Spartacus moments (solidarity)

The signal moment in Stanley Kubrick’s (1960) Spartacus takes place on a hillside after the Roman legions finally defeat a slave rebellion led by Kirk Douglas. The victorious Roman general announces that the suI'm-Spartacus-film1rviving rebels will all be welcomed back as slaves, except for Spartacus, who will be crucified. Across the hillside, one sees the opportunity for heroic action, stands, declaring, “I am Spartacus.” One after another, each slave stands in solidarity, yelling out, “I am Spartacus.” Even Spartacus joins in.

The crosses come out the next day, as the Romans crucify thousands of men along the sides of the Appian Way.

It’s a powerful film with a clear political agenda. I can’t tell you much about the actual slave rebellion 2,000 plus years ago, but the idea of valorizing solidarity under pressure came from blacklisted author Howard Fast’s novel, as dramatized by blacklisted screenwriter, Dalton Trumbo. The writers’ names appear in the movie’s credits, breaking Hollywood’s blacklist. The notion is that solidarity means taking risks that could be avoided; standing with those under fire is a way to combat oppression and discrimination. It’s always easier not to.

The challenges of the Trump presidency will include opportunities for solidarity, and some are already standing up. In response to trial balloons for a national Muslim registry, Jonathan Greenblatt, leader of the Anti-Defamation League, announced his attention to sign up:

The day they create a registry for Muslims is the day that I register as a Muslim because of my Jewish faith, because of my commitment to our core American values, because I want this country to be as great as it always has been. As a Jewish community, we know what happens with litmus tests. We can remember. We have painful memories of when we ourselves were identified, registered and tagged.

The threat of large numbers of people volunteering to swamp such a registry–along with some obvious Constitutional problems–may be enough to scuttle the idea, or minimally, to design a more limited program that will be harder to disrupt.

Article Image

Columbia University

Even more pressing are Trump’s promises to rescind President Obama’s DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) program, which offered a relatively safe status to young people who came to the United States as children, and commence largescale deportations. Large city governments, like Los Angeles and Chicago, local police forces, and many universities have announced that they won’t cooperate with a deportation force. The idea is that deportations are antithetical to the other elements of doing their jobs: local police want residents to cooperate with them in solving crime; universities want to foster diverse communities involved in learning.

Across the country, university presidents have issued statements affirming their commitments to safety and diversity. For example, see the letter from City College of New York’s interim president, Vincent Boudreau:

Our values demand, whatever the rhetoric outside our campus, that we embrace the possibility that there is a place for all of us, on this campus and in this society: wherever you were born, and however you came here. They demand that we embrace our differences as virtues rather than threats, and recognize and nurture the promise represented by each person moving across this earth. At the most fundamental level, they demand that we commit our private and public selves to the responsibility of taking care of one another: of recognizing pain, and want, and isolation when we see it in those around us, and offering such comfort as we can.

We are a campus of immigrants, and the advocacy for justice in the field of immigration will continue to be central to our educational efforts. We are a campus community that proclaims its diversity, and so we must be a refuge and a source of wisdom on questions of racial, religious and gender fairness. We are, as an institution, built on foundational beliefs about the necessary place of accessible education—and by implication the need for robust social and economic mobility—in any stable and democratic society. And all of this means that whenever and for whatever reason the climate shifts against these values outside our campus, we are obliged to reaffirm them within it.

The leaders of 90 schools, so far, have signed a statement calling for retaining and expanding DACA. Many schools have announced that they won’t help deport students, and some have declared themselves to be sanctuaries. Meanwhile, faculty, students, and alumni have started petition campaigns asking their campuses to join in. Students have held demonstrations and walked out of classes to underscore their demands.

The statements and the campaigns are all about getting people to take sides in the upcoming conflict, and find solidarity with those more vulnerable.

The rebels on the hillside in Kubrick’s movie made a strong moral statement and deprived the Romans of property. Beyond that, however, the rebellion didn’t turn out so well for them. Sanctuary entails risk, even if crucifixion isn’t on the table. The point, however, remains powerful and clear–to stand against efforts to isolate and punish a vulnerable group of people.

