Skip to main content

Whenever somebody asks "Why don't people rise up and do something about [insert the latest political issue where politicians are screwing over ordinary people]?" it has become cliche to say "Oh, they're too lazy to get up off the couch and stop playing their Xbox."

But all joking aside, why are Americans today so docile, so compliant, so reluctant to protest or assertively seek to change anything that their government is doing? What has changed about the American character, and how did it happen?

America began with a zealous bang, not the frustrated whimper of a cynical people. This nation was founded by visionaries and rabble-rousers who wouldn't passively accept the authority of a distant government that was exploiting them economically and failing to represent their interests. They stood up for their rights and started a revolution.

Today, the situation is not all that different, minus the revolution -- or even anything that could hold a revolution's jock strap.

Most Americans feel that most politicians from both parties don't give a damn about the concerns of ordinary people and are primarily interested in serving the desires of the wealthy and the corporations who fund their campaigns. During a Great Recession with the highest unemployment in decades, the debate in Washington is not about how to create jobs and revitalize the American middle class, but about how much should be cut from Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, while actually cutting tax rates again for the wealthy. Yet even this conservative proposal that President Obama and the "Gang of Six" in the Senate have been pushing is rejected as not good enough for the rich by the only branch of government that apparently matters anymore: the Tea Party controlled U.S. House. They are literally threatening the first government default on U.S. debt obligations in history -- to protect the interests of the super-rich, and no one else's interests.

Unlike our forebears, the American people today seem inclined to passively accept the status quo of establishment politics -- a "debate" so bizarre and an inside-the-Beltway "consensus" so far from the consensus of average middle class citizens that it seems more like a parody by The Onion. The only thing we, the people, do is to utter our fleeting complaints in cyberspace in the form of virally trending tweets such as #f*ckyouwashington.

Meanwhile, in other countries, people don't just tweet their frustration with politicians; they take action in the real world. For example, today in Israel, massive protests against Netanyahu are causing the Israeli government to hear and at least consider the concerns of the people. And Israel is certainly not the only country in recent memory where the people have risen up with loud voices demanding real political change.

It seems that America has become the exception to the rule. In many places around the world these days, it's not uncommon for people to demand good government that authentically represents them. But in America, it is now normal to bitch and moan about how much the government sucks, yet accept it anyway and do nothing serious to try to change it. No primary candidates running against the president. No third parties supported by more than a handful of people. No protest marches in Washington. Nothing but riding the proverbial couch wearing clothes made in China and sold at Wal-Mart, holding a Mickey D's burger in one hand and an Xbox controller in the other.

How did the American people get this way? Has our character, as a people, been fundamentally changed since our nation first came into existence? We certainly didn't start as a country full of people who were prone to bow to established authority and content ourselves with the scraps that fell off their table -- quite the opposite. Even as recently as 50 years ago, large numbers of ordinary middle class people marched and faced dogs and firehoses in the fight for civil rights for African Americans.

Today, I don't think there's any cause that the average person in this country would lift a finger for -- or at least not more than a mouse-clicking finger.

I think we need to figure out why. Because nothing will really change in this country, none of the major problems America faces will be fixed, until the cause of the pervasive unwillingness of our populace to do what it takes to make change is identified and remedied.


Why aren't large numbers of Americans doing something serious to change our corrupt government that doesn't serve our interests?

9%16 votes
15%26 votes
28%49 votes
41%70 votes
4%8 votes

| 169 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  When public protests became an arrestable offense (12+ / 0-)

    and the corporatocracy made it impossible to get hired with a police record and health benefits tied to employment - you get a passive society too scared to do anything.

    I see a very beautiful planet that seems very inviting and peaceful. Unfortunately, it is not.…We're better than this. We must do better. Cmdr Scott Kelley

    by wretchedhive on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 06:56:34 PM PDT

  •  I choose the last option. (15+ / 0-)

    Not to call it a conspiracy, but the powers that be all see democracy and citizen involvement as annoyances to be minimized.  So, every effort is made to thwart and ridicule activists and make positive change impossible, no matter what means are employed.  Since the 1960s, police have improved their techniques for defeating peaceful protests.  Not facilitating them, not keeping them peaceful.  Defeating them.

