To those critical of media coverage of anti-war vs. immigration rallies

[seg4527]

I've noticed quite a few people commenting and complaining about how little media coverage the anti-war rallies receive as compared with these immigration protests.

Now, I've been involved with anti-war organizing for over a year now, which isn't nearly as long as many people, but long enough to make some observations. I'm in Minneapolis at the University of Minnesota, and I've attended my first rally with about 50 people at it, and then helped organize one with 200 and 2,000 respectively (The latter got lead coverage on all of the local news programs of the day, all channels, all times). I'm currently involved in organizing for a walkout/rally in the Twin Cities later this month that we are expecting possibly 4,000 students to take part in.

A point: At the rally that had 200 people, we spend about 2 weeks mobilizing, at the rally with 2,000 we spent about a month, and we will have put about a month and a half into the coming rally which will be pretty damn big, as far as anti-war rallies go nowadays.

Last weekend, they had a pro-immigrants rights rally across the river in Saint Paul, in which 30-50 thousand people were at. I'm not sure how long was spent mobilizing for it, but I only heard about it less than a week ahead of time, and I stay in pretty decent contact with the activist community. And 30-50 thousand people showed up. On campus, we spend weeks laboring and stressing out and are completely amazed when 2,000 people come out (And the U of M Twin Cities is the second biggest campus in America with about 50 thousand students, and most of the 2,000 students at the rally were actually from high schools).

You've seen the photos from LA and Dallas, two cities that both got 500,000 people at rallies.

I don't know if the average bourgeois white liberal realizes this, but what we've seen is one of the biggest mass movements in American History build itself up in front of our eyes in literally the past few weeks, while we peck away at the keyboard online and read our New York Times sipping Lattes.

I don't want to discredit anybody involved in the anti-war movement, because I know a lot of good people who have literally dedicated their lives to ending this war. When it nears rally time, I spend nearly as much time working on the movement as I do for school, as do many others.

But I really hope that DUers can see the difference of what's going on. I'll be the first one to say that before the war, when there was a true genuine mass movement to stop the war from happening, the media was shameful in their reporting. I took a bus from Minneapolis to be in Washington DC last September to be with 350,000 plus of my brothers and sisters, only to read on the way home in the Chicago Tribune on page 18 that "thousands" rallied against the war and hundreds of counterprotestors were there too.

But lets not delude ourselves about what is actually going on, either. These immigration rallies are happening all over the country, in huge numbers. Tens of thousands in major cities from coast to coast, sometimes hundreds of thousands. And it happened nearly overnight.

When it comes to the anti-war movement, we have pretty much settled into the routine of having two big rallies a year, sometimes in DC, sometimes in New York. We stroll into DC on a saturday afternoon, and we're out before sunset. A few people stay till monday and get arrested.

On the anniversary of the war, we'll have rallies across the country, anywhere from a few dozen to a few hundred people. New York, San Francico, L.A., Chicago, Twin Cities usually get a good couple of thousand at them.

Can't we see the difference of what's going on? These immigrants are fighting for something, and they know what they want, and personally, I think they are going to get it. They have the numbers, they have the message, and they have the power. There is even talk of doing a boycott/general strike on May 1st, which will most likely be successful if they follow through with it.

There is a big difference between a real mass movement and a bunch of white folk marching down the streets two or three times a year.

We can learn A LOT from what is happening with the immigration rallies. Whether we agree with their goals or not, nobody can argue about how successful they have been in building and mobilzing. Are we willing to learn? Or shall we continue to bitch about the media amongst ourselves?

Here in the Twin Cities, us campus activists are at least attending and trying to learn.

Peace

Steve

[HEyHEY]

1. If they "can't see" what it's all about - they are truly stupid

Seriously, if they don't understand how a rally for immigrant rights of that size gets more coverage than war protests it confirms their idiocy, and possibly their bigotry.

[Vexatious Ape]

2. We need turnouts like those

for the DON'T NUKE IRAN protest's that will, or need to be happening.

[Hardrada]

3. Here in Iowa

we are a bit slow off the mark but have had some gatherings the media has covered fairly. I am helping to get an SDS chapter going in Iowa City. That organization has once again national potential and can keep things going year round and not just the two "holidays" we feel we must attend, important as they are.

[seg4527]

11. i've been keeping an eye on the new SDS chapters

I'm really excited about it, lots of great potential. Especially reading their "mission" for over the summer and next fall and doing more attention grabbing actions.

[mduffy31]

4. I think also there is a "whats new" attitude re: War Protests.

What I mean by that is that they have been going on for the last 4 years, so there really isn't anything "new" or "sexy" about them. The news just seems them now as a regular everyday occurrence. If there was the numbers that there are for the immigration protests I would also postulate that there would be more coverage.