For those who pay attention, there are likely to be far too many opportunities to demonstrate solidarity in the future.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

What these protests do…

Young people, particularly in places that didn’t support Donald Trump, continue to protest his election. (Below, you can see high school students in San Francisco marching.)

Two months before his inauguration, it’s worthwhile to think about just what these demonstrations can do.

To start, it’s extremely unlikely that the sincerity and vigor of the demonstrations will convince Donald Trump to resign in advance, nor motivate thirty plus Republican party stalwarts elected to the electoral college to vote for Trump to defect from their commitments.

This doesn’t mean demonstrating doesn’t matter.

Demonstrators demonstrate their convictions that Trump is unfit, by virtue of program or character, for the White House. Their concerns, about racism, misogyny, or the environment, to note just a few, draw public attention to Trump’s promises and his proposed appointments. They may provide a thumb on the scale for or against particular candidates for office and specific promises. The protests may also encourage Republicans in Congress to counsel the president-elect, or even to oppose some appointments or programs.

The protests set a policy agenda for news media, and pose questions that will be relayed not only to the new administration, but also to its supporters, inside and outside government. This week we see questions posed to the Trump campaign about just how racist, sexist, and anti-Semitic new senior strategist, Steve Bannon, really is. That’s not the conversation the administration wants to have. Trump can still decide that Bannon’s counsel is worth the hassle, but as long as the demonstrations continue, that cost will remain.

The demonstrations also matter for continued opposition to Trump’s presidency. People who turn out to protest see others who agree with them, and some of the other 61 million plus people who voted against Trump, watching the action online, see that they are not alone. People who take an action, carrying a placard, making a call, or even wearing a safety pin, identify themselves as activists, and are more likely to take another step. They’re also more likely to be asked to do something. Already, contributions to groups at the core of the new Trump opposition, like Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have seen spikes in their fundraising. Like fundraisers, good organizers make lists and know to go back to people who have already demonstrated their willingness to respond.

Demonstrators in action meet people who agree on Donald Trump, but have different priorities: abortion rights, civil liberties, immigration, environmental protection, police violence, for example. Making contacts and learning issues is how political coalitions are built in the streets.

Demonstrators also pressure local authorities to declare their own politics through action. Here in California, leaders of the state legislature, local police departments, and university administrators have declared their opposition to mass deportations.  Signals of support aren’t enough, but they matter. Resisters can’t stop Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials from doing their jobs, but they can refuse to cooperate with them, passively, or openly by declaring zones of sanctuary. They can make deportation marginally more difficult.

And such sanctuary declarations expand the new administration’s list of opponents. Trump and some of his Congressional supporters have already announced their intent to cut federal funds for sanctuary cities and campuses. I doubt that majorities of Republicans will be willing to cross that line by explicitly defunding their cities and universities.

Taking a stance polarizes and engages a larger crowd, some of whom might then be enlisted in the great political battle. Right now, we’ve seen relatively small protests in mostly supportive settings, focusing on Trump himself and his campaign promises. The activists’ challenge will be to continue and focus their efforts as concrete policy proposals emerge from the new president and the Republican Congress. The first demonstrations that we’ve seen are just the start of what can be a much larger and more powerful politics.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Apocalypse not yet

Demonstrations against president-elect Donald Trump continue in cities and on college campuses. (The image at right is from an anti-Trump walkout at Rutgers University.) Small groups continue to torment people who look like they belong to groups (blacks, Latinos, gays, Jews) that lost when Trump won, and now a few Trump supporters report  harassment when they come out by wearing Trump garb. Many people are trying to figure out how to respond to both Trump and what they fear he will do in office–specifically, what he promised.

It’s not just in the streets. Democrats in Congress are arguing about how to pick and fight their legislative battles, and university administrators are issuing statements not only about the virtues of diversity, but even promises to protect students liable for deportation–which may include hundreds of thousands of people.

