Doug Henwood wrote:
>What part refutes itself? Chuck's pointing out ANSWER's propensity to
>cook numbers (personally witnessed by list member Liza Featherstone,
>who wrote it up for The Nation)? The slighting of other organizers'
>roles in making A20 possible? The deadening style of rallies, with 55
>speeches that no one wants to listen to?
>Inquiring minds are desperate to know!
>Doug
- ------------------------------------------------
CB: Hey, remember when Michael Moore was on this list toward its beginning. He's pretty funny and unboring, but he got chased away by...well what did chase him away ? Anyway, from that experience, I'm not sure that funny , non-boring speeches and presentations would get a friendly reception on or off the list, anymore than unfunny, boring one's. Damned if they do and damned if they don't.
I can't really remember too many rallies or demos I have been to which had exciting styles. Solidarity Day 1981, big , but boring. Peace Rally 1982, NYC, one million people against nukes . Not very interesting speeches, since the main point was profound but deadly dull and dully deadening. " No News or Free Press wanted here", a basic workers' struggle , but monotonous eventually. Things like storming the Bastille are relatively rare, one in a thousand. That counter coup in Venezuela seems like it might not have been boring. Perhaps we should organize Bolivarian Circles if we want more attractive,effective demos.
It is not that easy to make U.S. out of "Afganistan-Curb global imperialism-Israel " out of Palestine interesting, funny, exciting, don't you think ? If you've marched fifty times before, or even five times before, it gets to be a job. But what else can we do ?