George,

Sure: Sit-ins are one method of leveraging power. Those of us who sat-in do not have the financial power of the administration. We cannot deprive workers of their wages for political reasons or hire court apologists who theoretically support minority-friendly initiatives, for example. That does not mean we are powerless. Booker T. Washington recommended one route to power for blacks. The historical record suggests that his strategy was less effective than direct action.

It is naive to think that average people like me or like those folks who sat in Virgil Goode's office can wrest enough monetary resources from the capitalist elite to either pay a living wage or replace the salaries and campaign contributions paid by military contractors. Those who control economic policy are not about to enact policies that would redistribute power to somebody else. The grossly unequal distribution of monetary wealth does not mean average people are powerless, any more today than when the black students refused to leave the lunch counters. We still have the ability to exert substantial control over the public discourse. Unfortunately for Casteen and Goode, vestiges of a democratic system remain. Casteen cannot achieve his fundraising goals if he loses public confidence completely. Goode cannot keep his house seat if he loses public confidence.

In discussing strategies like sit-ins, we must always return to the central question of how to leverage power. Does the imminent loss of liberty make sit-ins more notable, a more dramatic and thus effective action? Undoubtedly, just as the monks who immolated themselves during the Vietnam War would not have gained six seconds of press attention if they had doused themselves with water rather than gasoline and then lit the match. The need for direct action is no less today as we confront the assault of the plutocracy on a democratic system, manifestations of which we see in Charlottesville as well as Capitol Hill, because the effectiveness of direct action does depend upon underlying democratic institutions, which we are in danger of losing.

Zack Fields (electronic mail, March 6, 2007)