It’s not clear what these first eruptions of activism are going to lead to, nor how effective they will be. What Trump does in office is going to matter a lot, and right now most of his opponents and allies are guessing. Trump has demonstrated no reliable commitment to any set of ideas beyond his own Trumpiness, and is already backing off some of his commitments–and commitments that supporters imagined. He’s also demonstrated little capacity or interest in managing anything beyond his media coverage, and may therefore be reluctant to undertake all of the unpopular policies he’s embraced.

Americans are worried that he’s not competent; some large share of his supporters said he’s not up to the job.  But incompetence is hardly reassuring; those who are going out into the streets are more worried that he actually can follow through on his promises.

Anti-Trump demonstrators over the weekendAmerican political institutions are designed to prevent the sorts of things he’s promised from coming about. Thus far, the tripwires have failed: The Republican Party nominated a candidate without experience in public service nor demonstrated commitment to the party; mass media struggled to cover his background, and he refused to conform to norms that we thought were well-established about transparency or honesty; and the electoral college, designed as a check against such bold ambitions, actually delivered the election to him.

The next lines of defense are in the checks and balances of political institutions in Congress. With both Houses of Congress now controlled by the Republican Party, the question is how disciplined Republicans will be in acceding or challenging Trump.

Some historical context is helpful here. Donald Trump and the Republican Party performed substantially worse than Barack Obama and the Democrats did in 2008.  Compare the results in Congress:

House of Rep.                      Senate

D             R             Dgain     D             R             Dgain

2008                       257         178         (21)        60           40           (9)

2016                       193         238         (6)          51           48           (2)

President Obama, who actually won the popular vote, won a larger majority in the House and, for a brief time, a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Even then, his agenda narrowed as he sought to maintain the support of Democrats who held seats in more conservative states or districts (RIP, the public option, for example).

Within weeks of taking the office of office, Obama faced the newly emergent Tea Party, which opposed health care reform–among other things–emboldened Republicans, and scared more than a few Democrats.

If Trump had electoral coattails, they did not prevent the Republican Party from losing seats in both houses of Congress. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell command smaller majorities than their counterparts eight years earlier, and their caucuses may be equally contentious.  They have also disagreed with candidate Trump on matters of policy. The issues on which they toe the line or draw the line with a new president are still unclear, but will matter.

The issues that Trump decides to push will set the initial terms of the movements that challenge him, just as opposition to health care reform became the litmus test that unified the Tea Party and the Republican Party.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

First responders to Trump’s election

I turned down an interview request yesterday on what to say to make the “rioters” stop. I said I had nothing to contribute. Shortly afterward, I wondered if I’d made a mistake. I could have said:

It’s understandable that young people who voted against a vigorously racist, xenophobic, and misogynist campaign that actively avoided the truth, who lived in communities and states that shared their views, and in a country where their candidate actually got the most votes, are frustrated. They’re scared about seeing their friends or family deported, health insurance eliminated, reproductive rights curtailed, and planet desecrated.

I could have said:

President-elect Trump could explain that he made campaign promises only to win votes and has no intention of following through on them, and then apologize for scaring people.

But,

It’s not surprising that the first fallouts from the Trump victory have emerged. Students have held rallies and marches on college campuses that expressed general horror and opposition, sometimes under the hashtag #notmypresident. Trump initially tweeted a whine about the unfairness of it all, blaming the media for inciting “professional protesters.” (If someone out there is being paid, please let me know. If someone out there is going to a demonstration because of an op-ed that she read, please let me know.)

But this is the kitchen that Trump chose to enter. Protests will continue at least up to the inaugural, which will surely feature much colorful opposition. This isn’t just about Trump; counterinaugurals are now a standard feature in our political life. Presidents Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Reagan all faced such demonstrations. A Million Women March screen-shot-2016-11-11-at-11-11-18-amhas already been announced for the day after Trump takes the oath of office, and surely there will be much more.

Somebody must have explained this to President-elect Trump, who later tweeted that he “love[d] the fact that the small groups of protesters last night have passion for our great country” (my italics). Perhaps he even realized that having an inexperienced billionaire just elected president of the United States whining about being mistreated isn’t a way to get people to stop protesting.

