The Democrat Protest
I'll sum up my experiences at the anti-war march in New York City yesterday in one word: eh.
There are two reasons for my lack of excitement over what I saw: an undersized crowd and a lack of emotion throughout much of the march. Though organizers are claiming that 300,000 people attended the march, I think they're grossly overestimating the number involved. A better estimate, in my opinion, would be 50,000, with 75,000 being the upper end of what I expect the numbers to actually be. I walked from the end of the march, where probably 5-7,000 people were gathered, up to the tail of the marchers, and would say 50,000 would be a liberal estimate. 300,000 is nuts.
The other problem is that the march was lacking in the aspects that make anti-war marches fun and valuable. The large majority of those involved thought they were committing some act of treason by wearing an "Impeach Bush" button and were tickled pink at the thought of this. The chants consided mainly of "Well, we think something should be done about Iraq, don't want to leave now though 'cause thats bad, but, hey, Bush is evil, right?" in not so many words. I was alone, so I was jumping in and out of the march, and there were times when I'd get in with a group, listen to what they were saying, and leave because it was so lame.
Not only were the protesters mainly centrist, but they also were lacking in emotion. In the D.C. march in September, there was a constant stream of noise and ruckus coming from the crowd, in all areas. Chanting, musical instruments, shouts, singing - everything. In New York, there was mostly just marching, which lacks the effect on spectators, it leaves them wondering how much these "protesters" really care about the issue.
That said, I spent a few hours with the red-flaggers of the Progressive Labor Party waving banners and chanting communist slogans. Then I found out they were authoritarian communists (not anarchist communists) and I booked. But it was enjoyable to be with them because there was a lot of energy and they drew a very large crowd, even if they are batshit insane. On a related note, the anarchist faction, which can usually be used to gauge the size and political orientation of the crowd, numbered around two dozen. In D.C. there were around 100.
The other surprising thing about the march was that there was no counter-demonstrations. There were a good 500 in D.C., and the lack of their presence in New York may reflect the weakness of the anti-war crowd.
Despite my complaints though, many of those on the train with me were at their first anti-war march and obviously enjoyed it tremendously. So despite the fact that I found it sanitized and emotionless, they found it to be vastly more entertaining and powerful. Maybe it'll be enough to drag them left in time for the next march...
P.S. One last note. Parents: DO NOT BRING YOUR CHILDREN TO AN ANTI-WAR MARCH. I was disgusted by the number of six year olds chanting "Stop the War!" First, they have no idea what they're saying and you're exploiting them for publicity. Second, an anti-war march can be a very dangerous place. The one in New York saw no arrests, but if it had been more like Seattle the kids could've gotten killed.
Appendix:
CNN article on the march
CNN gallery on the march (general ideas are there, including three year olds holding flags).
I'll be posting my own pictures once I get them off the camera. But I've got a backlog of homework to do now.
There are two reasons for my lack of excitement over what I saw: an undersized crowd and a lack of emotion throughout much of the march. Though organizers are claiming that 300,000 people attended the march, I think they're grossly overestimating the number involved. A better estimate, in my opinion, would be 50,000, with 75,000 being the upper end of what I expect the numbers to actually be. I walked from the end of the march, where probably 5-7,000 people were gathered, up to the tail of the marchers, and would say 50,000 would be a liberal estimate. 300,000 is nuts.
The other problem is that the march was lacking in the aspects that make anti-war marches fun and valuable. The large majority of those involved thought they were committing some act of treason by wearing an "Impeach Bush" button and were tickled pink at the thought of this. The chants consided mainly of "Well, we think something should be done about Iraq, don't want to leave now though 'cause thats bad, but, hey, Bush is evil, right?" in not so many words. I was alone, so I was jumping in and out of the march, and there were times when I'd get in with a group, listen to what they were saying, and leave because it was so lame.
Not only were the protesters mainly centrist, but they also were lacking in emotion. In the D.C. march in September, there was a constant stream of noise and ruckus coming from the crowd, in all areas. Chanting, musical instruments, shouts, singing - everything. In New York, there was mostly just marching, which lacks the effect on spectators, it leaves them wondering how much these "protesters" really care about the issue.
That said, I spent a few hours with the red-flaggers of the Progressive Labor Party waving banners and chanting communist slogans. Then I found out they were authoritarian communists (not anarchist communists) and I booked. But it was enjoyable to be with them because there was a lot of energy and they drew a very large crowd, even if they are batshit insane. On a related note, the anarchist faction, which can usually be used to gauge the size and political orientation of the crowd, numbered around two dozen. In D.C. there were around 100.
The other surprising thing about the march was that there was no counter-demonstrations. There were a good 500 in D.C., and the lack of their presence in New York may reflect the weakness of the anti-war crowd.
Despite my complaints though, many of those on the train with me were at their first anti-war march and obviously enjoyed it tremendously. So despite the fact that I found it sanitized and emotionless, they found it to be vastly more entertaining and powerful. Maybe it'll be enough to drag them left in time for the next march...
P.S. One last note. Parents: DO NOT BRING YOUR CHILDREN TO AN ANTI-WAR MARCH. I was disgusted by the number of six year olds chanting "Stop the War!" First, they have no idea what they're saying and you're exploiting them for publicity. Second, an anti-war march can be a very dangerous place. The one in New York saw no arrests, but if it had been more like Seattle the kids could've gotten killed.
Appendix:
CNN article on the march
CNN gallery on the march (general ideas are there, including three year olds holding flags).
I'll be posting my own pictures once I get them off the camera. But I've got a backlog of homework to do now.
posted by Jimmy at 4:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home