An open letter to TPP protesters

FOREIGN AFFAIRS

Nathan Smith

TPP protester (Photo: Nathan Smith)

“Who has the power? WE have the power. This is what democracy looks like!”

So went the chant of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) protesters outside SkyCity’s convention centre on Thursday. It’s not often the mantra of a protest group perfectly encapsulates the malaise, frustrations and niggling feelings of impotency in the wider modern society. And this one fails as well.

I watched this week’s protests “on the ground” as journalists like to say. I felt sorry for those thousands of people. Down to a person, each demonstrator was convinced their activity would be effective. That was a vague hope for many, because no two people appeared to have the same grievances, but it was hope. Why else would they participate if they didn’t think it would work? So it's a shame that all they did was help people like me make more money.

The reason “peaceful protests” don’t work anymore is because none of its participants have access to the machinery of power and, far worse, they let themselves be used by the machinery of power to become a slave and a battery. This machinery of power is the arm of the state commonly known as the media, and it controlled every step the protesters took this week.

I was prompted to talk about the intersection of the media with grassroots political action after I was overtaken by trudging TPP protesters on my way to the office on Thursday. Protesting is a perfectly respectable activity, don’t misunderstand me. But do not believe the lie that marching gives you power or a voice. It is a comprehensive surrender to the media.

Most people don’t realise that inviting media coverage of a movement will not “get your message out.” It never does: Instead, it gets the NZ Herald or NBR’s message out. Pithy chants and bright placards stand no chance of being delivered as intended when the journalist’s camera chooses what will be included inside the frame. All the emotion, all the rage, all the anxiety – brought to you by Kia and the editors at TVNZ.

It is impossible for protests to change anything because they are not designed to affect change. They are designed to dissipate the frantic energy of people who lack the power to change anything. The fact that protesters are allowed on to the streets of a major city such as Auckland is proof positive that they are operating 100% in support of the system. After all, the best place for a controversial movement is in plain sight.

I’ve noted in earlier pieces how the presence of the media at a protest is a sure indicator of the imminent failure of that movement. The media doesn’t care for nuance and reasoned debate: It wants a cage fight, because that makes for good clicking. The media’s job is to package a protest as a Manichean commodity, and which side is the light or dark is entirely up to the editors and journalists.

When the regime was stormed during the Russian Revolution, the message the revolutionaries carried was urgent and immediate. And before the press had time to catch up and interpret the new revolution, the movement’s message had already been digested by the public, changing the system irreparably. Only after the system was fully changed was the media then co-opted as a tool of the new power structure.

The way protests reinforce the system is perfectly captured in the picture below. It is a group of men selling Guy Fawkes masks, understood to be the international symbol of anarchist groups. Not only are these protesters selling the masks at $4, they are making a profit. I assume the irony of all this occurring at an anti-globalisation and anti-capitalist protest was entirely lost on them.

(Photo: Nathan Smith)

So it will never matter how many people walk down Queen St. Every placard is irrelevant. The only people who have any real power are people like me (a journalist), and I am stronger and faster than all of the demonstrators. I don’t care how quickly the TPP protesters overtook me when I walked to work, I will always be three or four steps ahead of them and forever in control.

Put a journalist in front of a teeming protest and hit record. Once it plays on YouTube the viewer won’t remember anyone else in the footage apart from the reporter. And for the majority of viewers, that is the only experience they will ever have of the protest – packaged as a commodity. The system has won.

In Don DeLillo’s 2003 novel Cosmopolis, the protagonist commutes through a city with a female aide when a violent protest explodes around his limousine. The resulting conversation shows how protest action is a tool, a commodity or at least expected:

Protesters were rocking the car. He looked at her and smiled.
"You know what capitalism produces. According to Marx and Engels."
"Its own grave-diggers," he said.
"But these are not the grave-diggers. This is the free market itself. These people are a fantasy generated by the market. They don't exist outside the market. There is nowhere they can go to be on the outside. There is no outside."
The camera tracked a cop chasing a young man through the crowd, an image that seemed to exist at some drifting distance from the moment.
"The market culture is total. It breeds these men and women. They are necessary to the system they despise. They give it energy and definition. They are marketdriven. They are traded on the markets of the world. This is why they exist, to invigorate and perpetuate the system."

