protest parties
wrote this a couple days ago. this isnt meant to write off everyone at these functions, just that ive had some experience and this is some of my observations. not that anyone cares......
im sitting here watching cspan's live coverage of the protest in washington... been watching it for like a half hour or so.
there's a few things that strike me off the bat. One, it seems that much hasnt changed since my days of rolling around chicago with a gimungous beard and an african drum, marching with the wto protest that drew thousands of lefties at the time... trying to match the intensity or capture the "moment" of the wto protest turned incident in seattle.
fashion. its so damn fashionable to be at these protests. Im not discounting people's hearts for justice here, but its a commentary on the state of the mentality of the "movement." and i think its always been. the hippies of the 60s were cool as COOL in their time. if you werent with them , you were a "square." and its the same echoing now in a way. albeit not to that magnetude. but watching the cameras pan through the crowd, one can see the perpetuation of cool dripping off their outfits and their accessories. and if a movement is rooted about being cool, i think that its important to remember that coolness is a trend, always changing and never staying for long. even the big movement of the 60s, credited with ending the vietnam war, became tired and old and people moved on. by the time the 70s came through, i bet many of the same acid dropping hippies were running around doing trendy cokelines and listening to bullsh!t like funkytown and you can ring my bell.
its too trendy. thats why i went to the wto. everyone was doing it and there was a sense of perpetual boredom in our lives mixed with the possibility of impending excitement or change and I bought it. but, to me, it was more to be seen. more to check out the cute hippie chicks and be cool and play my drum and rock my cool beard and meet other dudes jamming out with drums and whatever. where else can you find that kind of a cross-section of like-minded people hanging out together in such numbers and in such proximity? its like the best party i'd ever went to.
the protest party.
anyway, aside from that i was listening to the speakers. God knows im not a Jon Stewart disciple or a Steven Colbare (sp?) spawn... and while i do view much of the left as being unknowingly influenced by media outlets like the daily show and colbare report, i wanted to hear something new or fresh or interesting or worthwhile from these supposed leaders of the protesting left. [who owns comedy central btw? its become the leftist version of the Fox News conservatorium for the perpetuation of right wing views.]
But they didnt have a whole lot to say. Every single speaker had a chant that was often times sounding longwinded and forced, receiving little crowd participation.
basically i learned this:
hugo chavez is apparently the new Che Gueverra.
george bush is the worst tyrant _EVER_. Well, number 3, behind napoleon and hitler.
the rapture is not an exit stategy.
no more US intervention anywhere ever.
1. Hugo Chavez has more bushisms than George Bush. I especially like the one about how "his only regret is never getting to meet [said author of an anti-america book] because he's dead." hmm. homedude was alive. I forget his name and am too lazy to look it up but if you've put up with my crap long enough, you should go to google and find it in two seconds if you're interested. its called harnassing support from the frustrated left. just "rank on" Bush like in an 8th grade studyhall and support is bound to flock by the drove. im going to be the first to put chavez's face in a communist beret style gueverra shirt. and then im going to a protest and just ring off the phone numbers.
2. thats great. ignorance disguised behind a socially acceptable propaganda trend. Whatever happened to Nero, Herod, Slobodan milosevic, Saddam Hussein, Pol Pot, Lyndon Johnson (???), Josef Stalin, Mussolini, Franco, numerous pharoahs, numerous roman emperors, numerous conquistadors, numerous leaders of empires.... but yeah, lets grab two dudes napoleon and hitler and shove bush in there without thinking twice because we're damn ignornant and thats whats cool and thats what we've been told so lets regurgitate it.
3. heh
4. yeah no US intervention until the next time your country is being overrun by guerillas or somebody and people are being slaughtered by the hundreds for being islamic or christian or non-communist or whatver. then you bet you'll be on the phone all day trying to ring up the US ambassador to your country, crapping your pants with a feverish hope that they'll come to your rescue... if we went in iraq for the supposed reason of ending human rights violations (look up the statistics on the Hussein regime), tim robbins and susan serandan wouldve been so close to the white house people'd have thought THEY were vice president. hotel rwanda shows how the international world failed to stop the genocide in rwanda and lefties all agree we should have. but when we leave iraq and there's civil war and genocide, will we eventually have to go back in because of the left's oft changing mind and the idea that the stage is set for bloody civil war and genocide over there already? will we leave only to be back? will the left end up coming under fire for "voting" to leave iraq if it only ends up making things worse over there? what if people start holding up signs showing hollywood bighitters and accusing them of failing to stop a mass genocide when they had the chance? will the tables turn?
