If your History class was anything like mine growing up, you were probably taught that protest in the US
look something like this
-
Narrator
look something like this
The Great Civil Rights March in Washington, a moving exercise of one of the most cherished rights in a free society, the right of peaceful protest. People taking to the streets and demanding action from their government. There is no way that can be controversial, right? Psst... Roll the controversial footage. (gun bangs) -
Reporter
look something like this
Overnight Minneapolis on fire. -
Reporter
look something like this
Protests turned destructive in downtown Seattle tonight. -
Reporter
look something like this
Multiple shots ring out in Austin, Texas. (gun bangs) Protests outside of history books aren't simple things that you can just slap a label on. They can be peaceful one minute, chaotic the next and can even turn violent a minute after that. I remember when I was in Ferguson, folks were protesting and sharing why their communities needed change. But as soon as the sun set, police would put on their riot gear and block off the streets. Now depending on what news sources you're getting your info from, you might have only seen the highlight real, which usually means a focus on the chaos. So, let's take a look at not why people protest, but how. Is there a right way to protest? On its most basic level, a protest is a public expression of disapproval. And it can be directed towards a company, an institution, or a government. Protests have been in the DNA of America since before America was even America. We're all familiar with the Boston Tea Party, right? It was a bunch of dudes, they didn't like how Britain was taxing their tea, so they snuck onto a ship and dumped a bunch of it into the ocean in protest. Now the Brits, they can tolerate a lot, but messing with their tea, that's not gonna fly. Or as they say in England, "Oy! That's not gonna fly governor "or is it mate? Innit?" Please don't make fun of my accent. But anyway, the Boston Tea Party eventually led to, yup, The American Revolutionary War. When the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution in 1791, the right of every American to protest was written into the First Amendment. "The right of the people peaceably to assemble "and to petition the Government "for a redress of grievances." And we petitioned just a little bit. As a treat. The abolition of slavery, women's right to vote, Civil Rights, the Vietnam War, the Stonewall Uprising that gave national attention to the Gay Rights Movement. The March for Life to protest abortion, protest against the Government's inaction during the AIDS Epidemic, protest against Economic Globalization, Tea Party protest against taxes and big government, Occupy Wall Street, the Dakota Access Pipeline, the youth led Climate Strike, and in 2020, the Black Lives Matter Protest and Anti-Lockdown Protest. Whew, that's a lot. And that barely scratches the surface. Let's take another look at the First Amendment, You got the word peaceably in there. And if you head over to the ACLU website to look up your rights when you're protesting, it's actually kind of sad. You can stand on the sidewalk with a sign, but you can't get in the way of people as they walk by. You can pass out leaflets, but you can't block entrances to buildings. Oh, and if you want to, you know, march in the street with a bunch of people, there's a good chance that you'll need to get a permit. aAd it can be hard to make an impact if you're following all the rules. So, how do we as Americans think about a protest that people start doing things unpeaceably. For example, if a thousand people are protesting peacefully and 10 people loot a store, do we condemn that protest? What if it's 50 people? What if people set fire to that store? What if a cop gets injured? Does that invalidate the whole reason people came out in the first place? I think we need to sort of distinguish what is, sort of peaceful, and what is a disruption or an interruption. That's historian Kellie Carter Jackson. I think a lot of times we're more than happy to have a peaceful protest, if it doesn't interrupt our status quo, or if it doesn't cause us to be disturbed or bothered by the things that we might, you know, see on TV or interact with in our daily lives. But most protests that... The essence of protest is to disrupt. So I do think that protests in order to be effectual, they have to get people to be pulled out of the status quo. Today, Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights Movement are pretty much universally admired. But back in the '60s, they were super controversial. A poll from 1961 found that 57% of Americans thought the Freedom Riders and the sit-ins at lunch counters hurt the chances of integration in the South. Crazy, right? And after the 1963 March on Washington, where MLK delivered his, "I Have A Dream" speech, 74% of Americans believed mass demonstrations, harmed the cause. This idea that we have of Martin Luther King Jr. as so beloved, and so nonviolent and so passive, if you will, is an invention. It's a creation that came long after he died. And so, there's a reason and utility to be able to, demarcate King in this way. And it allows us to not acknowledge the fact that during the moment that King is living, he is causing all kinds of ruckus. And so when we look at the Black Lives Matter Movement today, it's no different, no different, from the movement that was happening in the '60s, '50s, '60s, and '70s, really. A lot of the stuff that's being criticized about the Black Lives Matter Protest, looting, vandalism, violence, and the distinction between real protesters and outside agitators, that was all happening in the '60s too. And just like back then, those criticisms are being used to discredit the entire movement. And since most Americans aren't physically at these protests, their views get shaped by what they see on TV and on their timelines. One of the things that's really important to understand is that almost nobody directly sees a protest, right? So the way most people are making sense of a protest is through the media, and what the media focuses on will often define how that protest is understood in the larger public. That's Omar Wasow, a political science professor at Princeton University. And so if a protest is 95% peaceful, but a handful of people light a car on fire, and then the media focuses on the car, that protest might be perceived by the public as a violent protest, even though 95% of the people at it were engaged in nonviolent direct action. And so the media really plays an important role in interpreting these events for the public. Turns out, there isn't really a right way to protest, but we do know that as protests get more extreme, they usually get less support from the public. There's research that was done at Stanford that looked at how do people respond to, kind of the range of tactics that protesters might engage in. What they found is that, as protestors use more extreme tactics, blocking a freeway was more extreme than holding up placards, engaging in property damage was more extreme than a blocking a freeway. As protestors engaged in more extreme tactics, they tended to alienate potential allies. People who might be sympathetic to that cause, often became less identified with that cause. And so they found that extreme tactics could actually hurt a movement by taking people who might have aligned with that movement, and causing them to distance themselves from that. And at the end of the day, protests are a battle to win over public opinion. And to do that, they have to navigate this weird dilemma. More extreme actions get more media attention that can spread awareness to more people, but at the same time, if it's perceived as too extreme, some people might be reluctant to support the protest. So now we want to hear from you. How far would you go to support a cause that you believe in? Would you break a law, put yourself in danger? Is there a line that you wouldn't cross? I can't wait to hear your responses. Teachers, if you like what you see, check us out on KQED Learn. I'll see you all next time, stay safe out there. (upbeat music)
Passport
Follow Us