|
Marches, Protests, and Civil Disobedience? |
 |
 |
 |
|
Written by Stuart Noble
|
|
Tuesday, 30 January 2007 01:41 |
by Stuart Noble
The recent march on the Mall in Washington D.C. has produced a fair amount of publicity in the media and discussion around the blogosphere for, well, a couple of days.
Let me start by saying,
The streets are dead capital. There is nothing to be gained on the streets.
If there is nothing (don’t read this in absolute terms) to be gained in the streets then where should political dissent be aimed? Some have suggested that online political activism represents a new form of civil disobedience. I tend to agree. In one sense, online political dissent is more effective than street marches and protests, primarily because the elite media doesn’t have absolute dominion over the message. The blogosphere has real power because of the free flow of information and ideas. This last bastion of democratic free flowing communication is a critical element to the preservation of freedom and liberty in a post-industrial large-scale society. However, while the free flow of information and ideas can translate into political capital, it doesn’t necessarily translate into political victory.
In order for civil disobedience to have any real effect it must be aimed at the power structure and it must disrupt that power structure in some meaningful way. The proud traditions of Gandhi, and King promoted civil disobedience through non-violence but that tradition was not one of mere protest alone. Gandhi and King both participated and promoted marches and protests. These activities served well to draw attention to their causes but their more powerful civil disobedience tools went right at the heart of the ruling economic structure. They understood that public attention alone wouldn’t bring about any lasting or meaningful change. |
