Warning: contains snarky captions.
September 28, 2005 7:20 AM   Subscribe

Selected images from Saturday's anti-war rally in San Francisco. More from Zombietime. Warning: contains snarky captions.
posted by jenleigh (123 comments total)
 
Is this the same Zombie? Must be a new site because I remember he had a few images hosted elsewhere. Good find.
posted by gsb at 7:29 AM on September 28, 2005


all for the protest but yeesh...
posted by destro at 7:33 AM on September 28, 2005


"Good find?" The Zombietime folks are simply mouthpieces for AIPAC, on some sort of self-appointed mission to "expose" anti-Semitism in the anti-war movement. It's old and tired.
posted by mapalm at 7:35 AM on September 28, 2005


Selected images

Not even trying, are we.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:37 AM on September 28, 2005


Doesn't this post belong as a comment in this thread?

I mean unless the FPP is about something other than what it purports to be about, in which case, isn't it just agendafilter?

In other words, jenleigh, are you just going for some kind of self-fulfilling prophecy about the rejection of loaded right-wing views of the legitimate anti-war movement, are you actually trying to make a contribution to MeFi?
posted by OmieWise at 7:41 AM on September 28, 2005


Ah, a jenleigh post. We hardly need to click it to know what it says, now, do we.
posted by clevershark at 7:44 AM on September 28, 2005


Those morans should get a job.
posted by soyjoy at 7:46 AM on September 28, 2005


Seriously, though, it's easy to make fun, but what's up with stuff like this? Did these people not know they were going to be marching in a demonstration until two minutes before? Do they not understand that a demonstration is at its essence a Media Event? They just make the Zombies' job all that easier.
posted by soyjoy at 7:48 AM on September 28, 2005


Oh, for shit's sake. Next time anyone calls the Right humourless, I'm linking to this post as example of the same kind of behaviour on the Left. Is the guy who runs the site a horribly biased Republican? Obviously. But the pictures are still good, and often quite funny. Lighten up, and learn not to take yourselves so seriously, will ya?
posted by unreason at 7:49 AM on September 28, 2005


Sure "exposed" a lot of swastikas... I dunno, I can understand the anti-war movement, but the stridency of some of it is a bit off-putting.
posted by fet at 7:49 AM on September 28, 2005


I'll call your Mumia and raise you two Ches.

That made me laugh out loud.
posted by probablysteve at 7:52 AM on September 28, 2005


some signs he respects
posted by destro at 7:52 AM on September 28, 2005


Doesn't this post belong as a comment in this thread?

I hadn't seen that thread, omiewise.

The link I posted was sent to me this morning. It is what it is: selected imagery from someone who wanted to snark on the less...convincing characters involved in the aforementioned protests. I don't think anyone would ever claim the perspective wasn't biased, but bias isn't really the point. I don't know or care if Zombie is an LGF member or an AIPAC member. The images speak for themselves. They've neither been altered nor taken out of context. You don't have to be expressly for/against these particular activists to find humor or human interest in how they portray themselves, do you?
posted by jenleigh at 7:52 AM on September 28, 2005


Were are the ha-ha pics of the pitiful pro-war rally?
posted by melt away at 7:57 AM on September 28, 2005


unreason writes "Oh, for shit's sake. Next time anyone calls the Right humourless, I'm linking to this post as example of the same kind of behaviour on the Left. Is the guy who runs the site a horribly biased Republican? Obviously. But the pictures are still good, and often quite funny. Lighten up, and learn not to take yourselves so seriously, will ya?"

I've actually got no problem with the site per se. it's biased, and the guy is kind of an idiot (he talks about "terrorist-style bandanas," and cites the Palestinian flag as evidence that a particular group is unsavory), but some of the picutres are good, and the stridency of some anti-war protesters is well worth pointing out. That doesn't make it a good FPP, though, especially when the agenda behind it is so transparent and there was a thread of protest pictures yesterday. If the pics are so great, post it to the existing thread and they'll stand. If the pics are cover for some other message, then creating an FPP out of them just to push that message doesn't raise the site to the quality of a good FPP when there is another place to post it.

(I understand that agendas are part and parcel of human nature, and that FPPs come with agendas all the time. This case seems worth pointing to because of yesterday's thread.)
posted by OmieWise at 7:58 AM on September 28, 2005


From the article:Because the whole truth -- that the girl was part of a group of naive teenagers recruited by Communist activists to wear terrorist-style bandannas and carry Palestinian flags and obscene placards -- is disturbing, and doesn't conform to the narrative that the Chronicle is trying to promote. By presenting the photo out of context, and only showing the one image that suits its purpose, the Chronicle is intentionally manipulating the reader's impression of the rally, and the rally's intent.

Zombie doesn't know dick about journalism.
posted by scratch at 8:00 AM on September 28, 2005


jenleigh writes "I hadn't seen that thread, omiewise. "

On preview (damn I forget to preview in the new mode): Fair enough, jenleigh. I said above I think the link is decent, I still think it belongs in the other thread.
posted by OmieWise at 8:00 AM on September 28, 2005


Ah, a jenleigh post. We hardly need to click it to know what it says, now, do we.

Bing bing bing, we have a winner...
posted by kgasmart at 8:04 AM on September 28, 2005


some signs he respects

Stop Islamic Fascism
Destroy Shariah Law
Stop Genocide in Sudan
Why Must We Choose...


Not exactly wingnut messages. And yeah, it probably did take some grit to display those in that environment without a cognitive-dissonance-afflicted nitwit harassing you about it. Are they any more egregious than dreck like this?
posted by dhoyt at 8:07 AM on September 28, 2005


I don't know or care if Zombie is an LGF member or an AIPAC member. The images speak for themselves. They've neither been altered nor taken out of context.

Of course, how silly of me to think this isn't taken out of context. I forgot about the magic powers of right-wing bloggers. You see, anytime one of them shows up at a rally where over 100,000 people attended, from loony activists to normal elderly couples, parents, children, and so forth, whatever fringe attention-getter they were lucky enough to get a photo of turns out to be the total and encompassing representative of the anti-war left!

