The Philosophy of Protesting

The legal and extralegal measured taken by the Memphis Black Lives Matter group has presented the city and state law enforcement with numerous issues. For example, these elites are forced to choose between protecting the right of people in a democratic nation to organize and protest peacefully and allowing these people to have their constitutional and human rights violated. Through judicial and social pressure, the Memphis Police Department were forced to comply with the bridge protest of 2016. Despite the seemingly smooth transactions between law enforcement and BLM protesters, Memphis BLM leaders went to great lengths to obtain a permit and establish event expectations to discourage behavior that could be seen as violent. Furthermore, media coverage before, during, and after the event was considerably biased. BLM protesters were painted with a broad brush as reactionary revolutionaries intent on agitating the city structure, resident life, and general traffic flow. Even more disturbing, a philosophical discussion began circulating on several media platforms following the protest. This discussion hinged on probing at the illegitimacy of the protests, protesters, and larger movement for black liberation. This discussion was based around a simple question: “What if a child had died in transport to St. Jude from Arkansas because they were unable to cross the bridge because of the protesters? Should the protest have been moved/cancelled?” This question caught me off-guard (though this falls right in line with the United States I should be accustomed to at this point in my life) because I didn’t expect it to be circulating on so many liberal news and media outlets. Further into my search for liberation, liberals are often just as racist as conservatives, just in a different flavor. This “philosophical question” is anti-black and conveniently ignores the purpose of protests as disruptive methods that demand change.

Protests act as a way for people without social, economic, or political capital to demand attention and voice in a “democratic” society.  It’s goal is never to get people on their side or to ask for sympathy; rather, protests demand that disruption will continue so long as the violence does. It was deeply disappointing to read this questioning of legitimacy that purposefully invites ignorance as to the movement for black liberation and suggests that our democratic system is a justified means to properly express all grievances for everyone.