On March 20th, 2004, tens of thousands of people took to the streets of New York to protest, peacefully, the 1st anniversary of the war in Iraq. The march, organized by United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ), took place in midtown Manhattan, rallying on Madison Avenue from 23rd street to about 42nd street. The demonstration marked the one year anniversary of the infiltration of American soldiers into Iraq. In attending this protest, I decided it would be best to sit aside and watch the throngs of people pass by with their various signs, chants, and messages. One year earlier in the streets of Amsterdam for spring break, I found myself sitting on the ledge of a bridge over a quaint canal when about 12-15,000 people marched through Amsterdam, meandering through the city streets and canals to a park near my hostel. While the protests had similar intentions and methods, certain differences were obvious between the two.

That, in and of itself, was quite a feat. It seemed that the majority of the people were middle and working class, but it also seemed difficult to pin a person or group as upper-middle or upper class. Everyone was dressed casually, and there were no “Millionaires Against War” signs being sported among the crowds… at least none that I saw. Nevertheless, I don’t doubt that wealthier Americans were participating in the protest.

While the march and rally were relatively peaceful, only incurring four police arrests (for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest) according to the New York Times, its messages to bystanders seemed hardly ones of unity. The protest was media savvy, with groups holding dozens of identical signs with web addresses and short, catchy phrases to put down Bush and his war.

It seemed as though so many groups had specific causes to fight for, rather than protesting the war. There were many people specifically promoting a political group (i.e. Socialists, Greenpeace, etc.), an American occupation other than Iraq (i.e. Argentina, the Philippines, etc.) or another protest (i.e. Marijuana Reform, WTO, etc.). While all of these issues are related and certainly fit in the mood and demeanor of this protest, the average bystander is bombarded with messages and ideas, none of which coincided.

The emotions portrayed among protesters had just as wide a range as the messages being delineated. Some seemed angry and almost mob-like with megaphones, drums, and chanting rhymes, while others seemed just happy to be standing for what they believed. There were peace doves, and there were angry veterans. The demonstration was too large to give it one specific emotion or underlying idea. In fact, if I came away with any underlying message, it was most likely “End U.S. occupation everywhere, especially Iraq.” That seems to be the best summary of many of the presented messages on posters, signs, and flyers. “Support the troops when they come home: Education and Health Care.” “Fight the New Colonialism.” And my particular favorite, “Caution, You are under media control.”

In Amsterdam, there didn’t seem to be a whole lot of police officers devoted to keeping order in this crowd, yet still, the demonstration went smoothly. The NYPD, on the other hand, was all over the midtown demonstration, both in organizing it beforehand and helping it run smoothly on the 20th.

The underlying difference that I can seem to draw from my two experiences is that the Dutch seemed to be more united in the idea of peace as the primary goal of the demonstration. Here in New York, “peace” was a word used to bring tens of thousands of people together. However, to many of these people, peace is secondary to whatever cause they represent. Bodyasbillboard.com, Impeachbush.org, INTERNATIONALAnswer.org.

The list goes on, and it’s not limited to the internet, although the internet did seem much more obvious here in New York. Many of New York’s demonstrators had a cause, an organization, or a website to promote. No one had that in Amsterdam. It was much more genuine in its purpose, and that seems, perhaps, to be a more European way of thinking.