Seriously, do photos of anti-war rallies actually make right-wingers temporarily stupid, or are you all just pretending? And which one is more insulting, honestly?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 8:10 AM on September 28, 2005


You don't have to be expressly for/against these particular activists to find humor or human interest in how they portray themselves, do you?

That's right, jenleigh. I know a lot of people who think Dennis Miller is a washed-up comic 'has been' who has co-opted Neo-Jacobian views. They don't understand why I think he's insightful and extremely funny. Must be cognitive dissonance.
posted by gsb at 8:10 AM on September 28, 2005


Seriously, does participance in anti-war rallies actually make left-wingers temporarily stupid...?

C'mon, you set yourself up for that XQ ;P
posted by dhoyt at 8:14 AM on September 28, 2005


This poster is awesome!
posted by jefbla at 8:23 AM on September 28, 2005


Jenleigh, probably no non-right wing poster here besides me has been more critical of the dumbass tendencies of some members of the left, particularly those who show up at protests like these who embarass and alienate many of the rest of us. That said, I have to tell you that these photos are misrepresentations, selcted shots designed to show the right what they want to see. yes, there are idiots among us, but I can offer myself and several other meFites of my personal acquaintance as evidence that these people are not representative of the left or the anti-war movement anymore than Fred Phelps would be an accurate reprasentative of Christianity. Beyond that you'll have to find out on your own.
posted by jonmc at 8:24 AM on September 28, 2005


I think you just proved my point. Took a while to search for the perfect one, didn't you?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 8:25 AM on September 28, 2005


Hey where's that image of that "moran" guy that I see posted here on a consistent basis?
posted by Stauf at 8:31 AM on September 28, 2005


Thanks for the tip, jon, but you're not really telling me anything I don't know. There's a reason I said they were 'selected images', and I think everyone's pretty clear on the fact that the source is openly biased. No one is confusing Zombie for a professional photojournalist or a professor of sociology. He's a blogger snarking on some particularly silly, amusing, far-out and egregious elements in attendance at these rallies.
posted by jenleigh at 8:33 AM on September 28, 2005


Was the "moran" guy a FPP the day after a post about the protest? I think not.
posted by leftcoastbob at 8:33 AM on September 28, 2005


Ah, a jenleigh post. We hardly need to click it to know what it says, now, do we.
posted by clevershark


Which you could say about any number of members on mefi. So your point is?

After seeing the picture of the idiot holding up the "moran" sign on every left leaning blog in the universe, I'm not sure why so many people have a problem with this.
posted by justgary at 8:37 AM on September 28, 2005


Balance.
posted by iamck at 8:43 AM on September 28, 2005


See, now this is why I don't believe in COINTELPRO. Infiltrated demonstrations would end in riots, not puppet shows.
posted by darukaru at 8:49 AM on September 28, 2005


I guess I wouldn't expect LGF to really know this, but thoes Mercedes-logo-looking peace signs he filled out the spelling error page with aren't really "wrong". It's a less popular version, but there are plenty of people who claim the version without the second vertical is the "original" version (I don't know if that's true, the explaination I heard was that CND took the 0-N semaphore for zero/no nukes and changed it to N-D for nuclear disarmament, which works, 0-N would look like the Mercedes logo, but it seemed a little dubious.), and then there are Christians who think the CND version is too St. Peter's cross-looking.
posted by queen zixi at 8:50 AM on September 28, 2005


lol "thoes" i r a stupid lubrul.
posted by queen zixi at 8:58 AM on September 28, 2005


From this page:

...this simple analysis reveals the very subtle but insidious type of bias that occurs in the media all the time... the Chronicle committed the sin of omission: it told you the truth, but it didn't tell you the whole truth.

...the whole truth -- that the girl was part of a group of naive teenagers recruited by Communist activists to wear terrorist-style bandannas and carry Palestinian flags and obscene placards -- is disturbing, and doesn't conform to the narrative that the Chronicle is trying to promote...

Such tactics... are commonplace in the media, and have been for decades. ...with the advent of citizen journalism.. we can... realize that the public has been manipulated like this all along.


It's worth pointing out that a photograph only shows you the contents of one tiny rectangle at one instant in time. And it's worth pointing out that when viewing a photograph, it's the most natural and human thing in the world to mentally fill in the things a picture doesn't show, providing imaginary context where there is none.

But that's just the way cameras and human brains work. It's unavoidable. Any single photograph is a "sin of omission," because there's always an omission of a larger context, a burial of a closer look at some detail, the elimination of what's behind the camera, the truncation of the instant before and the instant after, etc. Photographs don't constitute a perfect re-creation of reality. Shock!

For that reason, I find this characterization of these simple facts about photography as "manipulation" to be incredibly clueless, not because photographs aren't manipulative, but because they cannot be anything else. It's like criticizing the rain for being "drippy." That's not snarky, it's just dumb.

For the writer to imagine that his own photos are somehow different - that they tell "the whole truth" - is astoundingly naive and oblivious. He's included just enough context in his photos to perform his own feats of emotional manipulation, yet he has the chutzpah to imply that his photos are part of "the advent of citizen journalism," (his words!) and somehow more comprehensive or honest.
posted by Western Infidels at 8:59 AM on September 28, 2005


Was the "moran" guy a FPP the day after a post about the protest? I think not.

Hm. Guess you're right.

*breaks out the torch and pitchfork*
posted by Stauf at 9:09 AM on September 28, 2005


I know a lot of people who think Dennis Miller is a washed-up comic 'has been' who has co-opted Neo-Jacobian views. They don't understand why I think he's insightful and extremely funny. Must be cognitive dissonance.

It's not often you seem someone admit that their behaviour is a function of a semi-automatic irrational psychological process. Good for you gsb.

