"Max B. Sawicky" wrote:
>
> I notice repeatedly reports about rallies where the speeches are
> of no interest. Shouldn't this be seen as a problem?
I think it is an insoluable problem, which has nothing to do with any of the elements in the present anti-war movement but with the structure (unavoidable structure) of mass mobilizations and the physical facts of such mobilizations. Someone in writing of a rally in SF remarked casually that the speeches were boring but it didn't matter because he or she was talking to other people.
By long established tradition the decorum of rallies includes speakers. The speakers can't be made interesting and they can't be eliminated. I think thought should begin by accepting these two parameters. Because if you don't accept them, you are going to spend a lifetime spitting into the wind as far as rallies are concerned.
If there was enough debate, discussion, planning which accepted these parameters and didn't merely whine about how boring the speeches are, something might be worked out.
Suggestion. With current technology, it should be possible to program a microphone to go dead after 2 minutes of the same voice, and not reactivate until a voice of different gender and/or language accent began to speak.
Carrol
>
> mbs