Fears of Protest

Cosima Allen

The severe social injustice that continues to be exposed daily has unleashed a generation of determined and outspoken individuals who, without holding back, fight for their cause. The United States has become a focal point of upheaval, with reforms to the police force and justice system needed to ensure the equal treatment of minorities. The recent surge in Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests has perpetuated a notion of the ‘wrong’ protest where violence has undermined the credibility of protestors. Acts of aggression and force have shifted the conversation away from the issues at the centre of the upheaval and instead focused on the supposed irresponsibility of those challenging the system. Often rooted in racial stereotypes and coloured by a biased narrative, BLM opposition denigrates perceived violence within such demonstrations. 

The narrative of violence at BLM protests is loaded with inaccuracies and misrepresentations. The primary issue concerns the willingness of Americans to generalise and misconstrue the nature of fights for justice. A study done by the Armed Conflict Location Event Data Project (ACLED) analysed more than 7,750 BLM protests throughout the United States in the months following the killing of George Floyd. In 2,400 locations, ACLED noted demonstrations were ‘peaceful’ and recorded less than 220 instances of violence. The definition of violence in this context however is broad with examples including both ‘acts targeting other individuals, businesses and property’ as well as ‘a road blockage by a barrier’. Despite 97.7% of protests resulting in no injuries, 42% of respondents to an ACLED ‘morning consult poll’ believed them to be ‘inciting violence and destroying property’. This point of view is exacerbated by the Department of Homeland Security which released a threat assessment commenting on the ‘100 days of violence and destruction’ at the hands of BLM. The narrative shifted from the atrocities of injustice to the supposed disruptions caused by protestors.

The subject of protest in the United States is increasingly portrayed as something to fear. The threat of equal rights for all Americans is a frightening idea to many—the conversation becomes tainted by criticisms of actions of the oppressed. Gordana Rabrenovic, the Director of the Brudnick Centre on Violence and Conflict, says there is more evidence on the success of peaceful protests as they build their coalitions. This argument may be pertinent for smaller scale injustices but is not relevant with regards to the institutional bias against the black people in the United States. Franz Fanon argues that the inherent violent nature of colonised rule relies on a violent bottom-up response to change the social structure; the atmosphere of submission is too convenient for policing and is aided by the respect of the established order of opinion. This is in line with Sartre’s condemnation of the unresponsiveness in French occupied Algeria as the ‘end of dialectic’ and the forceful submission of silence from the overpowering police authority. 

Ultimately, the waves of protests for social justice come out of a deep history of oppression linked to the colonial identity of the United States. The misrepresentation of the peaceful or necessary reality of these demonstrations undermines the desperation felt by those marching. The United States’ fear in taking a stand against injustice stems from an assumed fear of the loss of a potential loss of its cultural identity.