[countmyvote4real]

5. Sadly, I think it’s a “lives” vs. “livelihood” situation.

Ironically, the old saying suggests that you’d do anything if your life depends upon it. In the case of the under the radar immigrants, it’s about both life and livelihood. That’s what compels them and their supporters to march in the streets.

The majority of America doesn’t have the ultimatum of deportation, so they go on with their lives with the pretense of pursuing their livelihood. And yet, the majority of Americans do not vote at all. I can’t say if they are too disillusioned to bother; don’t know or don’t care to rock their boat; or just not interested in politics regardless of how the various local tallies might affect them.

Sadly, we are more stupid than selfish. And I think that what the argument comes down to.

[FloridaPat]

6. Anti-war rallies have always been underestimated. And as ignored

as possible. I was suprised at the coverage of the immigration protests. But then, corporations like immigrants because it's good for business. They don't like anti-war protests because no war means no big-time war profits.

[zbdent]

7. Maybe the "media" is covering it, just not putting the tapes into the

public viewing . . . maybe private viewings with Homeland Security officials with "face-recognition" software . . .

[BeFree]

8. The difference

The anti-war rallies are just that: anti

The people in the streets, today, are for something.
Maybe instead of anti-war, it need be For World Peace?

The people today are standing up for their rights as human beings.
It is very clear what they want.

Anti-war isn't nearly so clear.

--------------

It is good you are taking notice of how, and why, they became so organized. There are lessons to be learned, eh?

A ramble:
The people in the streets today want to be free, and that is a powerful motivation, this need to be free. Many people wish them to have the same freedoms that they have; that is one reason they are so successful. Their brothers, sisters, indeed, their whole families are being held down by just a few words on a piece of paper: Immigration laws. They march to have those words changed, really quite simple. Remember the Magna Carta? This is history repeating itself. Anti-war rallies are a recent phenomena, but wanting peace and human rights goes back a long ways; in that is our allegiance.

[submerged99]

9. I've participated in both

I've been in both antiwar and immigrant right rallies.

Up until the past month, the immigrant right rallies were small and only attracted a few dozens of people.

What I think has really blown the numbers up is the recognition of the power of spanish speaking media. The immigrant right organizers realized there message was going to be ignored by the mainstream media and went to the spanish speaking media to get the word out for their protests. Most organizers were completely caught off guard by the numbers that showed up for the initial protests a couple of weeks back.

I don't attend antiwar marches anymore. I have friends, american indian/native american/indigenous, who have tried to get involved but our issues are marginalized and ignored at antiwar marches. At least at immigrant rallies, we are given a platform and made to feel welcome.

[seg4527]

10. i do think the anti-war movement has done a pisspoor job or reaching out

When I go to anti-war rallies, it's nearly all white people. Being on a univeristy campus, we obviously also have mostly white people at our rallies.

Lately there has been an equal access movement on the University of Minnesota Campus, and it has been a really good opportunity to make ties with the minority community both on and off campus as a good number of anti-war folks are also involved with that. So things are looking up, I think, at least here, in that respect.

[Ms. Clio]

12. K&R

Those who think this is some huge conspiracy organized by the Republicans are so far off the mark it's pathetic and have absolutely no clue about how true mass movements are formed and succeed. They will be left far behind, as this one sweeps forward without them.

[MadHound]

13. Two big differences that you haven't touched on

The first is that the immigrants are using a mass media outlet to mobilize their followers. In city after city, Spanish language radio and television are being employed to bring out the people. The anti-war movement simply doesn't have this sort of resource. No serious radio station, either non-profit, and especialy commercial stations, are going to start broadcasting information about anti war rallies and become the media outlet for the anti war movement the way Spanish language media has become for the immigrant movement.

The other factor is that the media, both on a national and local level continue to give as little play to the anti-war movement as they possbibly can. Marches ranging into the hundreds of thousands are being numbered as only in the thousands. Local media in my town refuse to give coverage to our twice weekly protests, numbering between fifty and a hundred. We marched two thousand(in a town of one hundred thousand) people through downtown on the third anniversary of the start of the war, and yet all we got was a back page paragraph.

It is the media that is keeping the lid on the anti-war movement. If people don't see it, then it doesn't exist. However immigrants have bypassed this with their own alternative media, and it has caught many many people off guard. Now, if the anti war movement could have it's own cooperative media outlet, we could go much further. As it is, we're stuck with what we've got.

[seg4527]

14. another great point

Here in Minneapolis both the high schools and the campus group Socialist Alternative are printing their own newsletters, but that's about as far as we've gotten in this respect.