On Thu, 10 Oct 2002, Wojtek Sokolowski wrote:
> I am not disputing the fact that many people may be cautious or even
> opposing the war. But that things does not concern them directly - it is
> something that is going on in a distant land that they have problem
> finding on a map. Now contrast that with a very tangible alternative -
> the prez wrapping himself in a flag and asking people to either march
> with him or to support the people who brought us 9/11, your neighbors
> questioning the patriotism of those who publicly express their doubts -
> in a word, an considerable peer pressure to conform.
Actually Woj, if you want to reduce all action to personal cost/benefits, I think you are touching on one here that draws people to demonstrations. Being the object of a strong pressure to conform is painful and alienating when you think differently. It makes you feel as if you're all alone. For this, a crowd of like-minded people is a balm. A real balm for a real distress.
BTW, am I mistaken here -- I thought were you anti rat action? Here it sounds more like you're just trying to extend the rat action calculus to include emotional payoffs.
But if you insist making that reduction, you have to do it equally on both sides of the equation. If you accept that people can support the war for purely emotional and symbolic payoffs (and no material gain), then you have to accept that people can gather in opposition for the same kind of reasons. And I see no reason a priori why our side has to lose that kind of battle.
Of course, it seems like you've kind of discarded beforehand the idea that either course of action can have any inherent worth with this approach. But I can see how that might appeal to a misanthrope :o) Next you'll be telling us how a woman can be reduced to 97 cents worth of chemicals :o)
Michael