Next step: Think hard. Is Dennis Miller actually funny?
posted by srboisvert at 9:14 AM on September 28, 2005


I like the post and the associated images. Some of them are ridiculous, and there's no reason to tip-toe around that fact. In the D.C. march, there were plenty of signs that bugged me because of wingnuttery, undocumented facts, or grammar and spelling mistakes. Some of them were funny, and I laughed. Some of them were just sad.
posted by odinsdream at 9:14 AM on September 28, 2005


For that reason, I find this characterization of these simple facts about photography as "manipulation" to be incredibly clueless, not because photographs aren't manipulative, but because they cannot be anything else. It's like criticizing the rain for being "drippy." That's not snarky, it's just dumb.

Wingnuts like this aren't dumb; they're working very hard (and very disingenuously) to frame everything that displeases them in the media as evidence of left-wing bias. It's a long-term strategy to push "balance" further and further right.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 9:19 AM on September 28, 2005


"Oh no, hide the kids Myrtle! There's a colored person standing next to an obscene sign!!!

Because the whole truth -- that the girl was part of a group of naive teenagers recruited by Communist activists to wear terrorist-style bandannas and carry Palestinian flags and obscene placards -- is disturbing, and doesn't conform to the narrative that the Chronicle is trying to promote. By presenting the photo out of context, and only showing the one image that suits its purpose, the Chronicle is intentionally manipulating the reader's impression of the rally, and the rally's intent.

Man, this is so funny I'm shitting myself.
posted by hototogisu at 9:22 AM on September 28, 2005


An amusing and frivolous take on a serious issue; US war policy and the apparent railroading of the economy in support of the associated Homeland Security budget. After Katrina and Rita we discover that the promised infrastructure is nowhere to be found and we are met with finger pointing. There are serious issues of national policy at stake and to portray them as merely the mistaken notions of the fringe left is dishonest and manipulative, the purpose of which is to breed complacency and confusion in the face of circumstances that demand thoughtful action.
posted by gallois at 9:28 AM on September 28, 2005


I can't wait for the next link copied straight out of jenleigh's mailbox onto our plate. I bet it's one of those token non-LGF-y ones!
posted by fleacircus at 9:37 AM on September 28, 2005 [1 favorite]



This
sign's pretty.

Also: zombie. dude. Eat some new brains already. You've still got the word "anti-idiotarian" stuck in your system. You're embarrassing yourself at all the zombie cocktail parties. It's not pretty.
posted by furiousthought at 9:37 AM on September 28, 2005


It's entirely possible to mock the content of this website without bringing jenleigh into it...
posted by hototogisu at 9:38 AM on September 28, 2005


Well said, Western Infidels.
posted by eddydamascene at 9:45 AM on September 28, 2005


It's too bad that the crazy people shout the loudest on both sides. It lets the normal people on one side believe that all people on the other are nuts and vice versa.
posted by callmejay at 9:53 AM on September 28, 2005


Ah, a jenleigh post. We hardly need to click it to know what it says, now, do we.

Precisely. Low-intensity right-wing sneak trolling. Standard jenleigh fare.
posted by Decani at 9:54 AM on September 28, 2005


Maybe I'm not indoctrinated enough or something, but how is this trolling?

It's a selection of pictures of utterly loopy people protesting. Jenleigh doesn't seem to be saying OMG LOOK AT THE ANTIWAR PEOPLE THEY ARE TEH COMMUNIST!!%@!1 -- in fact, she says, "selected pictures" and "snarky comments" in the post. Shiesh, sensitive much?
posted by fet at 9:58 AM on September 28, 2005


Why are people attacking jenleigh in the thread? Is she responsible for this garbage? Or do the generally accepted rules of decorum just not apply in her case for some reason?

Some of the posters are impressive in their detail and message, some are pretty pathetically lame but its good to see the images anyway.
posted by fenriq at 10:00 AM on September 28, 2005


One thing I don't get is that there is still a Stalinist Communist movement. And they are part of a "peace rally". That just strikes me as funny, ya know, considering how the "Revolution" is all about proletariate uprising with the violent destruction of the existing state and the cult of personality "election" of a leader of the new Communist government. Gee, that sounds swell kids. Let's all live in concrete apartments and wear grey jumpsuits too.

Remember children, Orwell's 1984 was not about fascist so much as it was about socialist/communists. Big Brother is not a Republican. He's the PMRC. He's Joe Leiberman peaking through your keyhole. He's Ted Kennedy taking away your guns, your booze, and your cigarettes. He's Al Gore telling you that the new gas tax means you pay $40 per gallon, for your own good. Though it can easily be pointed at the current administrations fetish for dictating morality. Anyway, stupid rant mode off for now.

Don't tread on me, I tend to bite ankles.
posted by daq at 10:10 AM on September 28, 2005


If someone picks up dog shit and smashes it in your face, you don't blame the dog.
posted by MegoSteve at 10:13 AM on September 28, 2005


Big Brother is not a Republican. He's the PMRC. He's Joe Leiberman peaking through your keyhole.

Wait. Lieberman's not a Republican?
posted by callmejay at 10:13 AM on September 28, 2005


Precisely. Low-intensity right-wing sneak trolling. Standard jenleigh fare.

Metafilter member has no idea what the word trolling means. Standard mefi fare.
posted by justgary at 10:15 AM on September 28, 2005


daq writes "Remember children, Orwell's 1984 was not about fascist so much as it was about socialist/communists."

You might need to reread the novel. It wasn't about ideology at all, it was about (among other things) totalitarianism.
posted by OmieWise at 10:18 AM on September 28, 2005


Orwell's 1984 was not about fascist so much as it was about socialist/communists.

Sure thing, bro. Of course, Orwell, though an anti-Stalinist, called himself a "democratic socialist." You would need to read to know that though, so you're forgiven.

He's Joe Leiberman peaking [sic] through your keyhole.

Hardly anyone here likes Joe Leiberman, in part because he is an unimaginably conservative Democrat. Besides, aren't you sure you don't mean AG Gonzalez? You know, the one with the crack team of porn snoopers?

He's Ted Kennedy taking away your guns, your booze, and your cigarettes.

Ted Kennedy, teetotaler extraordinaire, huh? Criminalizing alcohol? Are you out of your mind?

He's Al Gore telling you that the new gas tax means you pay $40 per gallon, for your own good.

