Posted by
Andrews on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 12:23:33 PM
Those on the left, and even the media, often make the mistake of thinking that the massive numbers at left wing protests, and the relatively small numbers at conservative demonstrations, is somehow meaningful. Either they adopt the simple minded assumption that the left far outnumbers the right, despite the relatively close outcomes of every election since 1992, or they adopt a slightly more sensible argument that the right simply does not have the energy or commitment the left has, which does help explain the elections.
However, I tend to think there is a much more simple explanation.
P.J. O'Rourke once said he explained the lack of conservative protests by saying "It's because we have jobs." I think this isn't far form the truth. One need only look at the bulk of the left's base to see the difference. The left has a number of constituencies who can easily protest, students, the unemployed, and the marginally employed. They also have three employed groups, professors, government employees and union workers, who often get formal leave to attend specific protests, or who can use relatively lenient leave policies to attend when not granted leave. Add to that the celebrities and idle rich who round out the base, and it is easy to see how the left can manage to gather rather impressive numbers for any protest.
And that does not even take into account the so-called "rant-a-mob" protesters, the marginally employed individuals who earn extra income by providing bodies whenever needed. Or the similar practice, invented by some unions, of hiring temps to protest when there are insufficient numbers.
I suppose those last two could be used to fill out conservative protests, but, to my knowledge, the use of protest ringers has been limited, so far anyway, to union protests and protests over supposed racism in various workplaces. And given the relatively impromptu nature of most conservative protests, along with the relatively meager support given to conservative groups by national organizations, I doubt most conservative protests have the money to employ such seat fillers. Which means conservatives are left relying upon volunteers, and, as most of those are employed, usually end up with relatively meager numbers.
Of course, these are all generalizations, but I think they paint a valid picture, and one which fits the facts. Liberals always seem to turn out several times as many bodies for a protest as conservative (excepting on weekend and holidays, when conservative numbers swell, also a telling fact), yet elections do not show liberals garnering two to three times as many votes.
And there may be another factor at work as well. I recall back in the 1980's we conservatives used to laugh at the way liberals would stage a protest at the drop of a hat. That changed in the early 90's when some conservatives began staging rallies in support of the troops during the first Gulf War. But I have a feeling many conservatives still hold on to that distaste at the thought of protesting. (I know I am still a bit put off at the thought of protests or rallies or whatever you want to call them. I understand the motives, and know they can get attention, but I can't get over the idea that they are still an organized adult version of a tantrum.)
So, I am afraid, for the foreseeable future, conservatives will continue to lose the "protest war". We just can't bring out the numbers the liberals do. But take heart! If Obama continues to trash the economy, maybe there will be enough unemployed conservatives to flesh out future rallies.