The protesters in Auckland were operating in a world built on a set of rules they did not create; rules they lack the ability to name, let alone change. Because of this, they will never be as fast or as strong as a media that operates outside those rules and exists to reinforce the structure the protests are attempting to upend.

So here’s a tip to future protesters: if you want to effect real change, you must refuse the presence of all media. Yes, that includes your own smartphones. Put them away or, better yet, throw them in the sea because those devices represent the toxicity you so adamantly claim to fight against. Do not think organising and spreading your protest plans on Twitter is a good move. The social network is a commercial enterprise attached at the hip to traditional media.

This is what I mean by slavery. All the “activism” people think they’re undertaking is simply ad revenue for shiny suits in Manhattan and a fresh tsunami of data sucked up to sell your own warped ideas back to you.

Ideally you wouldn’t even start a protest in the first place, because if you had the power to change anything you’d go right for the jugular. You wouldn’t dawdle around the edges “getting your voice heard.” Playing inside a rule-box someone else created is to lose the game before it starts. So if a guy approaches asking you to sign something, punch him in the throat. He’s your enemy. Until you understand this, until you realise that what holds you back is your self-imposed slavery, until you know this – not feel it – you will never be powerful.

Once the protests expired, I watched city council workers clean up the discarded placards and calm people stroll through Auckland’s streets again as if nothing happened. The frantic energy of political impotency had dissipated and been replaced by the lingering illusion of democratic power.

A protest is just the system offering you a punching bag. Think back to that slogan they all chanted – “Who has the power? We have the power...” Then why is everyone acting in exactly the same way? Do you see? The choice to protest was no choice at all, it was facilitated by the system.

The conversation in Mr DeLillo’s limousine continued.

“How will we know when the global era officially ends?”
He waited.
"When stretch limousines begin to disappear from the streets of Manhattan." Men were urinating on the car. Women pitched sandfilled soda bottles.
"This is controlled anger, I would say. But what would happen if they knew that the head of Packer Capital was in the car?"
She said this evilly, eyes alight. The protesters' eyes were blazing between the red-and-black bandannas they wore across their heads and faces. Did he envy them? The shatterproof windows showed hairline fractures and maybe he thought he'd like to be out there, mangling and smashing. "They are working with you, these people. They are acting on your terms," she said. "And if they kill you, it's only because you permit it, in your sweet sufferance, as a way to re-emphasize the idea we all live under."
"What idea?"
"Destruction," she said.
On one of the screens he saw figures descending a vertical surface. It took him a moment to understand that they were rappelling down the facade of the building just ahead, where the market tickers were located.
"You know what anarchists have always believed."
"Yes."
"Tell me," she said.
"The urge to destroy is a creative urge."
"This is also the hallmark of capitalist thought. Enforced destruction. Old industries have to be harshly eliminated. New markets have to be forcibly claimed.
“Old markets have to be re-exploited. Destroy the past, make the future."

This is what I mean when I say that if a protest isn’t throwing rocks, then the protest will fail. I’m not telling you to throw rocks, I’m explaining why your march won’t work.

Truly radical action this week would have been to pile up every protester’s life-savings outside the building and set it alight. The smell of the burning plastic would expose the naked truth that money and rules are equally illusory and their power over us is self-maintained. To paraphrase Jean-Paul Sartre: “you weirdos are freer than you know.”

The melting heap would be painful but it would be a consciousness-raising example demanded by proper revolution – the kind of self-sacrifice every protester wielding a smartphone is incapable of performing.