Scarier, I think, are the thus far scattered incidents of anti-Muslim, anti-black, anti-immigrant, anti-Semitic, and anti-women harassment across the United States, including many college campuses. It’s robbery, ridicule, and vandalism–so far.Graffiti on the windows on the abandoned Meglio Furs store in South Philadelphia. Photos by Jared Brey

Some of those who lost at the polls, seeing no other immediate recourse, have taken to the streets.

Some of those who won, finding support and encouragement in their victory, have celebrated by reclaiming spaces they think they own. It’s hardly new in America, but I’d venture to say it’s not what made America great in the past.

Organized demonstrations are harder to sustain than vandalism and violence perpetrated by small groups of people. What happens next is a function of both organization and responses. Trump’s opponents have the task of orchestrating a campaign that extends beyond limited events in supportive settings; it’s hard to think Speaker Paul Ryan, for example, is worried much about a march in Berkeley. But much more is possible.

Meanwhile, Trump’s supporters have the responsibility of not allowing thugs to define their victory. The president-elect’s opponents charge that his victory is a triumph of racism. Trump must now show that this is not the case, even at the risk of antagonizing some of his supporters. I fear this is another challenge that will be beyond him.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

After the fall….what kind of protest follows?

I wrote yesterday’s post about concession speeches when I assumed, having steeped myself in all the aggregators and prognosticators I could find, that Hillary Clinton was going to win, and that Donald Trump would face the dilemma of navigating the concession ritual. Having to explain how I got this wrong is far and away the least consequential fallout from Trump’s election.

So, Hillary Clinton delivered a moving concession speech this morning, stamped out of the standard model I described yesterday.  Trump’s win gave him the more attractive task of claiming victory and promising conciliation. He promised, as Barack Obama and George W. Bush did–and Hillary Clinton certainly would have, to be the president of all Americans.

This laudable aim is difficult to pull off; certainly, neither Bush nor Obama were able to convince large segments of the American people that the president was operating in their interests. I’d think it would be even more difficult for Donald Trump.

But politics doesn’t end after an election, and even if Hillary Clinton won’t be out in the streets protesting, others will be. When someone new comes into office, the prospects and provocations that face activists across the political spectrum shift.

Shortly after Donald Trump deliverd a victory speech about 2,000 people rallied against the election at UCLA.

Students protest Trump’s election at UCLA

Some of those frustrated by the electoral results started protesting right away. College students marched against Trump on their campuses, including here at the University of California, Irvine. This first round of protests targeted Trump generally, and students announced their appreciation for diversity. Protests like this will surely continue through at least the inauguration of President (ulp!) Trump in January.

But that won’t be all of it. As appointments and prospective policies start pouring out of the Trump administration, activists will respond to the provocations they see. Candidate Trump promised to keep Muslims out of the country, to round up and deport undocumented immigrants, to repeal the Affordable Care Act, to build a Great Wall on the Mexican borders, to cut taxes for wealthy Americans, to withdraw from international agreements on climate change and trade, and to reduce regulations on coal mining and guns (to pick two). Plenty of people will be aggrieved.

With the Republicans, ostensibly allied with the new president, in control of both houses of Congress, people who want to fight unwanted policies will see little reason to focus on the legislative process, and much more incentive to take to the streets. This has happened before: in 2009 when Barack Obama worked to pass health care reform through a Democratic Congress, the Tea Party emerged  to challenge reformers through demonstrations large and small, and confront Democratic legislators at town meetings. The Tea Party shifted tactics and became less visible after Republicans won control of the House of Representatives in 2010. There’s no reason to expect opponents of Trump’s policy proposals not to fight back.

