In his guest commentary (“Protesters must face reality in war times,” ODE, April 18), Patrick Gilligan expressed his disgust with peace demonstrators. As a long-time activist, I wanted to respond.
Gilligan criticized protesters for continuing to demonstrate after the invasion began. To him, it’s a justified, declared war — end of discussion. In fact, millions of people on the planet, including the Pope, believe it’s an unwarranted, preemptive aggression.
Unlike Gilligan, I don’t think our leaders exhausted every diplomatic possibility to avoid war, nor do I buy their justifications. I protest because I refuse to let them mistake my silence for approval.
Also, despite some people’s belief that the invasion represents a failure of the protesters to stop the war, first, it was obvious that our government was determined to go in, no matter what; and second, the worldwide demonstrations have clearly had a positive impact. For one, it forced our government to at least go through the motions of getting international support, which delayed the attack.
Furthermore, knowing the world was — and still is — watching made our leaders more mindful of civilian casualties. We continue to voice our opposition to policies we disagree with to affect the actions of leaders who pretend to ignore us.
Gilligan was irritated by the “destruction and chaos” caused by protesters in San Francisco, but how did it compare to that of, say, Baghdad? Similarly, he was frustrated at the delays caused by demonstrations. Imagine the desperation of an Iraqi mother dodging cluster bombs to get an injured child to a hospital lacking electricity and running water.
Another purpose of protests is to interrupt life-as-usual for those individuals whose comfortable, insulated existence prevents them from empathizing with people half a world away in far more dire circumstances caused, in part, by our government. Ideally, these disruptions spark critical thinking and compassion in citizens willing to contemplate the consequences of our country’s actions.
Gilligan’s anger at the $1 million in police overtime is woefully misguided and his prediction of “economic disaster” because of businesses closed by protests is laughable. Compared to the $80 billion price tag for the war (which doesn’t even include the cost of occupation and rebuilding), it’s 80,000 times cheaper to protest a war than to wage one.
He needs to put the figures in perspective and direct his anger at the real cause of financial ruin in this country: unbridled military spending. I also protest because I believe it’s disgraceful that the wealthiest country in the world squanders 50 percent of federal tax dollars on the military while homelessness, hunger, health care, elderly support and education go underfunded.
The reality is: The people in power realize they are outnumbered and their legitimacy is derived from the complicity of the masses. Protesters, especially millions of them, who get citizens to demand a different agenda, threaten our leaders’ sense of control. If the movement grows, they could lose power. Thus, they do all they can to marginalize, dismiss, discredit and even criminalize actions that could “get out of hand” and interfere with their plans.
I understand why our administration wants activists to shut up and go home. What baffles and disturbs me is seeing average citizens like Gilligan adopt our leaders’ antagonistic and undemocratic stance toward dissent.