And since this did not happen, the conclusion must be either that these people cannot see their servility or that power over the existing system is the real goal – not change. The first is forgivable but the latter is horrific. A small group will always use the crowd for a power grab. Their goals are rarely to usher in a fresh and egalitarian society. These people will simultaneously count you among their numbers even as they ask you to die for their goals. Or kill, depending on how much power they get.

Dear TPP protesters: Do you want change or power? What you did not fight for, and this is to my point, is the specific power of being taken seriously without the need to protest.

Want to listen to the day's hottest stories, plus interviews and panel discussions? Stream NBR Radio's latest free 40-minute podcast from iHeartRadioTunein, or iTunes.


40 · Got a question about this story? Leave it in Comments & Questions below.

This article is tagged with the following keywords. Find out more about MyNBR Tags

Post Comment

40 Comments & Questions

Commenter icon key: Subscriber Verified

Great article thank you.

I think you touched on something really powerful towards the end there that perhaps the greatest protest action of all would be a comprehensive collective action to simply not spend a single cent on anything, a total and complete annihilation of consumption, movement, action and energy (a mass hunger strike if you will) thus starving the beast and causing its collapse.

Never going to happen of course and even if it did the genius in the system is to respond to the new needs that would be created during such action and it would be reborn in the same but different form - but it is an interesting thesis nonetheless.

Reply
Share
  • 2
  • 0

I have seen the media deliberately distort what happens, so as to show massive upheaval, where there often was hardly any.
First, was when the USS TRUXTON entered Waitemata Harbour I was watching from Fort Cautley. As she passed between A and B buoys, there was a small number of protest boats around her. She slowed down for five minutes or so, to pass them safely, then sped up again. But the TV news that night appeared to show a massive protest fleet surrounding her, almost completely untrue.
Second, was a flat-top truck outside Auckland University, with a group of, presumably, students on it, and several cameramen urging them to get closer together so as to look a crowd. I presumed they were protesting about SOMETHING, but I had no idea what.
Third, was at Waiting, some years ago, where I saw a group of protesters, about 20 I estimated, standing in the water and chanting something. Yet, on the evening news, it appeared that a massive protest has occurred. And on the next day my primary school children were informed - or rather mis-informed, by their teacher that there had been a huge protest by Maori.
All deliberately altered by the media to show things in as bad a light as possible.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

What a brilliant article. Key, Joyce and their cronies understand the concept of power so well. They pay lip service to the concerns of the masses with rapier skill. Their cynical expertise has seen the almost complete erosion of the principles of due process during their terms. Democracy depends on genuine checks and balances, currently they are just a token to disguise the pragmatisms that are the hallmark of Key's dominance.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 0

Gosh, John, isn't it remarkable what can be learnt from growing up with a single Mum in a State House! I mean who knew!!? Gosh, that must have been my mistake. I grew up with two parents and wealthy.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 1

Steve, I think JKey will go down as one of our great leaders, it sucks for our democracy that we have no opposition.

Reply
Share
  • 2
  • 0

We have no opposition because the 'opposition' cannot get beyond opposing John Key. The oppositions arguments are shallower than a carp park puddle

Reply
Share
  • 2
  • 2

We have no opposition because NZ has followed overseas examples and become more and more about a personality at the top and the soundbites they deliver.

We saw this when Helen Clark was in power and National languished at 27% support. We see this now with a credulous electorate that still trusts that "nice, everyday bloke" at the top and can find no equally attractive persona on the left.

Until Key leaves and / or the Left can stand up a mannequin to match National will remain ascendant.

That said, I've seen quite a few people who formerly supported National due to policies find themselves unable to any longer support the party due to unethical conduct in the past few years.