    A sense of helplessness is deliberately engineered.  Why get in the street if it makes no difference?  Why worry if you can't change anything?  Apathy is a consequence, more than a cause, of the sense of helplessness.

    Voting changes things. That's why they don't allow it.

    by happymisanthropy on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 07:01:47 PM PDT

  •  IMHO it began at the end of WWII - (10+ / 0-)

    A generation that had been traumatized by the Great Depression and then asked to sacrifice for a world war wanted peace, prosperity, and security.  But they were immediately told to be afraid, very afraid of the USSR.  Without much of a whimper they quickly gave up some hard fought for labor rights in Taft Hartley.  Marched off to war in Korea.  Were afraid to point out that McCarthy was insane.  Freaked out over Sputnik.  Built more and more nukes.  Marched to war in Vietnam.  (Had Goldwater waited a few years, fewer voters would have noticed that he stood for insane things and he might have won.)

    Many noticed and weren't passive in the fifties and sixties.  Got their heads bashed, tear gassed, arrested and then they started killing.  In 1980 all those white economic  beneficiaries of the New Deal could say, "I got mine; screw the rest of you."   Then another generation came of age and decided that Reagan Democrats were cool.  

    Now we're too fat and endlessly amused with shopping for crap and consuming mindless crap that we can't recognize that we're passive and destroying ourselves and the world.

  •  good question (5+ / 0-)

    i don't think it's always true--wisconsin probably being the biggest, most recent.  there were also some pretty impressive protests against the war in iraq.  but generally i agree.  my extremely unpopular answer is that an unholy trinity of christian fundamentalism, war fetishism, and white resentment has turned a significant percentage of the population into fear-fueled sheeple.  not a majority--but enough to tip things.  america has always been super religious, sure, but christian fundamentalism+ (let's call it) is a way of living that informs every aspect of the believer's life (if you have any christian fundamentalist or even evangelical facebook friends, you know what i mean).  they can't be reasoned with--only outbred.  and they breed faster, too, which is why we're doomed.

    Bayh-partisan: it's the new joementum

    by gogol999 on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 07:09:26 PM PDT

    •  I know what you mean. My unpopular comment (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gogol999, apimomfan2

      in reply to yours is that progressives had better start breeding. Otherwise, people 100 years from now are going to be living in a society ruled by religious nut jobs. Simple demographic math says that if they have an average of 5 kids per couple and the average progressive has 1, advanced civilization will just be a fleeting blip on the radar screen that lasted a couple of generations between dark ages.

      Eric Stetson -- Author, Speaker, Visionary.

      by Eric Stetson on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 07:27:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Stealth propaganda (7+ / 0-)

    The sad truth is that the advertisements on TV are no different from the propaganda one reads about in History class; we're just supposed to think they're different because we're "free."  Their lies are so ingrained that very few can even imagine living without consumerism.

    They Live is a documentary.

    by verdastelo on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 07:10:57 PM PDT

  •  Americans as a Mass Have Always Been Passive (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Stetson, Marie, dionys1, apimomfan2

    First, MANY colonists did not support independence. I'm not well informed about the level of support for it but I've seen speculation that it might've been under 50%. I'll look back here for corrections.

    Tens of thousands fled to Canada during and after the war of independence, especially from the southeast which would secede from the union 4 score years later.

    Since then we've had countless movements and uprisings and civil disobedience by small selected fractions of Americans, from whiskey brewers to abolitionists to renters and laborers and suffragettes and foreclosure sale disrupters and civil rights and war resistance movements --but we have no history of nationwide general strikes of large numbers in very broad coalitions standing up against their government.

    One of the important reasons we never have is that we are multicultural, and between our own prejudices and the manipulations of power, through our entire history we've had numerous significant factions strenously opposing the values of some of the others. At this point we have a large faction regarding the rest as literal enemies. If there were civil disobedience in the street it will immediately turn to factional violence because their faction is backed by the full faith and credit of global economic ownership.

    I'm not aware of a single instance of the "average American" lifting more than the fingers it takes for mouse calls, letter writing or phone calls to representatives.

    As a liberal boomer who had to endure having my political ass whipped by my elders and then my successors over 40 years before the first generational reinforcements arrived in 2006, I for one never saw the average American pitching in.