who knows. im tired and dont care. im not a republican. im just waiting for my exit strategy to come through.... (not really)
im sitting here watching cspan's live coverage of the protest in washington... been watching it for like a half hour or so.
there's a few things that strike me off the bat. One, it seems that much hasnt changed since my days of rolling around chicago with a gimungous beard and an african drum, marching with the wto protest that drew thousands of lefties at the time... trying to match the intensity or capture the "moment" of the wto protest turned incident in seattle.
fashion. its so damn fashionable to be at these protests. Im not discounting people's hearts for justice here, but its a commentary on the state of the mentality of the "movement." and i think its always been. the hippies of the 60s were cool as COOL in their time. if you werent with them , you were a "square." and its the same echoing now in a way. albeit not to that magnetude. but watching the cameras pan through the crowd, one can see the perpetuation of cool dripping off their outfits and their accessories. and if a movement is rooted about being cool, i think that its important to remember that coolness is a trend, always changing and never staying for long. even the big movement of the 60s, credited with ending the vietnam war, became tired and old and people moved on. by the time the 70s came through, i bet many of the same acid dropping hippies were running around doing trendy cokelines and listening to bullsh!t like funkytown and you can ring my bell.
its too trendy. thats why i went to the wto. everyone was doing it and there was a sense of perpetual boredom in our lives mixed with the possibility of impending excitement or change and I bought it. but, to me, it was more to be seen. more to check out the cute hippie chicks and be cool and play my drum and rock my cool beard and meet other dudes jamming out with drums and whatever. where else can you find that kind of a cross-section of like-minded people hanging out together in such numbers and in such proximity? its like the best party i'd ever went to.
the protest party.
anyway, aside from that i was listening to the speakers. God knows im not a Jon Stewart disciple or a Steven Colbare (sp?) spawn... and while i do view much of the left as being unknowingly influenced by media outlets like the daily show and colbare report, i wanted to hear something new or fresh or interesting or worthwhile from these supposed leaders of the protesting left. [who owns comedy central btw? its become the leftist version of the Fox News conservatorium for the perpetuation of right wing views.]
But they didnt have a whole lot to say. Every single speaker had a chant that was often times sounding longwinded and forced, receiving little crowd participation.
basically i learned this:
hugo chavez is apparently the new Che Gueverra.
george bush is the worst tyrant _EVER_. Well, number 3, behind napoleon and hitler.
the rapture is not an exit stategy.
no more US intervention anywhere ever.
1. Hugo Chavez has more bushisms than George Bush. I especially like the one about how "his only regret is never getting to meet [said author of an anti-america book] because he's dead." hmm. homedude was alive. I forget his name and am too lazy to look it up but if you've put up with my crap long enough, you should go to google and find it in two seconds if you're interested. its called harnassing support from the frustrated left. just "rank on" Bush like in an 8th grade studyhall and support is bound to flock by the drove. im going to be the first to put chavez's face in a communist beret style gueverra shirt. and then im going to a protest and just ring off the phone numbers.
2. thats great. ignorance disguised behind a socially acceptable propaganda trend. Whatever happened to Nero, Herod, Slobodan milosevic, Saddam Hussein, Pol Pot, Lyndon Johnson (???), Josef Stalin, Mussolini, Franco, numerous pharoahs, numerous roman emperors, numerous conquistadors, numerous leaders of empires.... but yeah, lets grab two dudes napoleon and hitler and shove bush in there without thinking twice because we're damn ignornant and thats whats cool and thats what we've been told so lets regurgitate it.
3. heh
4. yeah no US intervention until the next time your country is being overrun by guerillas or somebody and people are being slaughtered by the hundreds for being islamic or christian or non-communist or whatver. then you bet you'll be on the phone all day trying to ring up the US ambassador to your country, crapping your pants with a feverish hope that they'll come to your rescue... if we went in iraq for the supposed reason of ending human rights violations (look up the statistics on the Hussein regime), tim robbins and susan serandan wouldve been so close to the white house people'd have thought THEY were vice president. hotel rwanda shows how the international world failed to stop the genocide in rwanda and lefties all agree we should have. but when we leave iraq and there's civil war and genocide, will we eventually have to go back in because of the left's oft changing mind and the idea that the stage is set for bloody civil war and genocide over there already? will we leave only to be back? will the left end up coming under fire for "voting" to leave iraq if it only ends up making things worse over there? what if people start holding up signs showing hollywood bighitters and accusing them of failing to stop a mass genocide when they had the chance? will the tables turn?
who knows. im tired and dont care. im not a republican. im just waiting for my exit strategy to come through.... (not really)
Leave a Comment