What planet do you live on?

posted by Optimus Chyme at 10:20 AM on September 28, 2005


Ooh, bad open italics. :(
posted by Optimus Chyme at 10:20 AM on September 28, 2005


Preview... it's not a race.
posted by Witty at 10:24 AM on September 28, 2005


Oh please, after the FPP felatio devoted to the marches yesterday, Jenleigh's link is fine as a matter of balance.

Fact of the matter is that, while I would LOVE to see a credible anti-war movement, most Americans - not just AIPAC idiots - look out on marches like this and see 100,000 people they wouldn't want to sit next to on the bus, much less suffer their political opinions.

Pics like this should drive the point home, not cause people to get defensive.

King's march on Washington, arguably the most effective protest in US history in that it led to the passing of the Civil Rights Act, was staged as a focused media event. Protesters were told where to stand, what to wear, and what signs to hold up. There was one speaker, one message.

And it worked.

Similarly when WWI vets protested not getting government benefits promised to them - I believe it was in the 30s - as a protest they descended on Washington and actually marched in ranks and wore uniforms. Again, an effective presentation.

NO ONE on the left thinks about that. At all. I live in DC, I've been to literally dozens of these events and they all have horrible presentation. They're all to busy whining about their individual causes to think about it. Seriously, is it the war in Iraq? Or Palestine? Or Oil Companies? Or racism? Or capitalism? Then there's the crap that is totally superfluous - let's face facts, Mumia is guilty, and no one gives a @#$?! about problems like the Zapatistas in the face of bigger domestic problems.

Then there's the issue of hyperbole and the fact that these things are organized by people such as Ramsay Clark, not exactly the most candent star in the political milky way. Not to mention ANSWER, where War in Iraq = Bad, but Kim Jong-Il and Soviet invasion of Afhghanistan = good. Not the people I would want to represent the anti-war message to middle America.

Pick single cause, get some normal looking people to support it, and have only a few intelligent and relatively respected people deliver the message. That shouldn't be asking too much.

While you could view this as snickering on the right, there's a powerful lesson here if you're willing to approach these photos with some humility.
posted by Heminator at 10:26 AM on September 28, 2005


and so the thorough manipulation of people with images continues ... i suppose it should come as a relief that so many people are so bad at it

i think a simple "impeach bush" sign says it all, myself ...
posted by pyramid termite at 10:28 AM on September 28, 2005


Preview... it's not a race.
posted by Witty at 10:24 AM PST on September 28


Yes, Witty, one shit comment out of 450; meanwhile, you're still 0 for 1766.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 10:28 AM on September 28, 2005


{applauds Heminator}
posted by Witty at 10:31 AM on September 28, 2005


...after the FPP felatio devoted to the marches yesterday...

Ah, you must mean all the links to reasonable compilations of protest reports and flickr photo streams. Yes, mostly unadulterated information *does* need to be balanced, this hack commentary is fine balance indeed!
posted by hototogisu at 10:32 AM on September 28, 2005


I for one am glad that Zombie is alerting us to the imminent Communist takeover of America. Off they go with their obscene placards and naive youth to take on the White House. And we'd never have known, because the Chronicle is too busy with some kind of agenda to report on people with stars on their T-shirts.

Aside from that ludicrous attempt at analysis - as well an obvious contempt for those who argue with power - some of that was pretty funny. Learn to spell if you're going to make a placard. It's too bad that it takes a twit like Zombie to point it out.
posted by palinode at 10:33 AM on September 28, 2005


C'mon, how can you not make fun of this guy?
posted by monju_bosatsu at 10:38 AM on September 28, 2005


Similarly when WWI vets protested not getting government benefits promised to them - I believe it was in the 30s - as a protest they descended on Washington and actually marched in ranks and wore uniforms. Again, an effective presentation.

Weren't they attacked and routed by an Army detachment led by Douglas MacArthur?
posted by COBRA! at 10:38 AM on September 28, 2005


get some normal looking people to support it

You mean like these people?

And we had the ANSWER discussion yesterday, while we were fellating each other.
posted by If I Had An Anus at 10:40 AM on September 28, 2005




justgary writes "Which you could say about any number of members on mefi. So your point is?

"After seeing the picture of the idiot holding up the 'moran' sign on every left leaning blog in the universe, I'm not sure why so many people have a problem with this."


whoa, Nellie! hold ya horses pardner. I didn't say "this doesn't belong here", do a meta callout, or even write "newsfilter" (as many in MeFi are wont to do). I'm just saying that with precious few exceptions, as soon as I see the name jenleigh next to a post, I don't even need to click on it to know that it's some rightie post about "evil libruls". jenleigh is just a very, very predictable member.
posted by clevershark at 10:45 AM on September 28, 2005


justgary writes "After seeing the picture of the idiot holding up the 'moran' sign on every left leaning blog in the universe..."

Sure, but do the people on this new link also have mullets?
posted by clevershark at 10:47 AM on September 28, 2005


And yet, you still clicked. GOOD FOR YOU!
posted by Witty at 10:47 AM on September 28, 2005


Also, what MegoSteve said (I think).

Yes, there have been some rude comments directed at jenleigh (I flagged this one) but she decided this zombie site was what she wanted to contribute to MetaFilter today. Despite the "I'm just sayin'..." attitude she is trying to cop, she is making a statement about the zombie site and her feelings regarding the anti-war movement by posting this link.
posted by If I Had An Anus at 10:52 AM on September 28, 2005


The site linked in the OP conflates anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. Though some anti-Zionists are anti-Semites, not all are and probably the majority aren't. There is a material difference between siding with the people of Palestine and hating Jews.

Perhaps the most idiotic thing is the "terrorist-style bandanna" comment. Anarchists have been wearing them for some time, and it wouldn't surprise me to find out that the person in that first photo was in APOC (Anarchist People of Color) or a similar group.
posted by graymouser at 10:55 AM on September 28, 2005


fenriq: Why are people attacking jenleigh in the thread? Is she responsible for this garbage? Or do the generally accepted rules of decorum just not apply in her case for some reason?