    --And this is not to be bitter or blame them, in this society of Constitutionally near-mandated propaganda. The country for many reasons has needed a messiah for half a century, it's been in that bad a shape. Some day, some Democrats may even come to realize that.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 07:20:53 PM PDT

    •  True... except the part about needing a messiah (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Marie, dionys1, apimomfan2

      I don't think what Americans need is a messiah. What we need is to actually believe in our own power to make change by being actively involved citizens. The whole culture needs to change. Right now, most Americans dislike seriousness, meaningfulness, and the responsibilities of citizenship in general. They laugh at anyone who cares about learning, being well informed, and wants to make the world a better place and do something to make it happen. People today in this culture embrace superficiality, and laughter is used as a way to preserve the status quo. Messiahs are very dangerous and usually lead to even more hopelessness because they always turn out to be only human -- in some cases even not willing to work for what they claimed to believe in (cough cough... some guy whose name starts with an O... cough cough).

      Other than the messiah thing, I agree with most of what you said.

      Eric Stetson -- Author, Speaker, Visionary.

      by Eric Stetson on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 07:34:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Various powerful interests have (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    succeeded in turning us against each other. The so-called passive ones don't want to enter the fray.

  •  We are one of the most religious "highly (6+ / 0-)

    developed" countries in the world, if not the most religious. There are sane religious people and not-so-sane religious people, but it goes without saying at this point that the not-so-sane are the loudest and they are in control of the schools. The textbooks our children learn from are by and large set by a group of regressive far-right conservatives from Texas. Children are not being taught how to THINK in schools. Science, and by extension critical thought itself, is CONSTANTLY under attack. How do we repair our country if we don't have a full toolbox? How do we repair our country if we aren't being taught how to engineer solutions to our problems? And I mean that literally, as we are woefully inadequate and underserved in math and science.

    You can't teach children about Carl Sagan in schools. You can't even teach children about Thomas Jefferson anymore. It's a recipe for disaster and it's only going to get worse, because ignorance breeds more ignorance.

    •  I think we need a mass cultural movement (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Marie, highfive, dionys1, jim d, apimomfan2

      Change is not going to come from politics in this country -- at least not anytime soon. It can only come from the rise of a massive grassroots cultural movement, which completely rejects the currently prevailing culture of religious fanaticism, proud ignorance, nationalism, and consumerism. A new cultural framework needs to be developed and people need to adopt it. It needs to have its own institutions associated with it for all aspects of life -- businesses, banks, schools, etc. -- and the people who support this new culture need to "culturally secede" from the mainstream (i.e. rotten) culture.

      With how far gone things are now, I think this is the only way there is even a realistic hope of change.

      Eric Stetson -- Author, Speaker, Visionary.

      by Eric Stetson on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 07:42:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Problem is that few over the age (4+ / 0-)

        of thirty see the need for cultural change and they will demand that the institutional powers crush those that do.  

        What a different country and world it would be today if we had allowed the culture to change quickly forty years ago.  Instead we've gone with a metastasized variation of permanent war and plastic crap.

        •  Someday people now under 30 will be the dominant (0+ / 0-)

          generation in society. When that happens, maybe cultural change will happen.

          I don't think today's under-30s are any less consumerist than the older generations, though, and that's unfortunate. But perhaps since so many of them are becoming unemployed and may never get decent jobs, they won't have money to consume with anyway -- and if so, their consumerist sentiments might wane.

          Eric Stetson -- Author, Speaker, Visionary.

          by Eric Stetson on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 08:04:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Current US demographics (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Eric Stetson

            will lead to a larger proportion of >65 and older.  Currently less than 13% -- lowest in the industrialized west (Japan's at or near 20%; the UK is low at 15%)

            Agree that consumerism is high among the young.  If any of them were transported back to the life of middle class youth of 1960, they would think that they'd they were poverty stricken.

            Very troubling that the un/under-employment numbers for those under thirty is extraordinarily high throughout most of the world.  That's what touched off the Tunisian uprising.  It's no better in Greece, Spain, or the US.

            If older people were open to cultural changes, would the young be open to the wisdom age can bring?  Both are needed.  Too bad were not yet evolved enough to recognize that.

