DIY History | Transcribe | Campus Culture | University of Iowa anti-war protests, 1970 | ""Iowa '70: Riot, Rhetoric, Responsibility?"" Page 13

Transcribe
Translate

University of Iowa anti-war protests, 1970

""Iowa '70: Riot, Rhetoric, Responsibility?"" Page 13

To anyone who wasn't there, our refusal to leave and our generally passive submission to arrest probably seem absurd. To those who think we should have left, my only reply is that I felt assured that we were acting entirely within the law (and that the charge of disorderly conduct is therefore absurd) and, more importantly, given the circumstances, our action seemed to be the most viable form of protest available.
It wasn't courageous; it wasn't forceful, radical action; it didn't deal a crushing blow to the system. Such actions were not available at the time, so we took advantage of a form of protest that was immediately available.
It would have been impossible for me to have walked out on a group that was taking a stand on the very issues about which I felt most strongly. Attempted resistance would have resulted only in more polarization, senseless injuries, and additional charges. The protest was a symbolic one, without direct effects on the corrupt system whose atrocities had made our collective presence necessary.
Aside from the satisfaction afforded to the participants who took a physical stand on their beliefs, its only justification will be the questions it raises for those who weren't involved--questions like why was armed force called to evict nonviolent demonstrators who weren't violating any laws?
How many times are "mistakes" like this mass arrest made and how many lives have they damaged? Why, in a supposed democracy, are we coerced into obeying the state even when it engages in ridiculous actions which are harmful to most of us? How long will it be before the power in this country is restored to its rightful owners--the People?

Protest Profits
When the revolution strikes, the capitalists will be overthrown. Or something like that.
Actually, the Iowa City demonstrations were not the October Revolt. In spite of a little broken glass, the Iowa City merchantile system was not overturned, or even dusrupted.
The market changed a little, however. Although most shops were closed Tuesday the fifth when the demonstrators siezed crucial intersections, a trend appeared—emphasis moved toward the essentials.
The owners of the downtown theaters—clearly a frivolous enterprise—estimated crowds at less than half usual.
"There's a better show in the streets tonight," said the Astro's manager.
When questioned concerning attendance, the Englert manager scowled, "What do you think?"
(This reporter was led to wonder if the famine of family films had not turned the theaters into havens for just that sort of liberal student whose views would lead him from M*A*S*H to the combination confrontation-festival at Clinton and Iowa.)
The demand for necessities of life more than counterbalanced the abandoning of all other recreational activities (than riots) by demonstrators.
Henry's carry-out restaurant claimed a four-fold increase in sales. And the usual night-time skeleton crew at Burger Chef were too harried for comment. A worker at Henry's suggested that they could lose a window and still see black.
They may have been storming Old Cap instead of the Bastille, but the demand for bread is eternal--and if it has a beefy burger with catsup and dill that doesn't hurt either.
The print media is often considered a necessity in this age of information. And "New Left Notes" were selling like the TIMES. However, I hesitate to include this in a discussion of capitalism--not so much because of the nature of the paper but because the hookers were willing to recognize anything from a stale Marlboro to seven pennies and a linty gumball as a linty gumball as valid exchange for thier publication.
While the demonstrators were "getting it together" with their strategy, the hamburger palaces were doing the same with their cash registers.

9

Saving...

To anyone who wasn't there, our refusal to leave and our generally passive submission to arrest probably seem absurd. To those who think we should have left, my only reply is that I felt assured that we were acting entirely within the law (and that the charge of disorderly conduct is therefore absurd) and, more importantly, given the circumstances, our action seemed to be the most viable form of protest available. It wasn't courageous; it wasn't forceful, radical action; it didn't deal a crushing blow to the system. Such actions were not available at the time, so we took advantage of a form of protest that was immediately available. It would have been impossible for me to have walked out on a group that was taking a stand on the very issues about which I felt most strongly. Attempted resistance would have resulted only in more polarization, senseless injuries, and additional charges. The protest was a symbolic one, without direct effects on the corrupt system whose atrocities had made our collective presence necessary. Aside from the satisfaction afforded to the participants who took a physical stand on their beliefs, its only justification will be the questions it raises for those who weren't involved--questions like why was armed force called to evict nonviolent demonstrators who weren't violating any laws? How many times are "mistakes" like this mass arrest made and how many lives have they damaged? Why, in a supposed democracy, are we coerced into obeying the state even when it engages in ridiculous actions which are harmful to most of us? How long will it be before the power in this country is restored to its rightful owners--the People? Protest Profits When the revolution strikes, the capitalists will be overthrown. Or something like that. Actually, the Iowa City demonstrations were not the October Revolt. In spite of a little broken glass, the Iowa City merchantile system was not overturned, or even dusrupted. The market changed a little, however. Although most shops were closed Tuesday the fifth when the demonstrators siezed crucial intersections, a trend appeared—emphasis moved toward the essentials. The owners of the downtown theaters—clearly a frivolous enterprise—estimated crowds at less than half usual. "There's a better show in the streets tonight," said the Astro's manager. When questioned concerning attendance, the Englert manager scowled, "What do you think?" (This reporter was led to wonder if the famine of family films had not turned the theaters into havens for just that sort of liberal student whose views would lead him from M*A*S*H to the combination confrontation-festival at Clinton and Iowa.) The demand for necessities of life more than counterbalanced the abandoning of all other recreational activities (than riots) by demonstrators. Henry's carry-out restaurant claimed a four-fold increase in sales. And the usual night-time skeleton crew at Burger Chef were too harried for comment. A worker at Henry's suggested that they could lose a window and still see black. They may have been storming Old Cap instead of the Bastille, but the demand for bread is eternal--and if it has a beefy burger with catsup and dill that doesn't hurt either. The print media is often considered a necessity in this age of information. And "New Left Notes" were selling like the TIMES. However, I hesitate to include this in a discussion of capitalism--not so much because of the nature of the paper but because the hookers were willing to recognize anything from a stale Marlboro to seven pennies and a linty gumball as a linty gumball as valid exchange for thier publication. While the demonstrators were "getting it together" with their strategy, the hamburger palaces were doing the same with their cash registers. 9