What are the accepted rules of decorum for someone who (a) posts a FPP that belonged as a comment in a current FPP, (b) makes it a single-link deal to some dude's agenda-flickr, and (c) shrugs unapologetically when informed of this, with the defense that it was in her mailbox, what could she do?

Calm down, It's all just some 'snark' on some blog.
posted by fleacircus at 10:58 AM on September 28, 2005


(a) Again, I hadn't seen or read yesterday's related thread

(b) I've seen plenty of single-links to blogs, news, or otherwise published to MeFi that made for an amusing read--for me, this was one of them

(c) I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be apologizing for — how many posts at MeFi are based off something they stumbled over/found on a blog/were emailed by a friend?

If you're not interested, or if my 'decorum' was questionable, why not skip over it? Or make a MeTa thread?
posted by jenleigh at 11:10 AM on September 28, 2005


Witty writes "And yet, you still clicked. GOOD FOR YOU!"

Ah, good old Witty, you never fail to remind me to switch the blacklist script back on when I turn it off. Good show!
posted by clevershark at 11:14 AM on September 28, 2005


Just doing what I can.
posted by Witty at 11:30 AM on September 28, 2005


No doubt Zombie and his ilk don't have the guts to hang out with these guys. Everyone knows that hanging around San Francisco snapping pics is more important than actually, I dunno, enlisting and fighting for your ideals/imperialism.
posted by bardic at 11:31 AM on September 28, 2005


I find the strident socialist throwbacks of the left infuriating and embarrassing. But I find the blind ignorance of the right DANGEROUS. All the more reason the left must get its collective act together.

Go to any parade, people. See those guys that drive the funny little cars with the silly hats... the Shriners. Those guys are Republicans. Protests are the same: parades of embarrassment no matter who or what organizes them.

They are like family reunions. We all have family members that at times we are ashamed of. My Grandma gets two drinks in her and she is singing King of The Road at the top of her lungs and she won't shut up. My Uncle Darryl will launch into John Birch Society tirades the second you bring up the UN.

But you should love your family. So don't give Grandma drinks. Don't mention the UN to Uncle Darryl.

I won't go to ANSWER sponsored marches NOT because of photos like these but because they can't organize and I'm sick of standing around with people in fairy costumes and shit with my thumb up my ass while ANSWER and the sundry socialist morons debate for an hour about the sexism and/or racism of one particular protestors female effigy of Condolisa Rice. THAT is the left's problem. Like Downs syndrome kids over-stimulated by Smurf cartoons and candy- they cannot focus and throws fits when told they have to.

I don't care about my left's families positions as much as I care that they ACCOMPLISH what they set out to do.. adn so far the track record is poor. And WHEN they succeed it is because people compromise and stay on message. NOT because they "celebrate diversity" and have massive mobile group ADD dioramas.

To me these pictures symbolize the lefts failure to organize. For which it was once known as GREAT.
posted by tkchrist at 11:46 AM on September 28, 2005


Thanks jenleigh. Good for a smile. And interesting on the sociology level actually too.


Decani writes "Precisely. Low-intensity right-wing sneak trolling. Standard jenleigh fare."

Get a grip Decani. It's a worthy post on its own merit. There isn't any of the usual tubthumping agenda pushing in the post's wording. Take some drugs. Openmindedness is a good thing.
posted by peacay at 11:51 AM on September 28, 2005


Fact of the matter is that, while I would LOVE to see a credible anti-war movement, most Americans - not just AIPAC idiots - look out on marches like this and see 100,000 people they wouldn't want to sit next to on the bus, much less suffer their political opinions.

Pics like this should drive the point home, not cause people to get defensive.

King's march on Washington, arguably the most effective protest in US history in that it led to the passing of the Civil Rights Act, was staged as a focused media event. Protesters were told where to stand, what to wear, and what signs to hold up. There was one speaker, one message.


You do realize how astonishingly dumb your choice of description for the current protesters is given the issue behind your example of the best protest?
posted by srboisvert at 12:01 PM on September 28, 2005


[T]he one thing that would have really shaken Middle America last week wasn't "creativity." It was something else: uniforms. Three hundred thousand people banging bongos and dressed like extras in an Oliver Stone movie scares no one in America. But 300,000 people in slacks and white button-down shirts, marching mute and angry in the direction of Your Town, would have instantly necessitated a new cabinet-level domestic security agency.

Why? Because 300,000 people who are capable of showing the unity and discipline to dress alike are also capable of doing more than just march. Which is important, because marching, as we have seen in the last few years, has been rendered basically useless. Before the war, Washington and New York saw the largest protests this country has seen since the '60s – and this not only did not stop the war, it didn't even motivate the opposition political party to nominate an anti-war candidate.

posted by johngoren at 12:10 PM on September 28, 2005


jenleigh: yes, the post was redundant and mediocre and you don't care. Understood. FWIW, I don't think you're the chicken lady, my apologies if that seemed personal. Peace, as they say.

This Zombie guy strikes me as someone who would chuckle at a sign that said "PLEASE STOP KILING" because of the spelling error. Maybe there could be something to say about the Loony Left (and the People Who Need to Hate Them), but that was so yesterday.
posted by fleacircus at 12:33 PM on September 28, 2005


I don't care about my left's families positions as much as I care that they ACCOMPLISH what they set out to do.

So the war is over then? The troops are coming home? Bush has resigned? Why isn't the media covering this, it sounds like big news to me?!?
posted by Pollomacho at 12:34 PM on September 28, 2005


Weren't they attacked and routed by an Army detachment led by Douglas MacArthur?
Yes. (Patton, too.)
posted by kirkaracha at 12:36 PM on September 28, 2005


I think I saw cleardawn in one of those photos.
posted by Kwantsar at 12:49 PM on September 28, 2005


fleacircus, I'm not in hysterics by any means, I was just unaware of why jenleigh was being persecuted for her post.

Anti-war protestors are fair game. They're in the public eye, that's why I would have spent more than 10 seconds making my sign, unlike some of the people.

Zombie's comments, though perhaps not unbiased, are valid in their own right though I disagree with the underlying sentiment.