        •  Woodstock scared the hell out of the ruling class (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          apimomfan2, Marie

          and they crashed the economy so we could never be sure about getting a job and made housing expensive so we would always have to work and not organize.

          The enlivening music was made anemic and posturing; art followed and we have wallowed in content free treadmilling since.

          We don't live in a democracy . . . we live in a capitalist oligarchy, with some democratic representation…Social Security, Medicare, the minimum wage, or labor unions?… The capitalist oligarchy …were forced to accept them…Howard Zinn

          by jim d on Mon Jul 25, 2011 at 02:13:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  agitation has been sublimated into consumerism (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Stetson, adrianrf, apimomfan2

    And it starts at a younger age each year.  By the time kids reach 8 or 9, they are already creatures of commercially defined desires and needs.

    Ugs, iPhones, the right clothes, the right everything.  

    Don't know much about history, but the most highly sought after commercial demographic out there.  Things are the Soma of today's generation.  And as long as they have them, all is well in the world.

    "In a nation ruled by swine, all pigs are upwardly mobile." Hunter S. Thompson

    by Keith930 on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 07:38:23 PM PDT

  •  Speaking for myself: it's money. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Stetson, Marie, apimomfan2

    I am struggling to care for a mother with Alzheimer's and I have not been fully employed for a couple of years. Once things resolve themselves I want to come out roaring and stir shit up!

  •  Peer pressure (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Major Tom, Marie, apimomfan2


    no protests because those are so declasse'
    no protests because the media won't cover them
    no 3rd parties because that might kill hopes for a supposedly VIABLE party

    But the worst offense it that people will NOT call, not write either.

    And we get these abysmal petitions.  Does anybody think online petitions are worthwhile?  Other than pols also asking for contributions?

    And, if we do protest, we need to keep the heat up and not stop with a weekend jaunt.  A weekend protest can easily be ignored by the media.

    Somebody said that Americans were just too beat down to protest.  I have to say that we have a problem of being intimidated.  We can do the twitter because who the hell knows and who cares.  But to actually CONFRONT a pol as they are doing in WI and cry SHAME!  That takes some mighty working up to.

    But if they can work up to it in WI, we can sure work up to it elsewhere.

    I think that protesting ALEC is a biggie.  And I hope people can show up in NOLA with big numbers.  I wish we had the choreographers for the Banksters protests!  But we need to protest it in all 50 states and cry SHAME on Boehner and Canter for being ALEC alums.  And cry SHAME on any tbagger alums.  Apparently the new crop in dc are trying to pass ALEC legislation.

    But back to peer pressure.  We need a buddy system.  Anybody in KC willing to be my buddy?

    boycott Koch = don't buy Northern TP

    by glitterscale on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 07:41:03 PM PDT

  •  According to James DeFronzo (5+ / 0-)

    in order to have a revolution you must have a few requirements:

    1. Mass frustration
    2. Elite dissidents
    3. Unifying motivations
    4. Political crisis
    5. A permissive world context

    For the United States, a permissive world context is a given. No foreign nation could stop a revolution here for a cost they would willingly bear.

    We have mass frustration, to be sure. We even have some dissident members of the elite. But we do not have unifying motivations - many members of the frustrated mass blame the dissident elites and/or the less-favored members of the mass for their frustrations.

    So the looming political crisis may not be usable for revolutionaries.

    •  Perhaps breakup of the United States (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      is what looms on the horizon. Conservative Republicans want a smaller and smaller and more and more paralyzed and ineffective federal government, and they want more power returned to the states. If they continue to win elections, and if their cultural agenda (e.g. Christian Dominionism, celebration of the rich and loathing of the poor, etc.) continues to advance in some parts of the country and not so much in others, then eventually the states may not have enough in common to want to remain together as one nation, and the federal government would be too small, weak, and paralyzed to do anything anyway.

      I think the only thing that would likely stop such a breakup is the fact that the U.S. has such a huge military, and the states would be unable to resolve how to break that up.

