Those who were around during the Vietnam War protest days remember all those marches on Washington. I attended one, and it was absolutely huge and very impressive.
And who can forget the photos of Martin Luther King standing in front of the Washington monument on the Mall?
It’s not clear how effective or important those marches were, even though they were actually dealing with administrations that appeared to care what the public thought, unlike the present administration. But visuals are powerful and they can affect some lawmakers and some of the public that hasn’t made up its mind yet. They also help to rally energy on the part of those who are already aligned with the viewpoint of the demonstrators.
And yes, the MSM would spin such demonstrations as it did the Tea Party demonstrations. But the MSM is not the only source of attention these days, and propaganda needs to be countered with better propaganda as well as facts. Facts all by themselves don’t quite cut it, unfortunately.
Many issues we face today are extraordinarily crucial for the future of America.
Two that come to mind—and on which the vast majority of Americans agree with the position of the right—are illegal immigration and the Iran deal. In spite of that, Obama is defying those opinions of the American people, and yet the right (not just the representatives of the right in government; that’s not what I’m referring to) seems curiously passive about it. There are many forms of peaceful (non-violent) activism, but demonstrations are one of them, and a visible one at that.
So what’s up with all this passivity?
Some might answer that it’s a lack of leadership from the GOP. But although that is true, this is not up to the GOP. Some might answer that demonstrations are just not in the style of the right; we don’t do groups, we are rugged individualists. My answer is that there’s nothing special or singular about demonstrations; they were just the first thing that popped into my head.
If not demonstrations, then the right needs to figure out something peaceful yet activist and effective that is its style, because it has been sluggish and ineffectual despite having the majority of Americans on its side in these fights.
Donald Trump himself may not be the answer, but he certainly knows a lot about publicity, and the crowds he’s drawing show that there’s this untapped and outraged energy that could be channeled. Breitbart was someone who also knew how to do draw attention, and the right lost a great activist when it lost him. It’s also no coincidence that he was originally a man of the left, where activism is the name of the game.
Here’s a commenter at my blog, opining on the subject of what to do:
The only effective solution to the Left-activist Gramscian march is a Right-activist Gramscian (counter-)march where the people collectively take the Left head on everywhere and win control of American society in honest competition.When the Right wins their contest against the Left, then GOP candidates like Cruz, Walker, Fiorina, and to a lesser degree Rubio can do their part defeating the thus-reduced Democrats within the elected political lane.Conservatives of all stripes need to stop passing the buck to the GOP. However, because conservatives habitually insist on demanding the GOP solve a problem that requires a victorious Right-activist Gramscian (counter-)march to solve, while they habitually eschew the collective Marxist-method activism that is necessary to compete for real with the Left, Trump is able to exploit the resulting market inefficiency.
Ideas, anyone?
[Neo-neocon is a writer with degrees in law and family therapy, who blogs at neo-neocon.]
[Featured Image: The angry face of the Brown U. shout down]
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY
