is excellent.
brown, thanks for the link, g’d on ya. as you well know, there’s a large Lebanese diaspora in Oze, so I am not surprised given the protest’s location.
Whoops, sorry, a bit long. It looked shorter in the text box. My apologies.
Incidentally, I read the Canberra Times too. Why was the one nonsense incident from the rally printed on the front page, then basically repeated on the 2nd page? Not one sensible point any of the speakers would have made was reported. It was a cheap smear job from a rubbish “news” rag.
By the way, imagine the reaction in the press if a local Lebanese/Australian dual national went and fought for Hezbollah. There would have none of the hushed condolences for the family, no sympathetic images of the boy looking clean-cut and nice in the papers, no implied sympathy in the press for the grieving relatives. There would have been baying for Lebanese to be deported, dual citizenship rights to be revoked, Muslims to be subjected to a police crackdown, etc.
halwa puri, very well put…
so what you’re saying is that some people go to protests not to meet chix or impress them, but to change minds and stuff???
Halwa Puri: Kyah Bhat. Very well said. Suddenly I am feeling hungry. Off to find some grub. Thanks Razib et. al.
halwa puri,
the debate is quantitative, not qualitative. if it is “one nonsense incident,” it is trivial. if it isn’t, it isn’t.
i don’t have an understanding of what protests are about unless
a) you want to meet chix b) you want to present a coherent message to the world to remediate specific injustices
yes Razib, there may well people at these protest who feel strongly about peace and are not trying to get laid by cute alterna-chicks or spark the next stalinist/islamofascist revolution. Shocking!!!
Apu and SunsetPrkBklynMassive: thanks!
Razib: yes. And sometimes going there to talk politics and change people’s minds really impresses some of the more earnest women there too.
Brown Fury, check out some other signs then:
http://www.zombietime.com/stop_the_us_israeli_war_8_12_2006/
My perspective aligns with what someone pointed out earlier. I want to protest a lot of things such as collective punishment but I don’t want to attend a protest with a guy holding a Nasrallah sign next to me, especially if the other guy standing next to me is holding a slogan by Gandhi. All these causes and idealogies getting jumbled together takes away from each individual cause sometimes.
Razib: on the nonsense incident, I know the Canberra scene well! Most speakers at protests like these are far too savvy, and genuinely abhor Hezbollah’s politics and strategy, and would not have made such a suggestion. These protests have, however, been attracting more than the usual left activists, and actual real Lebanese people have been going along too. If some of them support Hezbollah and want Israeli troops to be killed, then it’s not a surprise. It’s not a nice fact of contemporary political life, but it’s not a surprise. Perhaps they may be exposed to better ideas also?
PS – i do dig those alterna-chicks, with their tatoos and cool Bettie Page haircuts as much as the next guy, but let’s look deeper. Doh – what’s that supposed to mean?? ;-))
Kidding aside, I agree people need to present a coherent message Razib, but a protest is not exactly the best place to do more than wave a sign and chant. Now…were there speeches at said events, and what did the speakers have to say??
If some of them support Hezbollah and want Israeli troops to be killed, then it’s not a surprise.
honestly, i don’t mind that much if they want israeli troops to be killed. they’re soldiers. and i can even understand the context why the powerless (or less powerful) take the war to civilians via terrorism. my issue is my perception that there is bizarro conspiracy theorizing/jew hating/commie sympathizing at these things galore. if it is trivial, it is, if not, it isn’t.
Razib: I’m not sure about anywhere else, and I haven’t been to a protest in Tehran lately, where I’m sure the anti-Jewish component of the crowd is much larger, but the Australian protests tend to have: a) small numbers of organised leftists, who show a disproportionate influence on the day because they generally do most of the organising work to build the protests, b) larger numbers of “ordinary” people, who have responded to the publicity and turned up, whose political views are no doubt extremely varied, but who generally aren’t heard from the speakers’ platform, c) very small numbers of actual loons, including anti-Semites, puppeteers, and dressed-up and painted walking political statements, and d) moderate numbers of representatives of more “respectable” non-government organisations, who are generally trying to walk the tightrope between sucking up to government in order to lobby, and remaining credible to the leftist organisers of the protests who have invited them to speak.
So what?- so this website decided to take pictures of the 10-15 idiots at this rally out of the couple thousand people who were there. Your response is just too simplistic. There’s no way you can go to any sort of mass protest and expect to agree with everyone there. It’s just the nature of the beast. And, with any sort of protest, on either side of this and every other issue, there are gonna be fringe idiots who don’t really believe, in peace, justice, fairness etc.- they’re either ignorant or just filled with hate.
But, if you believe in protest and organizing as a real tool for resistance, and really understand how important it is and view it as one of the few opportunities for normal people to take action, then you can’t dismiss it so easily because there are a few people there who are fools.
Of course, this doesn’t necissarily mean that, if you believe that what’s happening in lebanon (and palestine generally) is wrong, that you have to support every opposition demonstration- i freely admit there are some very disturbing viewpoints out there. But where, as here, the message of the rally is not offfensive, and overwhelming majority of the people are not saying the things that offend you- then it’s a little rash to dismiss it just because of a few idiots. If everyone made their decisions this way- how would we ever speak out against our government and injustice?
This particular demonstration was, I think, organized by the ANSWER coalition. I don’t know too much about their politics and behind the scenes stuff- but you should take a quick look at the website. While you may not necissarily agree with every position that they’ve taken- there’s nothing supporting the things you mention- nasrallah, hezbollah, hamas, etc.
