Tube City Almanac

August 26, 2009

Wake Me for the Anti-Protest Protests

Category: Commentary/Editorial || By



The more I hear about the protests surrounding the upcoming G-20 summit, the less I understand.

The Thomas Merton Center, a Pittsburgh-based anti-war collective that's serving as a clearinghouse for G-20 demonstrators, has posted a list of its demands for the leaders of the G-20 nations:

  • Money for Human Needs, Not for Wars and Occupations

  • Environmental Justice for the Earth and its Inhabitant (sic)

  • Jobs and Health Care for All

. . .

Why not ask for lollipop trees and unicorns, too? Maybe I'm dense, but those seem like pretty vague demands.

"Environmental justice" means ... what, exactly? An end to strip mining? Elimination of fossil fuels? Smiley faces on toxic-waste dumps?

"Money for human needs" as determined by whom? (Here's an idea ... how about determined by the elected parliaments in each country represented at the G-20?)

"Jobs and health care for all." Look, anyone who wants a job can get a job. The problem is that a lot of the jobs are lousy jobs. Now, if someone wants to demonstrate against "favored nation" trading status for China, and for the return of American manufacturing jobs, then show me where the protest starts, and I'll help.

Of course, if we bring back a lot of smokestack industries, we run the risk of screwing up the whole "environmental justice" part ... so I guess that's not want they want, either.

. . .

One complaint I commonly hear voiced is that the G-20 leaders are meeting "behind closed doors, in secret." Which elicits a big "so what?" from me. Personally, I go to a fair number of public meetings, and almost no one attends them.

As reporter Jack Germond once observed, what some people call a "secret meeting" other people call "a meeting that no one else gives a s--t about."

Another complaint I hear is that the people at the G-20 summits aren't acting democratically, because they weren't elected. Actually, they were. The United States elected Barack Obama, the Germans elected Angela Merkel, etc.

. . .

As far as I can tell, then, G-20 protesters are not upset about any one thing in particular. They're like Marlon Brando in "The Wild One." When his motorcycle gang finishes tearing up a town, a bystander asks Brando what they're rebelling against.

"What've you got?" Brando says with a sneer.

I'm certainly not against dissent in the form of marches and protests.

The civil-rights movement wouldn't have gotten any where if people hadn't risked their lives and safety. Many of our labor protections wouldn't exist if steelworkers and autoworkers hadn't gone on strikes and often gotten their heads beat in.

But those kinds of protests had clear goals. Civil-rights marchers wanted the elimination of poll taxes and desegregation of schools and workplaces. Union organizers wanted collective bargaining and the protection of a contract.

. . .

The G-20 protesters are vaguely dissatisfied about something. They don't like capitalism, I guess ... although I can't help but notice that many of them are relatively well-off, educated, middle-class types who have benefited from the capitalist way of life.

Yet instead of doing something productive --- running for elected office, organizing their workplaces into unions, helping to tackle specific problems --- they just want to holler and get attention.

(And that doesn't even include the violent, self-described anarchists, who attend these demonstrations solely for the purpose of breaking windows, setting fires, and wreaking havoc. They're just anti-social goons with no higher purpose.)

. . .

In the process of venting their vague frustration at some undefined thing, the G-20 demonstrators next month are going to inconvenience a lot of people who will be unable to get to work, and will thus lose income, or who will see their property damaged, and will have to pay for it out of their own pockets.

They're actually harming people who have jobs to pay for their "human needs," and they're forcing people to replace manufactured goods (like windows), which harms the environment.

In other words, they're not sticking it to "the system," they're just screwing the people and causes they claim to be supporting.

Maybe you think that's noble, but I think it stinks.






Your Comments are Welcome!

