Conservative business attire for anti-war protests

[interlocutor]

I believe one of the NY Times op-ed columnists made the point a year or two ago, that the protesters would be taken more seriously in coats and ties than in standard issue anarchist wear. Perhaps it was Bob Herbert.

 

[NoVaguy]

Originally Posted by reubencahn

I'm curious. When people use the phrase "Democrat" politicians and "Democrat" party, is it a deliberate attempt to insult?

Yes. Etiquette generally requires that you call people by the name they choose. Anything less is indeed a deliberate attempt to insult.

 

[NoVaguy]

Originally Posted by alflauren

It's a matter of semantics and a way of not ceding the word "democratic" to the Democrats. A Republican is a member of the Republican party. A Democrat is a member of the Democrat party, not the Democratic party.

There isn't anything particularly republican about today's Republican party. Should we then come up with up with another name in order to not cede the term "republican"?

 

[marc237]

As to the topic of the original poster, I agree that a more conservative or business attire would make sense for demonstrations of that kind - it implies that those participating are not just bare-footed hippies. I have been struck by the image of the original civil rights marches of the late 50s and early 60s where most of the marchers were in coat and tie or dresses (gender dependent) as opposed to the far more casual dress of the late 60s. In part this reflected a seismic cultural shift and, in part, the fact that the protesters against the Vietnam war were considerably younger on average.

When I march, I tend to wear a blazer or sports coat and dress slacks (and very comfortable shoes).

 

[epa]

I mostly demonstrate when there is a local demonstration against Basque terrorism, due to some more innocent people having been killed because some stupid brainwashed young guys with nothing better to do want to feel important playing patriot games. The last time I went to a demonstration these ETA guys had blewn up a garage at the airport and managed to kill two guys from Ecuador who were here in Spain, working hard trying to support their families back home.
When I go to these demonstrations I am normally so pissed off by the incredible stupidity of these terrorists, that I actually do not think about dressing up or down. If the demonstration is on a weekday, I go directly from my job, with suit and tie. I guess that is what most people do around here.

 

[Kasper]

Originally Posted by Sator

Did I say that?

DA! Tovarish Lenin say to us to 'beat our swords into ploughshares'. But comrade say wear lounge suits at least when protesting. Tavarish say big NET! to dressing like crap for protest:



Beloved comrade lead by example and wears nice little red boutonniere:




I don't want to be disrespectful to Australians but many people here in the US take the war very seriously. I don't think your down under jokes are very appropriate considering the circumstances.

 

[Kasper]

Originally Posted by marc237

As to the topic of the original poster, I agree that a more conservative or business attire would make sense for demonstrations of that kind - it implies that those participating are not just bare-footed hippies. I have been struck by the image of the original civil rights marches of the late 50s and early 60s where most of the marchers were in coat and tie or dresses (gender dependent) as opposed to the far more casual dress of the late 60s. In part this reflected a seismic cultural shift and, in part, the fact that the protesters against the Vietnam war were considerably younger on average.

When I march, I tend to wear a blazer or sports coat and dress slacks (and very comfortable shoes).

Thank you for really thinking about your reply. I think that many can agree that Martin Luther King should be role models for many of us including his conservative dress which many people might not think about.

 

[Sator]

Originally Posted by Kasper

I don’t want to be disrespectful to Australians but many people here in the US take the war very seriously. I don’t think your down under jokes are very appropriate considering the circumstances.
What makes you think I am being anything less than deadly serious? There are Australian armed forced in Iraq alongside US forces. An Australian, David Hicks, is the first Guantanamo inmate going on trial. I happen to think that this equation of slobwear being a symbol of liberal politics to be complete nonsense. I think I demonstrated that quite effectly with the way Lenin - in his way, a brilliant if deeply misguided idealist - and his well tailored lounge suits show. Heck, if Lenin can turn up to Red Square in a suit and boutonierre, then there's absolutely no excuse for a moderate to wear slobwear under the guise of liberalism. The idea that being well dressed equates with conservative politics is a hangover of the French Revolution, when court dress symbolised the monarchy. I happen to feel that this equation is totally invalid today.

 

[Kasper]

Originally Posted by Sator

What makes you think I am being anything less than deadly serious? There are Australians armed forced in Iraq alongside US forces. An Australian, David Hicks, is the first Guantanamo inmate going on trial.

I happen to think that this equation of slobwear being a symbol of liberal politics to be complete nonsense. I think I demonstrated that quite effectly with the way Lenin - in his way, a brilliant if deeply misguided idealist - and his well tailored lounge suits demonstrate.

The idea that being well dressed equates with conservative politics is a hangover of the French Revolution, when court dress symbolised the monarchy. I happen to feel that this equation is totally invalid today.


I am sorry I misunderstood you. I hope that many of the Australians in Iraq aren't like the people I knew back in Philly who only joined the military to get money for college.

 

[tiger02]

Originally Posted by Kasper

I am sorry I misunderstood you. I hope that many of the Australians in Iraq aren't like the people I knew back in Philly who only joined the military to get money for college.
Look, you clearly think you're right about this, and you clearly want to discuss it. So start a thread in the appropriate forum already, and stop bringing it up in passing. Tom

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by reubencahn

I'm curious. When people use the phrase "Democrat" politicians and "Democrat" party, is it a deliberate attempt to insult?
It's just Texas.

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by NoVaguy

Yes. Etiquette generally requires that you call people by the name they choose. Anything less is indeed a deliberate attempt to insult.
You mean like when DannyWilson wanted to be called "The Guy"?

 

[Kasper]

Originally Posted by tiger02

Look, you clearly think you're right about this, and you clearly want to discuss it. So start a thread in the appropriate forum already, and stop bringing it up in passing.

Tom


I don't want to make a controversy but there is nothing to be right about as I know this is what happened to those guys back in my old neighborhood. If I decide to protest the war in my best work attire no one can stop me as I know that is my right as a citizen.

 

[tiger02]

Originally Posted by Kasper

I don't want to make a controversy but there is nothing to be right about as I know this is what happened to those guys back in my old neighborhood. If I decide to protest the war in my best work attire no one can stop me as I know that is my right as a citizen.
Huh? I encourage you to start a thread in the CE forum, and you start defending your right to protest in a suit and tie?

 

[Joel_Cairo]

Originally Posted by NoVaguy

Yes. Etiquette generally requires that you call people by the name they choose. Anything less is indeed a deliberate attempt to insult.
It also has to do with the strong emotional valence that the small-d adjective "democratic" has. Regardless of political affiliation, people like things which are "democratic", so if one party gets that name, the other will be jealous. It doesn't work with "republican", because most americans are foggier on that adjective. If you as the man on the street if the USA is a Democray of a Republic, I think you'll see what I mean. Calling dems the "Democrat Party" goes way back to McCarthy (if not further), who liked the way "democrat" sounds like "beaurocrat." It has become code for the political right, like flashing gang signs or referring to a "culture of life" without ever explicitly stating anti-abortion stances. GWB has done this pretty often, but more so in 2006 (the year of his stiffest political opposition) than all of his previous presidential years combined. I believe it was either WaPo or the NYT who had the count of "democrat party" publicly coming out of Dubya's mouth in 2006 at 22 different occasions.