[Vision2020] Protesting is Essential

[Tom Hansen]

Courtesy of today's (November 1, 2011) UI Argonaut at:

http://www.uiargonaut.com/stories/sections/opinion/stories/2011/november/1/protesting_is_essential.html
 
------------------------------
Protesting is essential

Nathan Lindstedt | Sociology Major

I am writing to take to task the recent opinion piece written by Katy Sword. The views contained in her critical assessment of the value of protesting are not supported by facts and are typical of the anti-intellectualism rampant among a number of students at the University of Idaho. 
The assertion that the protests have not accomplished anything other than “forcing local police to work overtime” is baseless. The protests in Moscow have garnered national attention. Bill McKibben, a well-known environmental activist, has cited the protests in Idaho as a sign of nation-wide opposition to the exploitation of Alberta’s tar sands. The legal battles and protests have also cost ExxonMobil money and successfully set back the project in Canada. These costs have given various stakeholders some bargaining power in seeking concessions from the oil company in its approach to the development of this resource.

The idea that Moscow residents are alone in their opposition along the entire megaload route is incorrect. It was opposition from residents in Montana and a subsequent legal ruling that halted the modules shipment along Highway 12. Residents in Coeur d’Alene have also protested the megaload shipments. A few minutes of research puts the allegation that Moscow is the sole source of megaload opposition to rest. 

The inference that those who disapprove of the megaload shipments were somehow negligent in contacting representatives through traditional channels in a timely manner to halt the transport is false. Legal challenges were brought before the courts and citizens approached elected representatives several times to voice their concerns last year. The fact that citizens are still trying to influence their representatives is a sign of the importance of this issue to those concerned.

It is true that numerous parties have individually highlighted certain aspects of the megaload shipments they oppose, but this is simply a feature inherent to many grassroots movements. Instead of creating conflict and confusion, it shows how the various facets are interrelated. Sword’s contention that these interests are somehow divisive and incompatible would negate the presence of the organization that is observed in the mobilized citizens. People do have their own ideas and likewise form their own views, but that does not mean these same people cannot come to a common agreement on an issue at hand.
The rationalization laid out in her opinion piece displays Sword’s personal views. She does not see the utility in direct democratic action. I consider this to be a precarious position to hold. The history of our country is filled with examples of people who took to the streets to voice unpopular grievances to advance their causes. From the Civil Rights Movement in the South to the patriots of the American Revolution, there have always been struggles by minority parties to create change. 

To expand on this point further, historian Robert Calhoon notes that active support for the patriots in the 13 colonies stood at the most around 40 to 45 percent of the population with about 15 to 20 percent loyal to the crown and the rest of the colonists taking an apolitical position. It would be a logical fallacy to go into speculation about how the world would be a different place had people not been actively protesting, but it is clear that it would be different.

I believe ideologically insurgent movements are necessary to maintain democracy, whether it is those in Moscow or those emanating from Wall Street. These are movements that give us pause for reflection and encourage citizens, regardless of political affiliation, to engage in discussions. 
Naysayers will do all they can to point out the shortcomings, but only time will tell how these events will change the future political landscape. The fact that these movements are still in a formative stage but have already encountered a knee-jerk opposition based on conjecture displays the power they may have as they mature and develop. 

This is what the entrenched interests fear and why more of us should take the time to secure the future we want to see. Human rights and justice are not “givens” in our society — they require tough sacrifices from those who are willing to protect them.

------------------------------
 
Seeya round town, Moscow.

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20111101/7ae521ec/attachment-0001.html>