Peacecampaigning must change

The need for a sea change in the peace movement

Tuesday, July 11, 2006

FAQ's about Peace campaignign

How can I use these methods when I don’t have these skills?

Even if you personally don’t have these skills there are many people in the movement who do, but they need younger ideas and help.

What do you mean keeping it in the public’s mind?

A short video of an action or event put on to the web will be seen long after the event has finished.

Do you want all of the people with an “unacceptable image” to leave the Peace Movement?

No. I’m sorry if I gave that impression, but it is important to portray an image to the public that they can identify with.

Are you saying that the public can’t tell when it is being told the truth, whoever is telling it?

No. However a large percentage of the population are persuaded by the appearance of the person. Politicians are well aware of this problem and many good men have failed for this very reason.

Are you saying that a big demo has little effect?

No. But it may raise public awareness for a short time, which is just not enough. We must be able to keep the pressure on after the demo has finished. This can be achieved by putting our point of view on professional looking websites.

But we do get good coverage of our demos from local newspapers and TV?

OF course we do have some success, but that is often controlled by the Media’s point of view. We are also at the mercy of other events that may take place on the same day and push us out, so we need to take control and put out good PR and professional electronic images on the web.

I already go to too many meetings, are you really suggesting we have more?

I guess the reason you go have to go to so many meetings is because there are not enough participants to do the work needed. I say change the format; make them more interesting, get new blood involved.

I think the politicians take our demonstrations very seriously.

I am sure they watch us and keep files on us, and take us seriously. The point is: are we getting through to the public? Until we do that with some degree of success the power-that-be do not feel concerned.

What do you mean “Complying with the requests not to rock the boat?” We are being arrested all the time if that’s not rocking the boat tell me what is?

I certainly have a great respect for anyone so dedicated to their cause they have been arrested during a non violent action. But they must ask themselves: Did it help the cause? Did their arrest help in any way to raise public awareness?

Please explain what you think is an unacceptable image and why.

I understand that many people want to make a lifestyle comment by their hairstyle and cloths they wear i. e. woolly rainbow jumpers and hats, decaled Morris minors, or Citroen Cv cars. They want to display to the world that they are unmistakably “Green”. However cute and appealing this image is, it does not cut ice with the general public or big business. This is how the media like to portray us, rather cranky, off beat and out of step with the rest of the world. We don’t want to be seen as the alternative but as the mainstream.

I wear ex army camos because they are cheap, why shouldn’t I?

The cloths we wear are one of the ways we communicate, it also helps the public identify with us and our cause. The more acceptable our dress the more people we represent. Wearing ex army camouflage clothing is supporting some ones army and it only seems to emulate those who we are campaigning against and is frightening to a large part of society.

see also


The time has come when a thorough change in the Peace Movement is not only vital, but also crucial. The methods that we are using are completely obsolete.
To achieve increased success, protesting has to get up to date by harnessing the power of the media and mass electronic communication. Our actions must have the power and potential to prolong the message in the public’s mind by keeping it at the forefront of the media and thereby attracting new followers.

Why is that some “well-planned” actions have not got the news coverage they deserve?
Is it because the demonstrators lack dedication and enthusiasm? Or is because the methods used are derived from 1950’s.
To examine the flaws of the current methods used we must first distinguish between the actual outcome and the desired outcome.

Why at times, an action can seem to be a success, but on close examination, it could be considered to have been a complete failure?
For example, a large crowd of protestors may bus into a demonstration. On arrival they collect their placards and banners and march past the police lines. After several demonstrations, they go home to watch the report on TV, and are happy with the outcome. The police have made a few arrests and so they are happy too. The media have got their pictures, so they are content as well. Everybody in this case seems to be happy with the actual outcome, so where are the flaws? The action has had little effect on the public, so the politicians have not felt challenged by it. So what is the desired outcome of a demonstration? The satisfaction of all “participants” or delivering the message to the public?
The logic is simple. The campaigners inform the general public by having a demonstration attracting interest and encouraging further action. The public later puts pressure on the politicians. This will force them to take notice of the situation and make changes.

