that's the point. they have no clue how to contain a struggle which
transgress the 'stright' grammar of protest. they were puzzled and
became nastily violent.

On 4/10/08, Anivar Aravind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The grammar of protest
> By C S Venkiteswaran
>  http://www.infochangeindia.org/analysis256.jsp
>
> Kerala does not tolerate anything but calibrated and conventional
> protest. The media recently "exposed"a group of youngsters expressing
> solidarity with the Chegara land struggle as frolicking and not
> serious. They trivialised in the process both the cause and the
> process of investigative journalism
>       
>       
>
> Some weeks ago, a group of cultural activists and youth undertook a
> night vigil in front of the secretariat at Thiruvananthapuram, to
> declare solidarity with the people's struggle in Chengara. A number of
> important social activists and commentators took part.
>
> The next day, Kairali and People's TV beamed visuals of the event:
> young people sitting around, talking, smoking, walking, lying down,
> and hugging. Obviously they were unaware of the hidden camera fixed
> across the street. The commentary that accompanied the visuals was
> sarcastic, casting aspersions on the intentions of the youth in
> question. By "exposing" the "degeneration" of the protestors, the news
> item hinted at the "real intentions" and "degeneration" of the land
> rights struggle at Chengara, as if the visuals were a reflection of
> that battle. It was obviously directed at debunking the people's
> struggle in Chengara. It was like saying: look at the company they
> keep!
>
> One could not have missed the contrast. At Chengara, a life and death
> struggle is underway where people are fighting for land and
> challenging the state by threatening to commit suicide if the police
> intervene by force. It is a spontaneous struggle in which the
> self-proclaimed "monopolists" of popular struggles have no role. The
> only way to counter such a struggle from the outside is to tarnish it,
> denigrate it and stamp it as "extremist". To explain it away as
> "gullible" people falling prey to the machinations of vested
> interests.
>
> That is exactly what the state and the party have been doing ever
> since the struggle caught the attention of the media and the public at
> large. The strategy is to identify and isolate individuals behind the
> struggle and launch a smear campaign against them; not to address or
> analyse the issue at hand.
>
> So what do we see at the vigil? A group of committed, concerned
> youngsters making merry at midnight in the middle of the city!
> Obviously the media was waiting for such an opportunity and readily
> zoomed in on the "juicy" story, "exposing" the full reality.
>
> This sort of telecast for public consumption prompts several questions
> and offers insights into our notions about morality.
>
> Over the years, political struggles have acquired and assumed a
> language of their own in Kerala. They have specific formats and modes
> of expression -- processions, sit-ins, pen-downs, dharnas,
> satyagrahas, hunger strikes, slogan-shouting, memorandum-filing,
> road-blocking, stone-throwing, destruction of public property (buses
> are especially vulnerable), hartals, bandhs, etc. These interventions
> or forms of struggle are graded, calibrated and performed according to
> the gravity of the situation and the amount of public support,
> especially from the middle class. Obviously, it is the affected
> parties' clout with the system that really matters and decides the
> form of protest, which is actually a kind of structured dialogue
> between the affected people and the powers-that-be. It is common
> knowledge that often, when a serious issue comes up the minister or
> concerned authority himself asks the affected parties to "stage" a
> public protest so that enough public opinion and pressure is (seen to
> be) created for the state to take a favourable decision. It's a drama
> where the affected appear to protest and the state appears to listen
> and take action. The great drama called democracy!
>
> But if someone dares to break the rules and does not follow the
> grammar of protests, everything is turned around. Because the
> powers-that-be are clueless about how to contain it; and more
> importantly, such protests make them seem "powerless".
>
> Only in calibrated and conventional "struggles" do the protestors need
> to follow the rules: rules about how to behave, about demeanour,
> speech, body language. Look "serious" so that you mimic the gravity of
> the situation. No smiles, at least in front of the camera. You are
> "crusaders", "cross-bearers". Do not loosen your grip on the elaborate
> performance put up for public consumption. Be the message!
>
> So what happened the night of the vigil? The protesting youth
> certainly didn't look "serious" or "grave"; they didn't act the part
> of martyrs being led to the stake. They didn't even bother to put on
> appropriate faces! Instead, they were frolicking and making merry,
> chatting, smoking, and hugging. How can the guardians of public
> morality stand such behaviour? Naturally, the moralists sprang into
> action, denouncing the "debaucheries" of the youth, using their spy
> cameras so that all was "revealed" to the world at large. It was as if
> they were smuggling visuals out of a nuclear plant or the Pentagon!
>
> The protestors were going about their activities in a public space and
> in full public view (what could be more public than the footpath in
> front of the state secretariat?). The photographers, on the other
> hand, were not casual passersby. The spy camera was being directed at
> a public act; in other words it was an act of spying on a public
> protest performed in front of the public, in a public space.
>
> The energy and enthusiasm of these "investigative" journalists and
> their spy cameras would be better  directed at the real centres of
> power and conspiracy; at the authorities that decide our lives and our
> futures,  than on a group of youngsters just being themselves in a
> public space. If we leave our future to the moral policemen who keep
> vigil on public protests for us, who dictate to us "how to protest",
> we are doomed.
>
> More importantly, let such "exposes" not muddle our exposure to the
> real struggles, both for our land and for our freedom.
>
> (Dr C S Venkiteswaran is director of a media school in Kochi. He is
> also a filmmaker and film critic)
>
> InfoChange News & Features, April 2008
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
 To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to