I guess what bothers me is that people weren't debating the merits of the post so much as they were lining up to take easy potshots at someone they disagree with.
posted by fenriq at 12:58 PM on September 28, 2005


Anus, if you really think those Flickr sets look like "normal" you need to pull your head out of your namesake.

They look like hippies to me, albeit somewhat more sensible people than in the Zombie sets, but still hippies holding up signs that most Americans find hyperbolic.

It only proves my point that you look at those people and think "normal." Show me a guy in dockers and a collared shirt - or god forbid a Nascar hat - then we'll talk.

Also, leave Jenleigh alone. "Despite the "I'm just sayin'..." attitude she is trying to cop, she is making a statement about the zombie site..." Come on, she warned about the captions and the pics say more than whatever nonsense the site owner would have you believe. Or are simply incapable of ignoring any context you don't agree with? Because the pics are hard to argue with.
posted by Heminator at 1:04 PM on September 28, 2005


meta protest

Last winter some people I know started a protest to protest the act of protesting. The protest was intentionally meta, with gibberish signs like "shave the whales" and "stop the war to save the gay Palestinian trees for Jesus."

*The video is the money link*
posted by pieisexactlythree at 1:25 PM on September 28, 2005


They look like hippies to me, albeit somewhat more sensible people than in the Zombie sets, but still hippies holding up signs that most Americans find hyperbolic.

It only proves my point that you look at those people and think "normal." Show me a guy in dockers and a collared shirt - or god forbid a Nascar hat - then we'll talk.


Dude, as I'm sure you know, I go through life in jeans, t-shits and a plaind collared flannel shirt. I have sort hair, sideburns and a face that screams "cop," or "fireman." I'd take baseball and NASCAR over an art gallery, and Howard Stern over NPR. And I've marched in my share of protests, although I've clutched my head at some of my companions. But we're out there.
posted by jonmc at 1:29 PM on September 28, 2005


You've got funny friends, pieisexactlythree.
posted by jenleigh at 1:36 PM on September 28, 2005


Anus, if you really think those Flickr sets look like "normal" you need to pull your head out of your namesake. They look like hippies to me...

Are you kidding? Subtract the signs and the backpacks, and you could swap them for the crowd at a typical middle-class suburban shopping mall, on either coast or anywhere in between. How much more "normal" can you get?
posted by Western Infidels at 1:49 PM on September 28, 2005


Apparently, one must wear Dockers to be normal.
posted by MegoSteve at 2:03 PM on September 28, 2005



TERRORIST!!!!
posted by klangklangston at 2:24 PM on September 28, 2005


tkchrist: I won't go to ANSWER sponsored marches NOT because of photos like these but because they can't organize and I'm sick of standing around with people in fairy costumes and shit with my thumb up my ass while ANSWER and the sundry socialist morons debate for an hour about the sexism and/or racism of one particular protestors female effigy of Condolisa Rice. THAT is the left's problem ... they cannot focus and throws fits when told they have to ...

To me these pictures symbolize the lefts failure to organize. For which it was once known as GREAT.


Word.

I'm certainly no right-winger, but I think the link deserves a place here in that it shines light on the warts of what passes for leftist organization these days. My one problem I guess is that the photos attempt a well-deserved criticism but are utlimately so artless as to be equally deserving of the scorn Zombie heaps on the protesters. If you want to see it done right, get ahold of a copy of "Postmodern Protest in the Age of the Neo-Demo," by P.J. O'Rourke. Published in the July/August 2002 issue of the Atlantic Monthly. Observations of a Palestinian Solidarity March in Washington that, in trying to be many things ... well ... Link. Unfortunately it's subscriber-only, so I'll quote a little here (and hopefully stay within the bounds of fair use):

A fifteen-foot-wide balloon had been erected by the Rainforest Action Network. The balloon was decorated like a globe with a FOR SALE banner across it, but it was shaped like a small-town water tower or, maybe, a mushroom cloud. On one side of the balloon someone was speaking to not many people in Spanish while a young priest with blond streaks in his hair and wearing a fashion-forward sport coat got ready to take the mike. On the other side of the balloon there was a protest against Citibank, whose Washington office is catercorner to the World Bank. A speaker asked Citibank to "finance solar mortgages." The small group of listeners chanted—though not, I gathered, in response to the speaker's request—"Hey, Citi, not with my money." ...

A sign reading PRO-PALESTINIAN IS NOT ANTI-SEMITIC was carried next to a sign reading SHARON MAKES HITLER PROUD. A delegation of Iranian women in chadors was preceded by a delegation announcing LESBIAN, GAY, BI & TRANS PEOPLE SAY STOP THE WAR. One of the LGBTP was wearing, with panache, a Palestinian flag as a cape. A middle-aged Arab-American man sipped from a Starbucks cup. A college student held a placard: STARBUCKS SUCKS. Enlarged wire-service photos of Palestinian casualties were held aloft, as were THE MEDIA LIES posters. One banner stated, CANNABIS SMOKERS ARE NOT CRIMINALS. A woman ran through the march with a dollar bill dangling from the brim of her baseball cap. Her T-shirt said, IN PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS ...

One bunch began a skit involving a boy in a Halloween skull mask spraying an aerosol can at girls carrying primitive paintings that depicted agricultural endeavors. Then they all dropped dead and yelled something about Colombia.

The marchers trampled the grass on the Ellipse. MORE GARDENS, a sign read. Other posters and banners declared, GIVE COMMUNISM A CHANCE, PEACE IS PATRIOTIC, END ASHCROFT'S POLICE STATE, REPUBLICANS FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE FOR ALL, STOP CALLING PALESTINIANS TERRORISTS, REAL PROFITS FROM PEACE, CORPORATIONS ARE KILLING THE WORLD, THE U.S. STARTED IT ALL, DOWN WITH ALGERIAN FASCIST REGIME, PEACE TREATY IN KOREA, LEAVE CHAVEZ ALONE, and FOCUS YOUR DISCONTENT. Indeed.

posted by donpedro at 2:26 PM on September 28, 2005


Pieis: You and your friends should learn what Meta means.
posted by klangklangston at 2:27 PM on September 28, 2005


See, this kind of fashion-page critique is one of the reasons I think spectacle-style protesting is seriously dead. You mobilize a bunch of people, and you get commentary on clothes and appearance. "Oh, these protestors don't look middle-management enough to take seriously. See, that one's making an ad-hominem attack! And look at that one! Godwin!"