This is San Francisco. I’m sure there were a couple of naked people and a bunch of patchouli drenched hippies handing out flyers for the upcoming Marxist revolution, some rastas handing out samplers of medical marijuana and a few fat old lesbians who ended up in the wrong protest.
Still, it is completely idiotic to run around in the middle of San Francisco saying “we stand for Hezbollah”. I don’t think the protestors would last too long with Hez.
Again, I dismiss the much of the mashed together protestor culture and not necessarily the orgs behind them or their causes. The purpose of me pointing this out is that I hope someone who attends these protests takes at least a minute to admonish some of their fellow protestors.
So if you dismiss “mashed together protestor culture” then what alternative vehicle for voicing opposition and movement building do you think is effective?
I wouldn’t necissarily assume that the other people in the crowd aren’t as outraged as you about some of their fellow protestors, and I’m sure that some of them even take the bigger step of calling them out. But generally, at protests, I think most people just think the fringe folks who would hold up nasrallah signs are idiots and just ignore them. They understand what you seem not to- that those folks are just not the point and are irrelevant to the demonstration or the movement.
I’m doing it right now. And last night 🙂 See you soon brown fury. An In-and-Out Burger will take that fury right out of you.
Uhh- are we still talking about the same thing?
Jokes aside- while I agree that media is key, and clearly, blogging has become a great tool to debate and spread information- the blogging world should be careful to see their role in context. It’s just one tool or just one piece of a larger framework for fighting injustice (if that’s the purpose of your blog of course, as opposed to say, for example, discussing how f*cking awesome the DETROIT TIGERS are!!!). The goal of that framework being the building of people power. Which only really can be achieved through movement building- mobilizing for mass protest is an essential component of that.
Basically, I’m just saying that dismissing protest culture, and saying that you’re gonna blog instead is not an effective substitute. You can do all the blogging you want, but without mobilization, it’s very difficult for normal people to impact an issue.
Also, don’t read this as a diss on bloggers- I totally think that bloggers are generally doing an important and essential thing.
I like my in ‘n out burgers animal style.
abhi: i see your point, but maybe consider another point of view… i am at the international aids conference right now and there are protests going on left, right and center! i agree that by getting caught up in the hype of the act of protesting, few individuals seriously understand, distinguish or appreciate the issues being protested at grass-root levels. however, i have also observed that despite the caveats involved, something seems to be working. if nothing else the movement of a group of individuals helps socities move towards a critical mass, which allows s for change at larger scales. now whether the type of movement that is accelerated is good or bad, that’s a different issue.
the protests in the area of hiv/aids, especially w regards to homosexuality and women’s rights are bearing fruit. is every single indiavidual aware of the complexities and underlying facts etc etc… no. becoming more aware is always good, but does that necessarily matter? i see the purpose of protests as bulding towards critical mass and they accomplish that purpose in large. the effects of a protest are observed at a large scale… one gandhi figure may not be noticed in the grand scheme or matter to the overall cause. awareness building is different as it is more exact and detail-specific where one can carefully outline causes and distinguish between them. it can be approached in many ways, like blogging, but is also very subjective.
Lots of folks have been debating the appropriate Gandhian or non-violent response to Israeli military actions, both the recent ones in Lebanon and ongoing in Palestine. “Why can’t we have a Gandhi?” is a common refrain among Arab activists I know.
Mark Juergensmeyer (who wrote the excellent Terror in the Mind of God) had a recent short piece in Outlook asking what Gandhi would do in the current “war on terrorism”
http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20060821&fname=LJurgensmeyer+%28F%29&sid=1
P.S. I find the juxtaposition of Gandhi and Nasrallah pretty revolting, wonder if it was intentional, or if two people holding up those pictures/puppets happened to be photographed while marching side by side.
The funny thing is that in extreme Muslim quarters particularly Pakistani, Gandhi is a euphemism for timid, grass eating Hindus who can’t fight. In several eyeball to eyeball fights ( always find that phrase funny ) during the Kargil war many pakistani soldiers and irregulars would taunt Indian soldiers by calling them ‘ Gandhi ‘
Yes, protests do work to form a critical mass or at least stir up public opinion and induce an exchange of ideas. But the intermingling of issues at one protest is cause for concern, because the message/issue not only gets diluted, it confuses the issue at the same time providing those on the other side with reason to paint all protesters with the same brush and proclaiming them as being a part of idiotic fringe. Thus the impact of the protests is reduced. Its worrisome because it is not an isolated incident, its happening everywhere, the protests in London, Toronto, Paris, etc. etc.
Here are a few excerpts from an interesting article by Sarah Baxter who wonders why feminist ideals have become twisted into support for groups like Hezbollah..
To me the most troublesome aspect of the protests is the increasing presence of children at these protests. Why must kids be drawn into all this?
Thanks for the link – great article by Sarah Baxter. As a feminist I too am disturbed by women who align themselves with these Islamic fascists. True feminists need to differentiate from these misguided fools.
Abhi: I’m not sure why you’ve assumed that this doesn’t happen. I’ve seen it a thousand times: during the protest, and after it, groups of people standing around talking to each other and discussing politics, strategy and tactics. Some of them already know each other, some just met at the protest, or at the organising meeting, or whatever. Does this not happen in America?
PS: “admonishing” isn’t really so good. Talking to people about their politics like grown-ups is much better.