For the majority though, personality and soundbites uber all.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

You may want to read this John http://thestandard.org.nz/the-great-big-list-of-john-keys-big-fat-lies-u... Whilst it is from The Standard, (the anti-NBR), even if you discount half of what is in the list as bias that still leaves over 200 documented public lies by the 'great leader'. He'll go down in history as the 'PM people wanted to have a beer with', which is a long way removed from a "great leader". Kirk, Savage, Lange, even Muldoon in his eccentric way, were leaders, Key is 100% populist.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 0

To John McCarthy
Complete nonsense
What we have seen over the past eight years is a slowly reforming government managing quakes and GFC and yet an economically successful and calm period of government
Compare that with most countries of the world

Reply
Share
  • 2
  • 1

Really? We have an out of control Auckland, our two largest export sectors in tatters,regional disparity, shonky Saudi deals,potential foreign dominance of our meat industry, parasitic local government , muzzled media, child poverty vs flag indulgence, ballooning debt... Depends where you sit ?

Reply
Share
  • 2
  • 1

Good grief! Neither the government nor John Key personally are responsible for an out of control Auckland. Auckland rate payers are. Our two largest export sectors might be having a tough time but as anyone in the private sector knows, business moves in cycles and we just happen to be at the wrong part of the cycle at the moment. Plus, as these two sectors are in the hands of the private sector and not responsible to the government other than to pay taxes it is up to private individuals to make the calls that best suit their circumstances.

Regional disparity? It's called market forces. Let the failures fail and move on. Shonky Saudi deals? I'll give you that. But foreign dominance of our meat industry? Yeah, nah. Our meat industry is privately owned. The owners of meat industry capital will place their money where they get the best return. If they can't get a return under the current structure they'll take it out and place it elsewhere. So what if a foreigner takes ownership? The land, the animals and the plant is still here.

Parasitic local government? Once again, look to the local rate payers. They get what they deserve. Muzzled media? You have to be joking. If not then show me the evidence.

Child poverty? It does NOT exist other than in the minds of the loud and the shrill.

Graeme Edwards is right on the money here John. You have no argument.

Reply
Share
  • 5
  • 1

Hey Philip,
Thank you for your analysis. I accept the criticism in part. My real concern is about checks and balances, which having studied constitutional law back in the dark ages one of the salient points I recall. The other one was from Sociology 101 and was the inevitable growth of the self serving bureaucracy. Anyhow I will agree to disagree courteously, which is hard for me. we can though do better, TPP is oversold , market forces are a seriously discredited formula to appease all evils and one of the advantages of being an older farmer is I have seen the promises of hope and new dawns since the beginning of time, they are inevitably sucked up by the pretenders and parasites who produce bugger all.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 0

Taking John Key at his 2007 word (that there is a housing affordability crisis and he has concrete solutions, not rinkydink schemes), you're left with two choices:

1. He lied on the election trail
2. He failed at implementing these concrete solutions.

I don't claim that he held responsibility for crisis - he himself asked for that responsibility and proclaimed his ability to resolve it.

>"Child poverty? It does NOT exist other than in the minds of the loud and the shrill."

This is just blatantly untrue, as well as lacking in understanding of the importance of BOTH absolute and relative poverty. The social issues one finds in the slums of Manila or other cities are remarkably similar to those we find in our impoverished communities here.

The old canard "We don't even have poverty. People need to get out and see the world. I've seen real poverty! (through a taxi window)" doesn't hold water.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

I reckon both Graeme & John are correct to the extent of the points they illustrate, but the bigger picture as exposed by Nathan is that the "Establishment & Media have the same objectives - retention of power". Where the opinion of the population or a significant proportion of it is ignored or overridden the result has always been destruction of assets and people - French/Russian Revolutions so checks & balances and actual change to the popular will is essential to the maintenance of a prosperous & orderly society. The accumulation of so much wealth in so few hands and the deliberate avoidance by Large Multinational Corporates to avoid taxes whilst the establishment increasingly squeeze the middle classes in particular will result in undesirable consequences for those deemed responsible .

