Anti-war movement needs evolvement

Jason Lowder , Contributing Writer

Today marks the fifth anniversary of the U.S. led invasion of Iraq. But in Los Angeles, few feel the need to stand in opposition.
On March 15, the Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER) coalition called for a mass demonstration in the streets of L.A., to stop the war in Iraq, prevent war in Iran and to end the use of torture as an instrument of policy.  Only 2,000 people showed up, according to laindymedia.org.

Two thousand people would be considered a successful turnout in cities like Wichita, Kansas, or Cheyenne Wyoming, where the support for the war is high (relative to the rest of the planet) and population is low. L.A. is a city of 3.7 million and if you include the county, nearly 10 million people live in the general proximity of the intersection at Hollywood and Vine, where the march kicked off.

Comparatively, London, a city of 7.5 million turned out 50,000 demonstrators last Saturday, in bad weather.

Why in the U.K., where the troop death count is only a fraction of the nearly 4,000 U.S. casualties, can their anti-war organizations get 50,000 into the streets and L.A. can only manage 4 percent of that?

In defense of the peace movement, the mainstream media has, collectively, almost completely ignored any coverage of the movement’s actions and demonstrations. However this argument is paradoxical.  People don’t go to the demonstrations because the media does not inform them, and the media doesn’t cover these events because they are too small to be newsworthy. If ANSWER was to put together a mass march and rally the size of the immigrants rights demonstration of March 2006, the media would have no choice but to cover it.
Another reason participation in peace demonstrations is dwindling is because they are all practically identical. You arrive early, the march starts late, you walk and sing “1-2-3-4 we don’t want your f*cking war” and “Si se puede,” donate a couple of bucks in ANSWER’s yellow trash cans and rally at either the L.A. Federal Building or Hollywood and Highland Boulevard (depending on the location).  Then you get to listen to Lawyers Guild president Jim Lafferty introduce a few guest speakers, usually including Martin Sheen, Randi Rhodes and Ron Kovak.

Most damaging to the movement is  that the demonstrations are boring and nobody hears the message.  ANSWER must get permission from the very government it criticizes, who then tell them when and where they can march.  All traffic is blocked, most stores are closed, and the only people getting the message are the police who are present to prevent any violence.

If the anti-war movement wants to remain relevant, it should evolve.  This is not 1968 and we are not fighting in Vietnam. The leadership should follow the lead of the young and exciting group, The World Can’t Wait (WCW).  WCW actions include bicycling, live DJs, street theater … who says you can’t mix entertainment with protesting?  Any institution that wants to recruit and hold on to new members in this generation must provide some form of excitement.

Most importantly, the WCW stages its events where demonstrators will be seen and be heard.  During the 2006 State of the Union address, WCW protestors took the two west-bound lanes of Hollywood Boulevard, and marched to the CNN building where they started to generate as much noise as possible, to drown out Bush.  It was symbolic but entertaining. Or, exactly what the peace movement needs to adapt if they want to save any shred of effectiveness it still possesses.