Not All Protests are Created Equal: Take Two

If I may, it seems appropriate to revisit a post from not too long ago, Not All Protests Are Created Equal from March 6th.  Interestingly enough, that very same week, a radio piece addressed the same topic.  (Thanks for the LINK TO THE RADIO PIECE, Mr. Bolos!)  It asks:  What is a protest?  What is a civil war?

On the Media analyzes the use of the term "rebel" and "civil war" to identify anti-Qaddafi forces, while some could argue these men and women are "protesters."  The last bit of the radio show seems to sum up their discussion well:

Several people have told me that the moment they hear the word “rebel” they begin to disconnect. The effect is compounded when combined with the phrase “civil war.” Whether or not people like us on the other side of the world choose to engage or even follow the story is a decision each of us makes every day. We think we make those choices consciously, weighing the expense and time and mental energy with what we stand to gain. But often we decide without deciding. What we choose can hinge on the unrecognized power of a single world.

 We know that Madison, WI is not in the state of unrest it was in March... it lived the life of a "protest."  People had signs, people swayed government policy makers, people put down the signs, people (like myself) wrote blogs about it.  In Libya, the conflict continues.  Is calling anti-Qaddafi forces protesters accurate?  What do we call them?


Just yesterday CNN published "Inside Libya's Rebel Movement," a video that tells about the current status of the goings on in Libya.  This is by no means a protest, folks: military communication devices, guns, international military aid?  No, no, no.  This is a war.


In March, I could make analyze the fact that the situation in Libya and that in Wisconsin were titled similarly when their nature was so vastly different.  Now, with time aggravating the situation in Libya and dispersing the one in Madison, there is not even a title to compare.  These two events are no longer in the same realm of conflict.  


Clearly calling both the situations in Libya and Wisconsin did not change what they became, or else they would have become essentially the same thing.  So I must ask, do words actually have that much power?  Can a combination of symbols on a piece of paper or screen mean anything?  I don't think so; the blood in the dirt describes the situation quite accurately on its own.