Resistance: Protest in the age of the internet

I was just reading Richard Cullen’s piece on the lack of popular anti-war music and I think he’s missing something.

Music, say some sociologists, is just one manifestation of a more fundamental trend. Opposition to the Iraq war, which commands strong majorities in the polls, has not produced mass marches on the Pentagon or shut down college campuses.

The reasons are varied, including the lack of a military draft and much lower casualty figures than were suffered in Southeast Asia 40 years ago. But another big factor is the fragmented nature of how Americans live and communicate — with no clearer example than how we listen to music.

Cullen is not wrong but I think he’s looking for street protests and the same few antiwar songs blasting from every stereo as a sign that the opposition to the war is real. What he misses however, is that I think many my age understand that protests similar to those staged in the 1960s and 1970s probably would be ineffective at this time and really were ineffective then too. We have the mistakes of our parents to guide us.

The biggest reason why today’s protest music is failing to echo broadly, some cultural critics believe, is not just a shortened attention span on the part of music fans, but the move to an all-volunteer military. Compulsory military service during Vietnam meant millions more families felt they had a stake in the debate.

“If you’re at risk of going to a foreign country and getting your head blown off, then you take a very personal interest in what’s going on around you,” said David Fricke, senior editor at Rolling Stone.

“Let’s face it, people are distracted, they are distracted by reality shows, none of which have anything to do with reality,” Fricke added. “They spend more time watching ‘American Idol’ than they do voting in the last couple of elections.”

Without a draft, it’s easy for the public to lose sight of the war, especially when the media and presidential candidates turn their focus to the economy and other issues. The mission of rock activists against the war, then, becomes part of the subculture straining to reach the masses.

Again, he’s correct but in a way looking for this war, it’s antiwar movement and it’s outcomes to look the same as they did in Vietnam. I don’t think many people my age want any of those things. The protests in the 1960s were very troubling for large swaths of Americans who had every reason to be against the war. Images of young men and women burning flags, taking drugs and battling police created an understanding that opposing the war flowed from anger rather than deep concern.

This time there is just as deep an opposition to this war. At the same time there are few protests. Instead we are slowly becoming united as Americans by our desire to see this reach an outcome but also our understanding that we made an enormous mistake that we are largely responsible for correcting.

Yes, we need to leave Iraq but we need to also attempt to avoid a full blown civil war. There is a nuanced understanding of our situation that all but those on the fringes like Bush and McCain or Bill Maher seem to grasp. We know that getting angry isn’t going to help this situation. Protests can be beneficial in two basic ways, by convincing the population to agree with you or by convincing those in power to agree with you.

It seems clear that protests only convince governments to change policies if those in power really care what the opposition thinks. We live under a Bush Administration that has made it abundantly clear that it has no interest in changing strategies on Iraq no matter the public opinion. Under such circumstances, street protests and nuanced articles are probably going to be ineffective anyway, so the focus has to be on convincing the population.

In the age of radio and television we were bound by narrow ideas and short slogans. This is the age of the internet where our media can become a nuanced conversation involving large numbers of people trying to find realistic solutions. Today the idea of running to the streets and shouting “Get out of Iraq now!” seems almost silly. Rather than demonstrating a commitment to ending the war it conveys a lack of serious nuanced thinking. Therefore often protests today are discounted as empty gestures and are unlikely to sway the population. Instead the thoughtful articulation of better ideas seems the best strategy for protest in our modern age.

There is one final reason I believe that we have moved away from antiwar protest movements. In Vietnam the protest movement spilled to the streets over the issue of a draft. There was a sense that the antiwar movement had slowed seamlessly from the civil rights movement and would continue to evolve to tackle new issues. The foundation for that wasn’t laid though. The antiwar movement focuses so narrowly on the war and the draft that once the draft ended the momentum also died. Very little progress was made on the long term core issues that mattered to America. Nixon, Reagan and two Bush presidencies led a backlash against the extremism seen during the Vietnam era.

This time will be different. We may not storm the streets but we will convince the people what is happening in Iraq is wrong and needs to change but we will do so while acknowledging the difficulties involved in leaving in the hopes that our solutions will be sensible. We hope that with thoughtful solutions and nuanced debate we can convince the country to change on a host of issues. We hope that by involving citizens in a conversation rather than sending rock stars to lecture them, we can remind this nation of it’s populist roots and work together to manifest or ideals as reality.

At the end of the day, isn’t that more important than all sitting around listening to the same protest songs?