i went to the stewart/colbert rally to restore sanity and/or fear. mostly i went because it was here, and seemed to be what all the cool kids were doing. But I allowed myself the privilege of claiming my involvement was something of "participant observation" given my research interests in the efficacy of various forms of (performative) social movements.
As per usual, my thoughts on the rally were not without critique. Was this just another vagina monologues/take back the night/national coming out day stunt to promote decidedly neoliberal ideologies and distract us from the real issues all in the guise of progressive politics? Well, pretty much, yes.
But as faux mia pointed out over vegan breakfast, protest in the U.S. doesn't work (anymore?). So we've moved on to something else. Something more corporate. Something less overtly (but still covertly) political. Something that appeals to desires of the masses and does not contradict or question the ideological indoctrination they've experienced since their reagan-era births. perhaps its as lukacs and postone suggest-the commodity fetishism pervades all aspects of life. we can't escape it, even in our efforts to express dissent.
celebrity is the new politics. We have wrestlers and bodybuilders that have become governors, and presidents that have been compared to paris hilton (not that i'm saying it was an astute comparison). corrupt governors get recruited for reality tv shows. politics is celebrity and celebrity is politics. hell, have we already forgotten that colbert actually tried to run in south carolina?
and this phenomenon is perhaps not unlike the cholita luchadora phenomenon. the overt political connections are not clearly defined, but it is a spectacular event that cannot truly be understood without analyzing it as political. it speaks to social relations, but in a way that is digestible to the crowd that gathers for it. it does not push the boundaries too far.
so then, the real question is: what is the effect? will we being to understand political rallies as forms of entertainment (which is basically why i went, as well as the middle-aged african-american guy next to me on the bus "well, its saturday, and its something to do."), complete with celebrity music performances and professional athletes video-conferenced in? will they become just another outlet for coca-cola or comedy central to sell their wares? and if so, does this necessarily forclose the possibility that they can contribute to progressive political action?
i suppose in both cases, only time will tell. but if performance truly is a space in which social relations become more clear and possibilities of change are envisioned, then we might be on to something here.
2 comentarios:
Unfortunately, I can't follow your specific train of thought, as I am not well-versed in the area.
I can, however, put in my 2 cents. It's not the commodification of protest, but the commodification of thought. We are not a critical nation, and one idea is often just as good as the next.
Pervasive exposure to the media might be a cause of this. Being constantly bombarded by ideas and thoughts prevents us from analyzing each one fully (in theory, anyway). Thus, quantity comes to replace quality.
I don't think the rally was just a front for Comedy Central. I'm hoping that Jon Stewart really wanted to protest the current of political thought that gushed out of the Beck rally. I hope that people attending were, on the whole, there for a purpose and had messages to be heard.
It wouldn't be the first time I was disappointed.
atf-i think we're on the same wavelength here. basically, i was trying to say that because EVERYTHING (including, and perhaps most importantly, thought) has been commodified, it should not be a surprise that "protest" (though to be fair they called it a rally, not a protest) is in the mix.
i think part of what concerned me is that the protest was billed as non-political. now, i tend to abide by the ideal that EVERYTHING is political (as self-infuriating and conflicting as that can be at times), but even for someone of more moderate thought on the subject, it was not hard to see that this was indeed. political. i think we too often confuse "bipartisan" with "apoltical."
and i agree. it was indeed a response to the beck rally, and a fun, exciting, and necessary response at that. and perhaps it served to GOTMFV today. but i don't forsee any real systemic change resulting. perhaps i hold it to too high a standard. but damn, the french and bolivians (among many others) are so effective in their protest. i'm just constantly disappointed that we haven't figured out how to be a little more bold here.
Publicar un comentario