Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
>
>
> But what makes the power elite become willing to cooperate with
> movement leaders to make change, rather than ignore them? They would
> have to be given a reason why they want to cooperate and make change,
> i.e., there would have to be costs for refusing to cooperate and to
> make change and benefits for cooperating and making change. Actions
> in the streets, workplaces, communities, etc. change the cost-benefit
> equation for the power elite. When people are not restive, it
> doesn't cost the power elite anything to ignore them or those who
> articulate their wishes.
Dirksen was pretty clear on his reasons when he said "Let Civil Rights Be" (Literally, "An idea whose time has come. His assent was essential == and he gave it because mob action <g> was growing out of control. As long as blacks relied on the courts and Congress, they got nothing. Both courts and congress "followed the election returns" -- not the November election returns but the votes that were being cast everyday in the streets.
Like Wojtek, politicians and capitalists are scared shitless by public action. I began to catch on, actually, about three years before I became active, when I read a newspaper article on Robert Kennedy saying that those opposed to nuclear testing should write individual letters, not sign petitions or send form letters. Obviously he was lying through his teeth. No one gives a shit about people sitting at home. But a petition reveals that people are getting together and talking to each other. That is a threat.
Carrol
Carrol