A demonstration fails:
a) if it does not attract reasonable media coverage
b) if the action is immediately forgotten
b) if it does not arouse interest in the general public
c) if it alienates the public
d) if it does not bring more people to join the cause

When an action fails, the participants may well become despondent and be less likely to take part in future demonstrations. Therefore a failed action causes more even more harm than passivity.

We need to develop a more effective method of delivering our message. The drone, stereotype protestor has been created by the media who are perpetuating an image that we are slavishly following. We need to present a new image because today the messenger is as important as the message, if both are to be taken seriously by the public and the politicians. No matter how well written the message, its effect will be reduced if presented by somebody whose image is not acceptable.

We must also expand our messaging skills to include better use of web sites, film making, graphics and photography. In this way, we can prolong the message in the public’s mind. Our communication must be much harder hitting than that previously employed. We must not pull our punches and must tell the public how things really are. We are not getting through to the people. We are getting soft by complying with our requests not to rock the boat, not to be political and not to display disturbing or controversial images. We must remember that we are campaigning on behalf of the people against WMDs, the slaughter of innocent civilians, governments’ misdeeds and the greed of big business.

To attract new members we must change the way our meetings are organised. They need to be made more interesting with an informal format, with short speeches set between coffee and music and with a light relaxed atmosphere. Serious matters could be discussed at formal meetings by small working groups. All in all the meetings should become more visitor-friendly and less boring.

To reiterate our actions must have the power and potential to prolong the message in the public’s mind. We must keep at the forefront of the media by adopting new media technologies. We must also change our image to ensure that the public and politicians will take us more seriously.
Only then will the Peacemovement influence changes in the world.


Saturday, July 08, 2006

Some Bushisms

It would be a big mistake to think of George Bush as a dumb clown, but here are
16 splendid bushisms from the page:

enjoy them!

50. "I promise you I will listen to what has been said here, even though I wasn't here." —at the President's Economic Forum in Waco, Texas, Aug. 13, 2002

47. "We both use Colgate toothpaste." —after a reporter asked what he had in common with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Camp David, Md., Feb. 23, 2001

46. "Tribal sovereignty means that; it's sovereign. I mean, you're a — you've been given sovereignty, and you're viewed as a sovereign entity. And therefore the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities." —Washington, D.C., Aug. 6, 2004

44. "I'm the commander — see, I don't need to explain — I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being president." —as quoted in Bob Woodward's Bush at War

35. "Do you have blacks, too?" —to Brazilian President Fernando Cardoso, Washington, D.C., Nov. 8, 2001

32. "It is white." —after being asked by a child in Britain what the White House was like, July 19, 2001

27. "I'm the master of low expectations." —aboard Air Force One, June 4, 2003

26. "I'm also not very analytical. You know I don't spend a lot of time thinking about myself, about why I do things." —aboard Air Force One, June 4, 2003

25. "I know what I believe. I will continue to articulate what I believe and what I believe — I believe what I believe is right." —Rome, Italy, July 22, 2001

18. "See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction." —Milwaukee, Wis., Oct. 3, 2003

15. "The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him." —Washington, D.C., Sept. 13, 2001
14. "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." —Washington, D.C., March 13, 2002

10. "I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace." —Washington, D.C. June 18, 2002

7. “We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories … And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." —Washington, D.C., May 30, 2003
6. "Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere!" —President George W. Bush, joking about his administration's failure to find WMDs in Iraq as he narrated a comic slideshow during the Radio & TV Correspondents' Association dinner, Washington, D.C., March 24, 2004

5. "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." —Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000

if you wish you may visit my other blog


Thursday, June 29, 2006

Peace campaign change

Hi folks,

this is an experimental post,
see my other post please,

shut deso