But it’s not just his opponents. The Trump campaign emboldened a nationalism cloaked in various shades of white (see Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, a Trump enthusiast, at left). The campaign to “Make America Great Again” evoked a paler paradise located in a non-specific past where the white working class lived at the center of a much less colorful American dream. At least some Trump supporters will expect the new president to deliver on a set of essentially impossible promises. If he fails to deport masses of immigrants or create large numbers of well-paid manufacturing jobs for less educated workers, for example, expect those supporters to challenge him as well, and try to take nationalist politics into their own hands. It could get very ugly.

Trump’s election turns a page in a surprising end to a chapter in the American story. But it’s certainly not the end, and there’s no reason to believe it gets either easier or less disruptive.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

When you lose at the polls…..

Donald Trump has called his campaign for the presidency the greatest movement in American history. Maybe not. But what happens to that movement if Trump doesn’t win the presidency?

How the losers behave tells you a great deal about the system as well as the competitors.

U.S. Sen. Bernie SandersMadison’s goal in designing America’s political institutions was to keep dissatisfied people focused on competing within mainstream political institutions. The system works when those who lose at the polls focus on organizing to compete again–rather than simply taking to the streets.

The standard concession speech features thanks to the
voters and campaign workers, more or less gracious congratulations to the victor, and praise for the system. Almost all successful politicians, including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Bill Clinton suffered significant defeats and persevered.

Senator Bernie Sanders waged a vigorous campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, and conceded defeat when all the states were done voting. Deeply committed to a cause, he threw himself into his rival’s campaign, carrying his ideas. The Democratic platform responded to his concerns about issues like access to college and the minimum wage, and Sen. Sanders used the Clinton campaign to continue making his case for the 2016-03-31-1459468245-7773479-HillaryClinton.jpgcause. If he felt personal slights or disappointments, he certainly didn’t show it.

When New York senator Hillary Clinton lost a hard-fought campaign against Barack Obama in 2008, she quickly made her peace with the nominee, and worked to get him elected. Committed to public service–or personal ambition–Clinton joined the Obama administration and worked hard on behalf of the president’s policies, counting on his support when she again ran for office. It’s hard to imagine something far off the standard script if she loses the election.

Image result for donald trump

But what about Donald Trump? He has repeatedly announced that an electoral defeat would probably be the result of a rigged system. Regardless, he’s said that failing to win the presidency would reflect a tremendous waste of time and money. Does any kind of Trump movement continue after a defeat?

Trump has demonstrated no clear commitment to any set of issues. He’s backed off even his central campaign themes of stopping Muslims from entering the country and Mexicans from crossing the Southern border without navigating a wall. Very much unlike Bernie Sanders, he has no cause that is greater than his own personal ambitions.

There’s also no reason to see a clear commitment to the Re;publican party from its nominee. Whatever happens next, it’s hard to imagine Trump putting much effort into healing a divided party after the election.

Many pundits have speculated that Trump will use an electoral defeat to build a rightwing news network, either on cable television or the internet. I don’t think the numbers work easily for such an enterprise (cable viewership is down; Glenn Beck’s The Blaze is faltering online). More than that, Trump’s business record offers little evidence that he has the management patience to launch such a venture, or that he would be willing to invest his money in it.

If it’s hard to see Trump making a substantial commitment to building a movement or a business after losing at the polls, it’s quite easy to imagine intensified whining about bias and mistreatment. After a defeat, however, I don’t see how many Republicans are going to have much interest or patience for the whine. Trump will offer little support for any agenda, nor anything helpful for their personal political aspirations.

So, who will listen?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Hypocrisy is progress

After Donald Trump reluctantly apologized for comments he could not deny–they were caught on tape–debate moderator Anderson Cooper forced him to explain whether or not it was just talk. Cooper deserves credit for pressing Trump to answer whether he sexually women protest donald trump and the gop in new york city #gophandsoffmeassaulted women or just bragged about doing so.

It’s generally been a safe bet that Trump’s bragging has far outstripped his accomplishments, but this was different. Trump himself denied that he had made unwelcome sexual advances on women–ever; it was just “locker room” talk. Given that there were already many public reports of such advances, the denial wasn’t very believable, but it must have seemed like the best answer available to someone running for president and facing a television audience of tens of millions. But the lie was progress.