But, to be fair, this is what happens when you put on a media event. We want the people on our TV and in our newspapers to be serious, and wear Dockers--because only the serious-minded wear business casual.
posted by Coda at 2:28 PM on September 28, 2005


So the war is over then? The troops are coming home? Bush has resigned? Why isn't the media covering this, it sounds like big news to me?!?

read my post again. Or. Were you being cute or something?

My point is the left's protests have not done much in the last thirty years. I'd like them to actually work. I really would. But they cannot focus. And that is obvious with the picures in this thread.
posted by tkchrist at 2:34 PM on September 28, 2005


but the stridency of some of it is a bit off-putting.

If one were a shit-head Booshite (but I repeat myself) wouldn't it be fun to "false-flag" and join the demo as a wacky protestor to make the other side look worse (than they already are).

Not that there aren't a lot of Ward Churchills on the left, there are.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 2:44 PM on September 28, 2005


Jonmc, I never disputed you "normal" looking guys who oppose the war are out there -- you just don't see more folks that look like you at the marches. And it's a damn shame.

Coda, I agree its wrong to judge people by their clothing; but let's be realistic. If you're trying to convince people, particularly conservative types, aesthetics matter a lot. Was King misguided in insisting that everyone at the march on Washington adhere to a dress code? In the early days of TV, the appearence of King's crowd went along way toward toward making middle America shift opinion from "uppity negoes" to seeing them as Americans victimized by injustice.

Again, I agree what a person's wearing shouldn't color the validity of their arguments; but this isn't about simply making a rational argument - it's politics. (And nevermind that there's a whole host of stupid causes and sentiments abounding at these events that distract you from the central stop the war message -- that only compounds the- throw-a-rock-and-hit someone-who-needs-a-shower problem).
posted by Heminator at 2:45 PM on September 28, 2005


tkchrist, I think there was some kind of focus or organisation on the Left in America. It was called Unions, before that Syndicale(sp?) or some other kinds of collectives. Unions were proven to be anti-capitalistic, and as you know that's a recipe for disaster. At least NAFTA did a good thing. LOL.

Anyway, the Unions don't seem very effective these days, compared to the really effective organisations that do sterling work for right-thinking causes; like the Evangelical organisations and some other Foundations that do lots of stuff to help people in need. And to further a reasonable agenda to spread the freedom that comes with democracy.
posted by gsb at 2:55 PM on September 28, 2005


Jonmc, I never disputed you "normal" looking guys who oppose the war are out there -- you just don't see more folks that look like you at the marches. And it's a damn shame.

Looks are skin deep a lot of the time, Heminator. In New York or San Francisco, that guy with the tattoos and piercings is often as middle american as they come in many ways. It's not so much the style of people's clothes as the hyperbole and shoehorning of unrelated causes (and of course the lunatic fringe types who see any gathering as an excusse to act out) who alienate me, and I suspect others.
posted by jonmc at 2:55 PM on September 28, 2005


There is no telling who anyone is working for, in protest pictures like these. The woman in the Red star t-shirt might work for the John Birch Society for all I know. We all have a way of insisting that our worst nightmares come true.
posted by Oyéah at 3:08 PM on September 28, 2005


Don't the commies realize when they've lost? I mean, at least a third of the country thinks the war in Iraq is a good idea.
posted by my sock puppet account at 3:28 PM on September 28, 2005


I never disputed you "normal" looking guys who oppose the war are out there -- you just don't see more folks that look like you at the marches. And it's a damn shame.

Maybe you should look around more. At least, in Portland OR most of the crowd looked "normal." The bizarre signs and fright-wigs were in the minority. At the same time however those signs and costumes are pretty photogentic and memorable.
posted by elwoodwiles at 3:37 PM on September 28, 2005


elwoodwiles: In most places a huge chunk of the protestors look very 'normal'. The DC pre-war anti-war protests were mostly composed of office workers.

In any large group it is easy to find people who look odd. In any large group where people have signs it will be easy to find signs that are stupid. If you went back and got photos of protests in the 60s and 70s the captions would probably look even more moronic. But those protests certainly helped to force the US withdrawal from Vietnam.

These protests scare the right. These protests are the largest anti-war protests since Vietnam. There is, for the first time in over 30 years in the US, mass opposition to an American war. Even the US mass media is beginning to realize that the war is a disaster and those who fought it were disingenuous at best, completely dishonest at worst and incompetent as well.
posted by sien at 4:09 PM on September 28, 2005


Ooops. In the last paragraph it should be 'those who pushed for and organized' the war rather than those who fought it. The US troops are doing their best.
posted by sien at 4:11 PM on September 28, 2005


Thanks, Heminator, for the dumbest fucking thing I've read here in a few months. Those linked photos *don't* look normal to you? Maybe if that woman in the orange shirt only had some, oh, more womanly hair, none of that short-hair San Francisco bullshit. More Banana Republic, maybe?
posted by hototogisu at 4:14 PM on September 28, 2005


hototogisu, I see your point, but aren't you buying nto the false dichotomy by making it seem like a fashion divide rather than a moral one? Just sayin'...
posted by jonmc at 4:39 PM on September 28, 2005


These protests scare the right.

I don't think they do. I see no evidence of that. Not yet.

So far they can diffuse this stuff with just a little spin as the protests show little organization and staying power. It isn't how the protestors look - it what they do and how they organize. They are all over the place. Easy to distract and co-opt.

The power elite Right KNOWS the war is a disaster. The protestors don't have to tell them that.

It's obvious they have given up on trying to make the war work. They are running out of money, troops and options (ones that won't expose their initial ideologically based assertions and strategies for the twaddle bullshit they were). IE: They won't raise taxes, they won't institute a draft and they won't compromise with the European Union and UN.

