So now we've got another "Code Pink Hunger Strike" going on. They're starting at Dianne Feinstein's home, then moving on to Nancy Pelosi's office. The point of these hunger strikes is to end the war.
Personally, I think it's a good thing. Our food would be better spent nourishing our soldiers than a bunch of aimless protesters who think not eating will accomplish anything. In fact, can anyone thing of a hunger strike that has accomplished anything of significance since Gandhi?
They're so excited to have 8 people who will starve themselves for this hunger strike. 8 people? This is supposed to be a "big" event for Code Pink...and the got all of 8 people to go through with this?
Those will be the same 8 people that actually vote for Cindy Sheehan over Nancy Pelosi next year.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
She pre-dates Ghandi, but Alice Paul's hunger strike achieved successful results.
Also, there's the 1981 hunger strikes in northern Ireland are seen as successfully enabling access to the political process.
I'm aware of Alice Paul's accomplishments. However, as we've noted, since Gandhi...we've had one significant hunger strike that has accomplished anything.
I'd say that the 1981 hunger strikes in Ireland were part of a much larger national movement, though. There already had been protests, gatherings, and marches that had already pushed the calls for reform forward, and the hunger strikes were what pushed them "over the hump" so to speak and into fruition.
However, hunger strikes tend to draw pity or disdain (depends on where you stand), but not too much in the way of actual change in the majority of cases.
Code Pinko???
Brilliant!
Isn't the Code Pink hunger strike absolutely "part of a much larger national movement?"
Hunger strikes are an effective tactic precisely because they rely on pity. In themselves I agree that they don't amount to much, but they are certainly tactics to draw attention to causes. That in itself is part of promoting change.
I guess I just feel you are being overly critical of CP's tactics because you disagree with their cause.
Part of my critical nature does come from my disagreement with their cause...most of it comes from the fact that they can't even agree on a cause.
First it's "bring the troops home!" Then it's "Impeach Bush!" Next it's "Sheehan YES! Pelosi NO!" Now it's been "Put all the conservatives in Gitmo!"
C'mon, that's actually moving AWAY from any kind of a real national movement, wouldn't you agree Zen?
Honestly I don't follow Code Pink, so you apparently have more info on them than I. The national movement I was referring to was to end the occupation of Iraq by bringing the troops home. Hell, there may even be a majority of people (national movement) favoring impeachment. And not for partisan reasons, but rather on principle.
You may very well be correct about CP's shifting causes diluting their message.
Post a Comment