Trump denied committing sexual assault because grabbing women isn’t a prerogative of wealth or power, a new truth that Trump, begrudgingly, acknowledged. In trying to put himself on the sunny side of respectability, Trump admitted where the line was. Many others weighed in to explain that lockers and showers don’t signal a suspension of such basic values.

The maxim that “hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue, ” ascribed to François de La Rochefoucauld, is operative here; the lie reinforces the norm.

And the lie provides leverage to dig for the truth. Protesters who challenge sexual violence now joined those concerned with racism and xenophobia in turning out against Trump. More than that, it’s hardly surprising that Trump’s assertion of probity would provoke challenges–or that any media outlet not already in the tank for him would investigate and publish stories that expose the lie.

But the longer term effects are far greater. At once, all sorts of people had the opportunity to declare that it’s wrong to claim sexual favors just because you want them. Unwelcome grabbing, groping, and slobbering aren’t okay, and this is something that everyone gets to know again. Public confirmation of this value affects conduct, partly because of human awareness or moral education, partly because of fear of punishment. All of this is to the good. The lesson should extend far beyond the presidential campaign.

Anita Hill’s testimony about sexual harassment before a Congressional committee didn’t stop Clarence Thomas from taking a seat on the Supreme Court. Thomas denied the How we know Clarence Thomas did itcharges, and the Senate really didn’t press. The testimony did, however, go a long way toward defining and stigmatizing sexual harassment in the workplace, and law, culture, and practice evolved. I’m sure harassment still takes place, but it’s now clearly not legitimate, and sometimes perpetrators are punished (e.g.).

Oddly, being forced to lie about sexually assaulting women represents progress.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Persistence, part III: William Barber is ready

As the demonstration and discussions about the killing of Keith Scott continued, The New PHOTO: Protesters sit and hold a moment of silence for Keith Scott during another night of protests over the police shooting of Scott in Charlotte, North Carolina, Sept. 24, 2016York Times found an activist voice to explain what was going on. On the Op-Ed page, Rev. Dr. William Barber published “Why are we protesting in Charlotte,”  offering moral and religious motivations for his presence–along with that of many other clergy–at the protests. Barber explained:

In the Scriptures, the prophet Jeremiah denounces false prophets for crying “peace, peace when there is no peace.” We cannot condemn the violence of a small minority of protesters without also condemning the overwhelming violence that millions suffer every day.

But Reverend Barber didn’t emerge in the national news from out of nowhere. Over many years, he had been building an activist career on issues exactly like these, and when the Times sought an informed and respected voice, he was experienced and ready.

Since April of 2013, Rev. William Barber has been leading protests outside the state capitol in Raleigh, North Carolina. The Moral Monday (discussed here) protests focused on policy, specifically the new political agenda that Governor Pat McCrory and a Republican majority in the state William Barber at Moral Mondays rally.jpglegislature were pushing: measures to require photo ID to vote, restrict unemployment insurance and Medicaid. raise sales taxes to cut income and property taxes. relax environmental regulations, and cut funds for public schools. He lost on almost all these issues–at least in the short run.

But the protests continued, and have inspired like-minded efforts in neighboring states. (The Moral Monday campaign in Georgia supports an informative website.) In North Carolina, the campaign is explained on the site of the state NAACP; Barber is its president. In addition to the NAACP work, Rev. Barber, who holds a doctoral degree in theology,  and serves as pastor of the Greenleaf Christian Church in Goldsboro, about a 3 1/2 hr. drive from Charlotte, where he’s been demonstrating.

Reverend Barber’s continuing work in North Carolina helped him develop local credibility and contacts as well as national visibility. His persistence and visibility earned him a prime time speaking slot on the fourth night of the Democratic National Convention, where he outlined a vision of social justice that comes straight from the Biblical prophets.

