> I don't think the analogy works. For all of the rhetorical conservatism
> of the 1905 protests, it still involved a series challenge to the
> structure of the regime. I don't think you find any sort of comparable
> transgression within the context of the Obama campaign.
What made those protests in Russia transgressive had little to do with the composition, organization, or ideological scope of the demonstrations. Those workers were not moved by an explicit political agenda. As I said, they were okay with the Tsar. They just wanted a break in their living and working conditions. It was about their elementary needs. At a given time in history, the political venues through which people channel their demands are inherited, not chosen. There was no formal democracy in Russia. The Tsar was the decider. The workers involved in the protests accepted him as the ruler and appealed to him as you'd ask for a favor. They couldn't vote the Tsar out of power. The reason why economic protests like theirs became immediately a challenge to the status quo was *in the nature of the autocracy*, not in the nature of the protests.
In the U.S. today, there are other venues for workers to channel their discontent and demand changes. Mass demonstrations are part and parcel. But only part. We shouldn't view the streets as a political fetish. Ultimately, what's at stake is power -- control over the uses of the productive force of labor. Yes, participating in electoral politics today is like attending a rock concert, like pushing buttons on a screen. Even mass demonstrations today (e.g. those against the war or for the rights of immigrants) have an entertainment element in them. So what? As Don Quixote asked Sancho, why kick a door down when you can just turn the knob and open it? People will continue to use electoral politics to advance their interests for as long as the perceived benefits of electoral politics exceed the costs.
That said, there is a profound transgressive element in the electoral participation of Blacks in this election. Given the key place of racism and nationalism in the political life of today's world, there's a profound transgressive element in the election of a Black president in the richest and most powerful country in history. If you cannot see this by yourself, I doubt I could ever be able to persuade you of it.
> A better analogue
> to 1905 probably is the series of pro-immigration rallies over the past
> couple years. You have a comparable conservatism with the use of the U.S.
> flag (which is tactical, just as the 1905 example probably was) and at the
> same time which brought out millions into the political sphere in ways
> that hadn't occurred before. When I see Obama bringing his supporters
> into the streets I'll concede your point, but until then, he is a
> politician running an efficient campaign.
I agree that those rallies were a key moment in the political history of the country -- and in the history of the U.S. working class.
That said, notice how (at least those participants in the rallies who could do so) have turned to electoral politics to channel their demands for immigrants' rights. Demonstrating on the streets is not an end in itself, but a means to an end. And it has inherent limitations in a political system like this. Some of the political forces that supported the demonstrations are now split between Clinton and Obama. I guess we could say that the Latino/Hispanic organizations have been bamboozled, seduced, corrupted by the DP, etc.
Of course, that happens all the time. But that misses the point. I don't think those groups have abandoned their goals. Their constituencies haven't. They cannot turn their backs on their constituencies without eviscerating the political strength of their organizational structures. They are legitimately divided about the best ways to advance their goals. It's going to take a fair amount of negotiation and horse trading, but -- if Obama prevails in the primaries -- they will come around almost entirely. Their options are really that limited. If Hillary prevails on the other hand, I don't expect African Americans to throw their support with the same enthusiasm for Clinton as they've done so far for Obama. From the standpoint of a united U.S. working class, for Latinos joining the Obama camp would be more than marginally better, I think.