November 02, 2003

Penny for the Guy

Much to disagree with in this column by Mary Ridell, perhaps, though not its thesis ("retreat is not an option".) I'll just quote a few of the good lines:

Peace is slippery to define. To Samuel Johnson, it was the product of mutual cowardice. To Cicero, it was liberty in tranquillity. Now it means 'Fuck Bush' banners and presidential pyres for bonfire night. This is the Turner Prize of protest, featuring Stop the War activists as the Chapman Brothers of mass action. The forthcoming civil disobedience will be non-violent, organisers stress, but the whiff of brutalism conjures up a world where no such caveat is feasible...

[T]he anti-war movement, whatever its stake on prescience, has proved a depressingly negative force, too. The populist spirit that politicised a generation and illuminated mass marches has curdled into pessimism and posturing. It may be excessive to hope that a peace movement can save a single Iraqi life. But it might show better that it mourned, or even noticed.


I particularly like "the Turner Prize of protest."

See also Harry's comments on the seeming incongruence embodied in enlisting Guy Fawkes Day effigy-burning in a purported "progressive" cause. I'm not sure burning symbols in the street is quite as out of step with the traditions the Peace Movement as he says it is. And it can come as no great surprise that GWB puppets will be burned many times over on November 5. However, there's surely a degree of irony in this, and still more, perhaps, in this one. All in good fun, of course; and, as far as I can see, utterly pointless. Yet, in terms of historical analogy, who exactly is playing the role of "the Guy" in this scenario?

Posted by Dr. Frank at November 2, 2003 06:00 PM | TrackBack
Comments

History, schmistory. God save history, God save your mad parade. Personally I thought the "No Bush" protest was much more clever (http://wendypolyploidy.com/nobush/), from an artistic point of view, but I'm admittedly a sucker for Situationist-style non-sequiter political discourse.

So where does that leave "effective neo-progressivism"? Certainly you've expressed disdain for the primary modern forms of protest, namely, purchasing books by Michael Moore at WalMart and burning figureheads in effigy. As some part humanist, I am pro-occupation, though I have zero faith in any seeming humanist sentiment from the Bush Administration. In fact the only interesting thought I've had recently on the subject is that we ought to get all "coalition" forces out and leave everything in the hands of the Red Cross With Guns. Which doesn't exist, but if it did, might go a long way toward removing the capitalist-industrialist-zionist overtones that do us so much damage, despite any individuals' good intentions.


Posted by: Wes at November 3, 2003 12:32 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?