This is another way in which protest matters, even if not at the time or in the way that activists hope.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Persistence, part II: Kaepernick’s anthem protest and police violence

Most attempted campaigns stall out quickly, but sometimes…

Almost no one noticed when San Francisco 49 back-up quarterback Colin Kaepernick started his protest of police violence. Conservative media and the professional football commentariat pilloried Kaepernick, suggesting that his protest was ill-considered, inappropriate, and ineffective (see part I). His first defenders emphasized civil liberties and the quarterback’s right to protest more than his claims about police violence and race.

Tragic events, particularly police killings in Tulsa and Charlotte, turned attention from the Kaepernick’s physical posture to his political stance. Suddenly, the play that quarterback called seemed exactly on target. The protest about police violence echoed with enhanced resonance, and then spread to

Football players on other teams (Philadelphia Eagles here):

NFL: Pittsburgh Steelers at Philadelphia Eagles

 

 

 

 

College football players (Michigan v. Michigan State)

Michigan football players raise their fists up in protest during the National Anthem, before an NCAA college football game against Penn State, Saturday in Ann Arbor, Mich.

High school football players in Oakland, visited by Kaepernick


 

UNC students protest during the national anthem before the start of the Tar Heels’ game against Pittsburgh at Kenan Stadium in Chapel Hill.

Athletes in other sports (entire Indiana Fever team)

 

 

 

Spectators in the stands (University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill)

 

Musicians in the marching band (Southern Methodist University)

 

 

 

 

And cheerleaders (Garfield High School, Seattle)

img_6467

It’s mostly not majorities who are protesting, but it almost never is. The iconic campaigns of the past all started with a few people who were ridiculed by others. And there were always lots of false starts, where nothing seemed to take off. A successful campaign is a coincidence of commitment and opportunity, and the people who start it really never know how receptive the world will be.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Persistence, part I: Charlotte videos

The big story that activists always face is one in which authorities tell them that their efforts are inappropriate, ill-considered, and ineffective–or even counterproductive. (And, sometimes, they are.) It takes a certainty that comes from courage, social support, and stubborness toResidents and activists march in the streets of Charlotte on September 22. There was a heavy police presence, and the North Carolina National Guard was also on hand. keep at it. Sometimes persistence pays off all by itself. Sometimes, events vindicate and validate claims that previously seemed unimportant enough to generate protest.

So, once local and national activists learned of the existence of Charlotte, North Carolina police videos of the confrontation and killing of Keith Scott, it’s hardly surprising that they would demand their release. Scott’s family echoed that call, particularly after they had been allowed to view the police videos.

Rakeyia Scott released her own phone video of her husband’s death. It doesn’t show Keith Scott’s demeanor, nor whether he was armed, but you can hear Mrs. Scott imploring the police not to shoot her husband, then reacting to the shots and watching her husband die. It’s awful.

Protestors dump cargo from tractor trailers on a fire on I-85  during the Charlotte protests.Demonstrations shook Charlotte, night after night. Most, but not all, demonstrators were peaceful each night. There’s an ongoing battle to control the story and control the images. Black Lives Matter activists wanted the peaceful demonstrations to represent the conflict in Charlotte. Their opponents wanted images of disruption, looting, and violence. It wasn’t hard for either side to find what they wanted.

The police announced they wouldn’t be releasing their videos until an investigation was complete–however long that took. (Understandably, it’s harder for people to do most jobs when audiences are watching and commenting.  Public disclosure is a benefit–and a cost–of democracy.) The mayor then announced that the videos would come out some time–soon. She wasn’t very specific.

But after Mrs. Scott’s video came out and the demonstrations continued, the police released the videos the next day. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Chief Kerr Putney explained that he’d been assured that the ongoing investigation would not be affected by their release–allaying his earlier worries.

The videos, as Chief Putney acknowledges, don’t show that Keith Scott had a gun or threatened the police, but the chief is confident that there is enough additional evidence to support the police version of the story.

I doubt that this will be resolved easily or quickly. But the impact of the protests, in spite of what authorities and pundits said, is pretty clear.

Meanwhile, a new law that takes effect in North Carolina next week will prevent future videos from disclosure.

Expect a challenge here as well.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment