LATIN AMERICA: pot-banging protests

Raśl Escalante from Mexico says "Whereas pot-banging is primarily an expression of anger and its message is directed at politicians, stripping in front of the Houses of Congress is a means to draw media attention in order for a supposedly rational message to be brought to public opinion. As far as I've seen, no rational message has been conveyed, however, and this has resulted in the strippers being considered clowns and rent-seekers. [rent-seekers?]

I believe that to choose a scandalous or even socially costly form of protest is legitimate, as long as the underlying message makes sense. I agree with Rosa that Argentina's politicians need a strong wake-up call (as will Mexico's in a couple of years), and therefore pot-banging makes sense (looting doesn't). The arguments need not be elaborate to be rational (the silent march in Mexico City in September of 1968, although socially costly, conveyed a strong but simple message that tolerance of government brutality was wearing thin). Another example of an effective but scandalous form of protest here in Mexico City that I sympathized with was a police officer who tied himself to a lamp-post on Reforma Avenue (one of the main thoroughfares of the City) in order to protest against his superiors' extortionist practices. Although the form was scandalous, it was effective in getting this man's message into the media. Sadly, I don't think it helped the man; he was fighting too big a monster."

What does Raśl think of the student protests, that of 1968 and the more recent ones? How effective have they been? They clearly have been used for political purposes.

Ronald Hilton - 1/30/02