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Compare it to whom? Economically successful for whom? The PM himself said there is a $17 billion hole in their budget yet he is still proposing tax cuts, akin to overspending your household budget but still planning on having champagne for breakfast. The top 5%, perhaps 10%, have prospered, but it is propped up by a very shaky middle class and ignored lower class. To be fair NBR readers will be those that are gaining from Nationals consolidation of wealth, so your comments are expected if not rather sad. Your own fact that after five years they still have done little in Christchurch illustrates how ineffective they have been in Government.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Hit the nail on the head. From the outside, I saw (through the media) the protestors to be ill-informed and self-centred , and trying to get 5 minutes of fame and be part of a mass group, and not prepared to make any great sacrifice to pursue their vague aims. Taking a day off work or giving up a sex toy is not a sacrifice but as Nathan alluded to, if a proper sit in had occurred, if people had been arrested, if people formed a political party and proved continued widespread support, then I would respect them.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 1

>"ill-informed and self-centred"

This is certainly the party line being propagated about all those who raise concerns.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

The Fabians have the answer. Their protests are genteel and enlightened: "What do we want?" 'GRADUAL CHANGE.' When do we want it?" 'IN DUE COURSE'.

Reply
Share
  • 2
  • 0

Aye, the art of canny delay, which we owe to Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus Cunctator. They called him Fabius, understandably. Perhaps in future we'll call him John Key. Certainly the impotent rage of the ultraconservative left is a less daunting challenge than a rampaging Carthaginian, and his elephants, and Fabius dealt to those, handily enough.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Reminds me of another slogan "procrastinate NOW"

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

hmmm.... in my view the numerically significant numbers of concerned New Zealanders on Queen Street Auckland on 4 February 2016, protesting against the TPPA - has been a 'tipping point' for this John Key led National Government.

On Saturday 6 February 2016, Waitangi Day, at the NRL 'Nines' Tournament at Eden Park, Prime Minister John Key was publicly BOOED by the crowd, which was widely reported in the media.

As I understand it, this is the first time our purportedly 'most popular' Prime Minister has been publicly booed at a major sporting event.

I predict this is just the start of public displays of disproval regarding the role of NZ Prime Minister John Key, and I also predict that at future major sporting events that he will prefer to stay in the 'corporate boxes' rather than attempt any 'mixing and mingling' with 'ordinary' Kiwis.

Penny Bright
2016 Auckland Mayoral candidate.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 3

Hey Penny, if you become Mayor and control the council purse strings, will you pay your overdue rates?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

All politicians get booed, especially at sporting events. Better than being laughed at though, what do you say Penny?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

So we now gauge the pulse of the country from rugby league crowds. Give me a break

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 0

I agree. key has been sheltered by a complicit media ... bring him in front of the public and then we hear what many really think of him. The pendulum is swinging, the public are waking up to the shallowness of this man.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Penny, you clearly don't understand the article. Perhaps when those people who marched join you in not paying rates or bathing there might be change. Simple acts like BOOING or taking a day out to protest is not going to bring about any 'tipping point' but perhaps for the majority of us you thinking so is a good thing.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

... or, as I tweeted:

Precis of yesterday’s #TPP protests:

Down with National’s Big Government!

What do we want?!

We want Big Government!

Society has so caved in to statism as the ruling ethic, most people on that march are as clueless as sheep which would vote for abattoirs if they were bribed with a free lunch first.

Mind you, so would most journos :)

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

This is one of the most thoughtful articles I have seen on this subject.

Beautifully put words around my general feelings that the protesters were a waste of time and in fact probably reinforced a view that the TPPP (whatever it is) must be good if those "sorts of people" oppose it.

We have a pretty good country if the protests can happen without police deaths and over a silly subject - unlike import items like children being hurt and killed in NZ.

The article will not be well received by those that think this sort of thing actually affects the powers that be. Unless you can emabrrass the government (and they accept that embarassment) then unless you hold votes it is all for nix.

Great to see this quality of article in the media - so sick of the pap and click bait from the so called news papers.

Disagree or agree - quality piece.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Most of NZ society and economy is disconnected from any economic reality or direct economic signal as our economy operates mainly through redistributing income from farming and tourism and a few niche industries to the general populus and an expensive and outdated health and education system.
The protest communinty is inclined to be led by the daughters of left wing professors and ministers and has a cargo cult mentality. It is devoid of any perception of the real economic and security threats to NZ and bases its ideas on the delusion that most people are well intentioned, honest and fear if unprovoked. The protestors live in a pre French Revolutionary Rosseau like childs fantasy world.
Given the collapse of the Chinese econonomy and milk market , both always dubious source of substance the democratic pacific rim and the TPPP are the only choice for NZ and wealth. Prospects exist for a much larger income from lamb and meat sales under TPPP if the Silver Fern agreement is undone and tourism could be massively expanded with many new hotels and resorts, and a much more sophisticated and faster bar and club strips to replace the 'slow food joints' favoured by frightened and fragile women and bearded men.
The protestors employment base the education system, health system and psychology needs to be reconstricted with less public money, partical privatisation of the top girls and boys schools , ie $10,000 fee min for the schools in Seymours electorates and scholarships only for the top 3% IQ if acceptable to the school and good looking Maoris. University tenure will be ended and the current staff halved and replaced with new higher paid professionals. Health and Psychiatry will largely be replaced with self service pay for and choose your drugs and priority for the best bodies and intelligence. The current NZ employment structure is based on male muscle and power and collective decison and therefore is irrelevant to determination of actual human merit. Banning the top 100 militant protestors from government or judicial employment might also be useful.
In any other country Minto and Bradford would have experience serious state violence long age and the fact they haven't is why NZ has gone backwards. As long as militant females know they will only experiece kid gloves their is no counter their relentless destruction and levelling.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Good one Robert. Haven't laughed so much for ages! For the first couple of sentences, I thought that this was a serious article.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

I see this article as an indictment of the media rather than of the protesters. It describes our media as the servants of their advertisers and of the sensational rather than to understand and convey the real thinking behind something. As to the effectiveness of protesting, has the author heard of the Arab Spring? As to the future of journalism, maybe something this paid writer might be concerned about for a pay cheque, has the author heard of Twitter?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Thanks for your comment.

If I can point you back to the piece, and many of my earlier writings on this topic, I make it specifically clear that it is peaceful protests which do not work. However, when you throw rocks (both metaphorically and physically), you can approach some kind of meaningful change. But the key is not to let protests be cathartic or an end in themselves. There must be a series of steps to either take power, or change the system, of which protests are only one. Due to the incoherency of most protest groups and the difficulty of truly changing the status quo, I warn that this effort is not a simple task. Arguably, with the power and speed of modern media, true system change is likely impossible, unfortunately. Especially when relying on modern first-world citizens…

And yes, I have heard of the Arab Spring. Are you aware of how ineffective those mass movements actually were? In both Egypt and Tunisia, the ruling military groups remain in control of all powerful institutions and positions and the democratically-elected are side-lined or in prison. The effect of the protest was null in both cases, and arguably regressive. In Syria and Libya, the former suffers from a civil war with no end in sight (civil war is of course the naked militarisation of democracy) and the latter is barely a country under control of ex-military thugs. So even in these cases little has changed as a result of the protests. And if you want to claim Libya as a data point for your argument, then you're welcome to have a broken, collapsed, brutal and irreparable country.

As to your final comment about Twitter, please read my piece again. 

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

The author of this article claims social media can't be used to incite protest. Weren't the Arab Spring Protests essentially made possible by social media? Sure the end result hasn't been particularly positive for most of them, but that has no bearing on what was achieved with the help of information spreading online. If those people had "thrown away their phones" there would have been no united uprising.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Actually, I claimed social media SHOULDN"T be used to incite protest. Read the piece again. And think of the Arab Spring this way: if social media wasn't used, it would have been successful. The key to good geopolitics is not to analyse the world through your own eyes. Westeners thought the Arab Spring would work because Egyptians and Tunisians were tapping away on social media and spouting western values. But this is precisely why the movement hasn't worked.

