The Power of the Protest

I wasn't aware of the volatile situation regarding the New School's president, Bob Kerrey, until I encountered what appeared to be a small army of uniformed officers last Friday on Fifth Avenue just outside of a university building, hefty shields up, batons restlessly shifting at their sides. Twenty-two students were arrested for assault, burglary and larceny following the protest and subsequent mild rioting, and all were released the following day.

I applaud my fellow New School/NYU students for using the power of Protest to ensure that their view is heard. I strongly feel that the Protest is a right that most Americans no longer seek as a valid means of expression. This may have to do with the earlier heyday of tension-fueled issues of racial and gender equality, Vietnam, etc., that prompted all protesters to be pigeon-holed as militant/violent, dangerous, socialist, perpetually on drugs and living on the fringes of "civil" society, and - god forbid - Anti-American. This is evident in the fact that many immediately dubbed the students as "terrorists." If there is ever a fearmongering, hot-button term today, this is the Big One that, when associated with it, can even make the most conservative politician run for refuge in the blue states. While protests are currently still prevalent here, the negative connotations with which they are linked prevent them from becoming accepted by the mainstream. Many Americans have become passive consumers of the news which is presented to us, often relying on conservative sources that are much too afraid of recriminations by a larger conglomerate that owns it with its equally-conservative financial backers. But the Protest is used often and in substantial numbers in other nations (i.e. Sarkozy’s controversial administration, particularly with far right pro-U.S. relations and labor disputes, although unions require an entirely new and exhausting entry).

The flood of student and police footage on the web since the incident presented contrasting views of unnecessary police brutality alongside peaceful interference. Authorities released a video of students who locked themselves within the building, cooperatively holding their arms behind themselves to be hand-cuffed, while the officers politely and calmly facilitated the arrests. The Jourdan video showed the use excessive use of pepper spray and force in pushing a protester to the ground, as well as force used by the police on what appeared to be an innocent passerby vocally expressing his support of the students. The contrasting accounts are not a surprise. Reading the divergent stories reminded me of Malcolm Gladwell's take on the Amadou Diallo incident in Blink. Briefly, he argues that the inability for the officers to thin-slice the situation led to the tragic encounter. If they had taken a moment to quickly assess that Diallo was terrified and not confrontational or considered he could have had difficulty expressing himself, instead of focusing on the expectations of their environment (a black man, found late at night in an area of the Bronx known to be violent) and the adrenaline set off by any stressful situation, this could have ended differently. Although 41 shots (a number that was repeatedly mentioned to claim that it was a malicious case of racial profiling) were fired by the four officers, this number is misleading and we must remember that a person can release multiple shots per second and the entire incident probably took place in mere seconds. Coupled with the adrenaline and strong sense of self preservation, many of us would have, unfortunately, acted in a similar manner. I am not removing all blame on the officers in either the Diallo case or this circumstance, but I can see how these interactions we see in these videos probably took place in seconds. They were split decision reactions to a seemingly threatening glance, a moving fist, a grunt, a misunderstood word or threat, etc. from either party. These clips may have been taken out of context, as well, so that we may never fully understand what precipitated these actions.

Nevertheless, I don't doubt that what may have been a pure act of civil disobedience lays the ultimate goal of gaining publicity and sympathy. Despite my not having participated in the protest, I do not doubt that some individuals (who may not have officially participated in the protest) probably did provoke the authorities, and vice versa (which Kerrey did not mention). In a time that the web is widely available and the power of the image is so significant in how our news is covered (and colored), a successful protest needs a dramatic visual accompaniment (Jeff Widener's Tiananmen Square photo; Nick Út's girl running from napalm attack; the Kent State aftermath; Lange's Migrant Mother). What do you think will be retained in the public's mind and heart? Police (which already is not highly regarded) protestations of wrongdoing alongside Kerrey's feeble letter to the Times yesterday, or the alarming reminder of a young man being violently pushed to the ground? Will the protests ultimately succeed in ousting Kerrey and Executive VP James Murtha? Perhaps. But for now, the victory lies in the power we as individuals possess to organize, to speak out and - dare I say it - to be American.