Thank-you for clearing that up. All I knew was that there was protesters. The local news channels told me that they existed and the the area had to do something with them, but I had no idea whatsoever what was it they were protesting. Since the summit was about saving energy, what was there to be protesting? Sheesh. I think I may go out of town while this is going on. I heard from a friend from Charlotte that all the locals go to Myrtle Beach when the NASCAR race comes to town because of how impossible it is to go about your business.
Thee Dude - August 28, 2009



Don’t worry, Dude. The chance of any protesters making it to West Mifflin are pretty remote. ;-)
Webmaster - August 28, 2009



The video selection is perfect. I saw that film and a string of copycats with a friend when we were teens. We really thought then that we were getting away with something bad. Ha
Scott Beveridge (URL) - August 29, 2009



I’m a big fan of your blog, but I have to disagree with you big time on this. You are right that for this protest, and other large ones like it, there is no focused message, but instead dozens of groups and thousands of individuals with different messages and different priorities. The Merton Center, which is itself an umbrella group for many different progressive and radical causes and projects, often sacrifices clarity for consensus and tries to lump everything in. Other groups will show up to protest, either at the big rallies, or at their own actions, with very specific messages- against war, against a particular multinational corporation, etc. Most protesters, including most anarchists, will show to peacefully and passionately voice their support for something they believe in. A tiny, but photogenic, minority will show up to break stuff- to smash windows, overturn dumpsters, and possibly even light trash on fire. I don’t agree with these tactics, but it probably won’t be any worse than the broken windows, fires, etc. following the last Super Bowl win.
You said: “instead of doing something productive —- running for elected office, organizing their workplaces into unions, helping to tackle specific problems —- they just want to holler and get attention.” This is not true at all; many of the protesters are union activists, law students, social workers, teachers and others (even some elected officials) who bring their commitment to social justice with them to work every day. They do want to get attention though, and the G20, G8, and WTO meetings have become global forums for dissenters to spread their message about the world like would like to see. These meetings have created this dynamic because these global institutions pursue policies that exacerbate global problems.
You should not be annoyed at the protesters for creating this situation and the hassle. Obama invited the G20 to Pittsburgh to showcase us to the world, and that means we have to be a host to everyone that wants to use the global event of a G20 meeting to speak their mind- people who will speak inside the meeting, and people who will speak, shout, sing, dance and protest outside the meeting. How well we can balance hosting productive, safe and undisturbed meetings and allowing dissenters the freedom to speak and gather will define how worthy we are as a global host.
Neil B. - August 31, 2009



> Other groups will show up to protest, either at the big rallies, or at
> their own actions, with very specific messages- against war, against a
> particular multinational corporation, etc. Most protesters, including
> most anarchists, will show to peacefully and passionately voice their
> support for something they believe in.

But this is my point, Neil — 50,000 protesters all protesting their own causes is not a rally. It’s a big schmeer of noise.

As a result, what will the media (and the police) focus on? The 500 or 1,000 self-identified anarchists (who often aren’t true anarchists — they’re just vandals).

At least those jerks have a clear message: “Smash, burn, destroy.”

> These meetings have created this dynamic because these global
> institutions pursue policies that exacerbate global problems.

Seriously — what policies? Capitalism? The World Bank? The Federal Reserve?

Marching against the World Bank causes the rest of the world to yawn and go back to bed.
Webmaster - September 01, 2009



A friend in college used to call the student newspaper, “pro-anti.” I think the description fits a good many of these self-aggrandizing protesters. It reminds me of the protesters in college who built the shanties on the main area on campus to protest apartheid and then spent all their time hiding out in them smoking pot.
Dan - September 01, 2009



> and then spent all their time hiding out in them smoking pot.

You say that like it’s a bad thing.
Webmaster - September 01, 2009



Well, it could be argued that they had already killed their brain cells. But you won’t get a Nancy Reagan “Just Say No” speech from me. Seriously…if these protesters want to pursue a goal of affecting change in the third world then for God sake do it by moving there and actually help real people. A good friend of mine lived in Zambia for almost 6 months helping the government there work on protecting people from malaria. That is what it takes. Throwing rocks through the windows of Primanti’s isn’t going to save a child in Africa from malaria. In short, I’m with you.
Dan - September 01, 2009



To comment on any story at Tube City Almanac, email tubecitytiger@gmail.com, send a tweet to www.twitter.com/tubecityonline, visit our Facebook page, or write to Tube City Almanac, P.O. Box 94, McKeesport, PA 15134.