I don't wish to be rude, but you do know that history didn't start in 1950, right? There is a hundreds of revolutions and uprisings in centuries past that were successful without social media, which is why I blame the media in general for people's inability to affect proper change in the modern era. Disagree with me all you like, but since you and I aren't likely to meet face-to-face, you must do all the disagreeing over the internet. That's the trap, and you are entirely caught.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Dude. Seriously? Nobody is dumb enough to think the protest was going to stop the signing. It was a symbolic gesture and a show of solidarity. People united, and proof that 'democracy' is a term misused by our government. This woman sums it up nicely. https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10153260467226302&id=3449729...

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Your comment simultaneously misses the point and confirms my thesis. I should have just linked to this video and saved myself a few hours of writing. 

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

My decision to stop listening to journalists, reading the paper or watching the news makes life so much more interesting

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

So to clarify, you are saying that peaceful protest doesnt work?

Just a couple of historic examples:

Parihaka Mararae
Gandi (pulled down pretty much the whole British Empire)
Martin Luther King and the civil right movement - yes there were more violent activities also but the peaceful message was what got through
Vietnam
"Bombs are bullets"
Treaty protests
Springbok tour
Arab spring

These represent massive social change, most of the examples given have had a modicum of rock throwing but the core passionate peaceful message can be infectious. It can topple empires.

Yep the frame can be set by the reporter, but the stage is set by the protester. It has to be remarkable enough to connect more people to the message.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Three things:

1) I assume you didn't read my article because in the fourth paragraph I specifically say peaceful protests don't work anymore. I'm well aware peaceful protests have sometimes worked in the past, although the history here is murky, but they are no longer useful today.
2) I've addressed the example of the Arab Spring twice in the comment thread above. Suffice to say, it was not a successful protest movement. And it was far from peaceful.
3) At least five of your examples do not historically defend your reasoning. You rightly point out that MLK's protests were a mix of peaceful and violent. But the same can be said of Gandhi's, Vietnam and the Springbok Tour. I've already mentioned how the Arab Spring as anything but a peaceful protest.

As far as "toppling empires" goes, it's simply a fallacy to say Gandhi's protest movement collapsed the British Empire. A little process known as 'world war' was mostly responsible for that. And I do want to point out that there is a difference between change and taking power. Arguably all of the protest movements you cite resulted in minimal or null true change (defined as the dissolution or replacement of institutions and concepts associated with the status quo, or Ancien Regime). Instead, the leaders of those protests took over the positions of their enemies, affecting little change to the underlying system, all while convincing their followers that success had been achieved. This is known as the "iron law of Oligarchy".

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Nathan, you laugh at the protestors but you are at least as much a slave to power as they are. The media cannot question their owners either.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Post New comment or question

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

NZ Market Snapshot

Forex

Sym Price Change
USD 0.7506 0.0002 0.03%
AUD 0.9397 -0.0012 -0.13%
EUR 0.6389 -0.0028 -0.44%
GBP 0.5719 -0.0018 -0.31%
HKD 5.8618 0.0024 0.04%
JPY 83.1670 -0.1910 -0.23%

Commods

Commodity Price Change Time
Gold Index 1260.0 -1.660 2017-07-27T00:
Oil Brent 51.5 0.550 2017-07-27T00:
Oil Nymex 49.0 0.300 2017-07-27T00:
Silver Index 16.5 0.114 2017-07-27T00:

Indices

Symbol Open High Last %
NZX 50 7711.7 7711.8 7711.7 -0.94%
NASDAQ 6350.3 6379.7 6382.2 -0.08%
DAX 12151.4 12183.8 12212.0 -0.40%
DJI 21787.5 21808.5 21796.5 -0.02%
FTSE 7443.0 7443.0 7443.0 -1.00%
HKSE 27008.0 27047.9 27131.2 -0.56%
NI225 20048.5 20056.2 20079.6 -0.60%
ASX 5785.0 5785.0 5785.0 -1.42%