Interesting People mailing list archives
two on more on A don't fly day???
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 08:45:15 -0500
Begin forwarded message: From: Zach White <zwhite () darkstar frop org> Date: November 14, 2006 7:06:55 PM EST To: "David P. Reed" <dpreed () reed com> Cc: dave () farber net Subject: Re: [IP] more on A don't fly day??? On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 06:26:44PM -0500, David P. Reed wrote:
I beg to disagree with Mr. White. Perhaps he is a young man, born after1968 or so, and not privy to experience the power of creative non-violent action (aka Satyagraha).
I am a young man, but I do know the power of "creative non-violent action."
A "hunger strike" or "bus boycott" works for reasons that don't seem tofit into Mr. White's worldview, perhaps because he thinks of it as pointless, even suicidal to inconvenience oneself, rather than taking out one's anger through violence or its corporate analog - killing the company by cutting its profits. That it makes no sense to him merely shows his youth and narrowmindedness, assuming that the airlines require actual loss of profits to be moved, or that the only actor is the airline.
A boycott is an excellent idea. However, the boycott needs to be effective, and a one day boycott is not effective in this case. If it was proposed to boycott airlines until this TSA silliness ends, I would be behind it 100%. Instead, what's being proposed is a one day boycott. All we're doing is shifting travel off of one day, and on to another day. We're not depriving the airlines of our money, and we're not depriving the TSA of theirs. We're only making them take it a bit sooner or a bit later. The airlines are publically traded companies, and they respond to the bottom line. A one-day boycott has too many problems to be workable. For starters, except for a few frequent flyers, no one flies every day. Most people don't even fly every year. Right there, we've limited our pool of potential boycotters to those who fly frequently enough to care about what the TSA does AND happen to be flying that day. Another problem we face is that it's likely the airline executives and the TSA won't even know why people aren't flying that day, unless we manage to get media attention focused on the boycott.I think there are a number of better ways to get their attention. Perhaps
people could start taking the train for trips less than 2000 km. They could drive for trips less than 1000km. Maybe they'll take a cruise instead of taking a plane trip to a destination. Whatever they choose to do, they need to actually deprive themselves of the airline travel, or the airlines won't see the value of changing anything. Perhaps now that we have balance between the legislative and the executive branch, we'll be able to get our represenatives and senators in the government to actually change some of this TSA silliness directly. Finally, before you assume that I consider it "pointless" or "suicidal" to inconvience one's self, you should consider the fact that I've driven 4 hours out of my way to buy something I could have gotten at Wal-Mart.I've driven 4 hours to fight a $50 ticket I didn't deserve, and every day
I go out of my way to patronize the business that doesn't care that I'm not wearing shoes, even though I could spend less time and money at a closer business with a "No Shoes/No Shirt/No Service" sign. I understand very well what it means to be inconvienenced for one's values and beliefs. -Zach ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- two on more on A don't fly day??? David Farber (Nov 15)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- two on more on A don't fly day??? David Farber (Nov 15)