      Eric Stetson -- Author, Speaker, Visionary.

      by Eric Stetson on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 08:01:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  My two cents, we're too territorial (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Major Tom, apimomfan2

    and team centered.  Just look at the comments here attacking those of us who firmly criticize Obama and the party.  Too many people are more interested in playing party politics and blindly following that they can't see the damage our own leaders are bringing upon us and our party.

    They are more interested in making it a right vs left, Dem vs Repub battle than dealing directly with the issues, calling out our own for their massive failings.

    Is it any wonder why Obama, Clinton, et all get away with their "look at the shiny ball" tactics?

    We are our own worst enemy and we'll solve nothing until we first take our own leadership to task for caving and selling out the American people to the well-monied special interests that rule our politics.

  •  Size. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Wizard, jim d, apimomfan2

    In a country of 300 million it takes a lot of people to really make an impact and the media decides who gets covered.

    Hundreds of thousands protested the war and they got scant coverage. A couple of dozen goofy-looking people dress up as Patriots and it's a national movement.

    But the biggest impediment is geographic. Easier to isolate, (by limiting ingress and egress) and neutralize, (by limiting coverage) in a large country.

    "The human eye is a wonderful device. With a little effort, it can fail to see even the most glaring injustice." Richard K. Morgan

    by sceptical observer on Sun Jul 24, 2011 at 08:25:45 PM PDT

  •  I'd say it's a mix of factors (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    The media is a big one- not just in promoting consumerism, and fanning the hell out of the flames of the culture wars, but also in narrowing the range of debate. Sure, there's a lot of what looks like heated debate, but never about certain issues, and certain premises are accepted without question. American exceptionalism is a big one- we're told in myriad ways that we're the best, most compassionate and most liberated country ever. So we're discouraged from looking outward and seeing better examples.

    Another factor is the idea that we should just trust the government without question. Which is kind of funny, because at the same time, there's this streak of violent anti-government sentiment. But if you look at how it manifests, it's interesting. There's a lot of talk in certain circles about how "the government" can't be trusted, yet it's never done in a way that would threaten actual power. Medicare is this huge governmental monolith that must be destroyed, but the Department of Defense? Not a word. Health Care reform is Not To Be Trusted, but the USA PATRIOT Act is okay. And so on and so forth.

    And tying into that trust is the reluctance to acknowledge systematic problems. Notice how many people looked to Obama as our savior, and the one who would fix everything that was wrong with our country.  The idea seemed to be "Bush = the cause of all our problems" rather than Bush being largely symptomatic of more deeply ingrained issues. So when removing him without making any structural changes failed to fix everything, people kind of gave up. "We voted and that didn't fix anything, so there's nothing we can do" versus "we voted, that didn't fix things, so what are our other options?" People who are too optimistic frequently don't know what to do when their dreams don't work out.

    Actually- I think that may be the biggest problem- even people who genuinely want to do something have no idea where to begin.

    And holy crap, that got longer than intended. Yeah...I kind of went all "stream of consciousness" there.

  •  I think there was a point (0+ / 0-)

    where protests were part of the American character up to the late sixties when the character of the protests changed.

    It wasn't people who were well dressed out on the street with properly written signs having hoses and dogs turned on them anymore.  It was young people who did not conform to the previous modes of orderly twentieth century protests in the past.

    The result of this was not a great cultural leap forward into progress at all - but a systematic reimaging of the concept of protests in the United States.   The concept of protest as a means of actually accomplishing anything was delegitimized - the notable exception being Civil Rights - which was held up as the last great and important example of a movement of change that was relevant to society.

    This is not to say that people protesting didn't have legitimate causes or were somehow "doing it wrong" but that the cultural framework itself simply vanished it.  Media doesn't report it seriously, if they report it at all.    

    I know there were all kinds of protests for women's rights, anti nukes (bombs), etc - and many other important causes in the 70s - but I read a lot.  I certainly didn't see it on the heavily censored AAFES channel of my youth.  Younger people do not always see actual out in the street protests as a way to get anything accomplished.

    There are of course exceptions -Wisconsin would be a big one - but the fact of the matter is most people don't take them seriously and expect nothing to come of it.

    Does anyone remember the craptastic PCU?  The caricature of the protesting students who just looked for things to protest complete with pop up signs?  The scene where they are all screaming at the faculty "we're not going to protest!"  while the Reagan era adults looked flustered and confused?  

