raise hell at the point of profit

heres two do good hachademics
with a message on target


=========== 

piven and cloward 
results of reseach
 on movements and social change 

--------------------------

In every case we examined
  movements found their
concerns fell on deaf ears 
until they directly
disrupted 'business as usual' 
either in government 
or
business operations

 then and only then
did they made significant
gains

----- get it point of profit 
pinch em where it hurts fastest and mostest-----

"When unemployed workers
 sat in at relief
offices
 local officials somehow found 
the money to pay them benefits"

 "when movement participants
created chaos on the local level
 officials noticed at
the state and federal levels 
and began to make concessions "

 "contrary to conventional wisdom
 movements  lost ground quickly 
as soon as they changed
their methods
 to more acceptable means 
to achieve their ends
 negotiating through representatives
 working with candidates
 helping them get elected
 lobbying and so on " 

---- great so far butfuck 
here comes the zoinger-----

 "At times when voting 
  was much more restricted
 a direct challenge to authority
 could easily result in massacre,
lynching or other violent
                     responses "

------ be afraid be awefully afraid -----------

 "But when poor and working class people
              have "the vote"

-------what happened to get the vote ---------------

   they must  mobilize around their concerns 
            and turn out to vote
 governments were much
more responsive to social movements
                             that vote "

-- what the fuck is this 
they turn out and their two facer 
candidate of choice
gets in instead of gets whipped...
ok 
and then he what ? goes along with some "reforms" 
as long as the hell raisers 
 keep 
his left foot to the fire 
by point of profit bonfires ?

if so then 
here's my query
aren't 
   cause and coincidence 
 conflated here

  a rascally uppity 
prole- pleb
       movement 
powerful enough 
to turn an election around
and then "enforce " promises 
by direct actions 
prolly succeeded 
by direct action alone 

i say
movements that succeed
would succeed under any gov form

even a dictator
 would cave 
to a  movement "objectively"
able to wring out  the changes 
that take the above form
 in a state where 
the geeps face 
an   electoral road 
restrained
corporate klass   

even if the forms
 of struggle 
would need profound  motification
where popular  rights type rules 
were thrown out the window
and club rules 
were firmly 
in the drivers seat 

if by not voting 
they let the  other ass hole get in 
what ?
he'll weather their direct actions
  and just crack down ?

of course he will
 escalation ?
maybe 
movement strength 
is measured by persistence

 
    does  this petty good guy  argument
 boil it down 
to gettin the proper sell out elected?

of the  two types of politicians 

 elect 
the one's who can't sell out  
cause they need the hell raisers 
to stop raisin hell
or they won't  get re elected 

and  defeat all others
  
including
the  politicians who promise 
to  crack down 
  cause they don't want 
 the hell raiser vote 
to get elected in the first place 
   
 the true blue sell outs
who need the hellers vote to get elected
but 
who figure or find out
they can get re elected 
either 
no matter what the fuck 
the hell raisers do  
or 
because they plan on 
 turning on 
the hell raisers
 once they are elected 

or or or 

any which way here
i see not causation 
but 
i do  smell tautology    ----



===============================