Tim Jordan’s book Activism! (2002) portrays protests as a method to “cause us to focus on the meaning of particular movements and their demands.†Protests are now so frequent in our society they may be seen by a blind eye, so many causes and so little time… However, interestingly, Jordan writes protests “inform changes in our societies.†Thus instead of pushing change right now the strong point of a protest is informing society. However a major part is getting an informed society to change its lifestyle. How can actions of protest be involved in this movement?
Intriguing hypothesis that the number of protests have caused us to turn a blind eye. I’m thinking of yesterday’s anti-war demonstration that, by some accounts, brought together over 150,000 protestors. Yet other accounts had a much smaller number, “several thousand”. I wonder if this lower number represents a blind eye to what’s on the ground, an inurement to the effectiveness of protests, or whether it represents a refusal to challenge dominant discourse. In other words, “Americans support the war so therefore there cannot be so many people opposed to it”.
Another thing protesters have to worry about: will the act of protest be turned against them? Will it be used by the other side (whatever that is) to show the protesters as kooks or, worse yet, dangerous?