    They thought they had already stomped that crap out.

    I'll be honest.  When I see a diary from someone of a certain age group going on about how much they accomplished back in the good old days sitting in and singing Joan Baez - I roll my eyes.  

    Their parents generation are the ones that destroyed the legality of Jim Crow laws.  Their parents generation are the ones that integrated the schools.  Their parents generation are the ones who gave them the vote at 18 and eventually realised Vietnam was a really bad idea.  But it wasn't the sit ins and the draft card burnings that did it - but they did set the stage to quickly dismiss actual grassroots protest entirely right off the American stage.

    And we sail and we sail and we never see land, just the rum in the bottle and a pipe in my hand...

    by Mortifyd on Mon Jul 25, 2011 at 01:42:33 AM PDT

  •  Spoiled; American worker spending ability HAS NOT (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    INCREASED in Fifty Years. So In order to continue to believe that our standard of living is still going up we buy products made in SWEAT SHOPS by people working 12 hours a day 6 days a week and then pretend that's OK.

    Americans are numb. They watch one million Iraquis die and after one valiant effort give up after defeat; not even comprehending or giving a damn about the corrosive effect on our moral fiber.

    Scare by the Patriot Act; Smug about being "ABOVE" organizing;

    Distracted by personal toys, video games, walking around in their own personal Ipod world.

    These are significant barriers to our social connection and it is hard to imagine what would break these membranes open so our interconnectiveness can be felt again.

    We don't live in a democracy . . . we live in a capitalist oligarchy, with some democratic representation…Social Security, Medicare, the minimum wage, or labor unions?… The capitalist oligarchy …were forced to accept them…Howard Zinn

    by jim d on Mon Jul 25, 2011 at 02:27:09 AM PDT

  •  Why no fight? Because we aren't allowed. (0+ / 0-)

    We've become a society where fighting is frowned upon.

    I read a lot of 'reason' that are just too specific, that miss the point that someone who is willing to fight against a faceless nameless establishment based far off in a distant capital city is even more willing to oppose shenanigans right there in their local town in their face.

    People who are willing to fight, rephrase that to "willing to forcefully oppose with more than nasty letters", bullying by a distant authority do not tremble at forcefully opposing mundane schoolyard bullying locally.

    And, to simplify it even further, if you want someone to have the spine to go out and shout in the street and physically wave signs in the street, then you better be prepared to have that person get in the local bully's face with finger poking and shouting right there in the local grocery store when that person sees bullying happen at home.

    You cannot separate it out. You cannot have a 'pacified' society at the local level where little billy is expected to file a grievance on a piece of paper with the authorities when the bully bloodies his nose without that trend carrying upward to how billy will address being bullied throughout his life.

    It seems "Call the authorities when someone bullies you" is bad. Because it doesn't teach the bully that bullying in wrong, it teaches the bully that there is a power hierarchy, and the place to be is to achieve some high office either elected of corporate.

    We need to accept that fighting is okay, before people will fight against the injustice and inequality.

    Fighting is okay.

    "I must confess, when I see anyone with an Obama 2012 bumper sticker, I recognize them as a threat to the gene pool." - Republican Congressman Allen West (FL-22) Rawstory

    by JayFromPA on Mon Jul 25, 2011 at 03:44:48 AM PDT

  •  Marches used to be (0+ / 0-)


    They used to be News.

    Today they are filtered and censored,

    if they are even mentioned at all.

    How much has the public really heard about
    the WI protests?

    There is a reason, they haven't.

    Of course with youtube and twitter,

    there are New Options for getting Protest News out there.

    What is necessary to change a person is to change his awareness of himself.
    -- Maslow ...... my list.

    by jamess on Mon Jul 25, 2011 at 06:06:26 AM PDT

  •  Because people mistake (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jim d

    Posting on a blog or sending an email with "doing something".  Even at a local level I find there is less agitating on significant issues.

    Anyone going to the Save Our Schools rally in D.C. this weekend? Never heard of it?

    case in point.

    Perhaps folks feel "beaten down" into believing that marches and protests are not effective..and politicians only respond to those with the most money.

    Politicians: the people elect 'em and corporations direct 'em.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site