Civil war in Iraq is happening. Iraq is now a proving ground for top tier terrorists. Way better than Afghanistan - even under the Soviets. And these guys are dispersing through out central asia and Europe like dandylions.

Iran is gaining hegemony and will develope a nuke or get some sweeeeeet incentives not too.

Israel is in shambles.

The Saudi's LIED about thier oil reserves.

And Oil is not flowing out of Iraq in any way to pay for the war.

These are inarguable facts. And these were the thing the war was supposed prevent.

Bush knows this despite what he says. At best we may get a base or two in the north. That's it. And that won't wash with the average American nor with the Pentagon Strategic planners who went along with this war against thier better judgement. The price is too high.

We are just playing a "delay the inevitable" game at this point. All they have to do is hang on four more years and then blame it all on the left who will be bringing the troops home. Which is what is coming next since it looks like the blow-back from Katrina may yet see the left take back some seats in the mid-term elections.

The protest movement is beyond informing the right of thier mistakes. They should stop trying and simply conetrate on ending our involvement in the mess. Bring the troops home. That's all. Bring them the fuck home now.
posted by tkchrist at 4:47 PM on September 28, 2005


Can there be ONE protest rally on the West Coast without an ex-girlfriend of mine in it? It's not like I was ever THAT busy.
posted by davy at 5:37 PM on September 28, 2005


jonmc: that's the implication of my sarcasm.

Why the weirdoes get photographed has already been explained several times upthread; I won't bother with it myself.

davy: that means you're getting old ;-P
posted by hototogisu at 6:11 PM on September 28, 2005


jonmc: that's the implication of my sarcasm.

Well, my point is that many people I've known on one side aren't so sarcastic and many on the other side aren't so subtle.
posted by jonmc at 6:15 PM on September 28, 2005


jonmc: I officialy no longer have any idea what you're talking about.

But if someone is going to say a bunch of mom-types look like "hippies", the only appropriate response is laughter and snarkery. Granted, five dollars says he didn't even bother to click on If I Had An Anus's links, which is how he drew such a preposterous conclusion.

so, to the detractors: yes dearest brilliant conservative punters, we know no one takes demonstrations seriously, we know such disparate lunacy hurts the cause, and yes, we also understand the fact that the money shots are the goofy looking ones, and that's that.

If it is a moral divide (not a logical or rational one? it's not as if we've ever debated *that* one here before...), then bitching about dirty hippies is just a lot of laughable noise, isn't it?
posted by hototogisu at 6:25 PM on September 28, 2005


jonmc: I officialy no longer have any idea what you're talking about.

OK. There's plenty of (usually young) self-proclaimed lefties, who think they can guess what someones politics and/or moral character is based on how they dress or theirtaste in entertainment, and there are many people on the "right" or in the middle of the road who have trouble detecting sarcasm and irony based on their experiences with people like that. So when we meet people of any background who show an interest in what we have to say, it's imperative that we be clear about what we're saying.
posted by jonmc at 6:35 PM on September 28, 2005


or as Pete Townshend put it:

Do you really think I care/what you read or what you wear/ I want you to Join Together with the band...
posted by jonmc at 6:36 PM on September 28, 2005


Why are people attacking jenleigh in the thread?

Well, speaking purely for myself, I'm doing it because I've noticed that jenleigh frequently indulges in precisely this sort of behaviour. This is a post of a type I've seen from her many, many times in my relatively short life at MetaFilter. And I absolutely stand by my description of it as low-intensity trolling (it seems the qualifier was ignored, for some mysterious reason), in spite of the response from the person who suggested I didn't understand what the word "troll" means. I know perfectly well what it means. It means posting with the primary intention of getting bites, and no one is going to persuade me that wasn't jenleigh's intention here. She posted a selection of demo photos chosen to make anti-war demonstrators look dumb and silly. She's used this disingenuous, "Hey I'm just putting it out there, I'm not commenting", technique time and time again. She makes superficiously innocuous posts which contain thinly (or not-so-thinly) veiled attacks on the left. That's trolling.

Don't get me wrong: unlike many people here I have no problem with trolls. And hey, we've seen the "dumb demonstrators" pictures of pro-Bush people too. But I'll call it as I see it, whichever side it omes from.
posted by Decani at 6:43 PM on September 28, 2005


jenleigh rocks and you're jealous.
posted by shoos at 10:24 PM on September 28, 2005


Yes, she does rock, because low-intensity trolling is a fine fine method. It's innocuous, gets results and the right kind of attention; LOL.
posted by gsb at 11:18 PM on September 28, 2005


sorry, "low-intensity trolling"
posted by gsb at 11:19 PM on September 28, 2005


I don't understand why everyone is jumping on jenleigh, it's not as if she posted a bunch of obnoxious hand-selected photos which are easily not the best of the web!

Further, it isn't as if she has a history of posting not-so-subtle partisan crapola as fpps, right?



rite guys?
posted by stenseng at 12:50 PM on September 29, 2005


a history of posting not-so-subtle partisan crapola as fpps

So do a great number of people here. Hello? Like Y2Karl? What's you point? Or is it that you agree with the other partisan posts? Give the baby her bottle I say.
posted by tkchrist at 1:30 PM on September 29, 2005


Y'all really can't deal with the fact that you have your own "get a brain morans" crowd, can you...
posted by Krrrlson at 9:14 PM on September 29, 2005


i for one can't wait until jenleigh's next post about the crazy wild savages of the american middle class! hahaha look at those insane pipefitters dressed up like gwar.

man, i could support some of these people's ideas if their presentation wasn't so off-putting. like, hey, i'm all for free expression, but ya gotta admit it's hard to get people to see your side of the story when there are these morans afoot.
posted by Hat Maui at 3:14 AM on September 30, 2005


Huh.

*looks down at SportsFilter t-shirt*
*realizes he has chosen sides with disorganized freaks*
*smiles*

posted by If I Had An Anus at 6:25 AM on September 30, 2005


« Older for eyes   |   there's something actually in there Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments