CIVIL UNREST OR REVOLUTION?: GOING DEEPER

Our June 22, 2020, post explored whether the uprising we’ve seen since the May 25 murder of 46-year-old George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer differs from previous civil rights

protests. We examined competing police reform measures and considered political calculations that may affect proposed legislation.

Now we explore broader questions about the same topic. Are we witnessing civil unrest that

subsides once emotions die down or real revolution that leads to systemic societal changes? People ask because many aspects of this look different, certainly than the 1960s civil rights protests the three of us witnessed in our formative years. We start with some basics.

Multi-ethnic sacrifice

The civil rights struggle in America has always been diverse and multi-ethnic.

Consider the lost lives of Viola Liuzzo, Reverend James Reeb, Andrew Goodman, and Michael Schwerner, four white people killed while doing civil rights work in the South. Viola Liuzzo, a Detroit housewife, went to Alabama in 1965 to help with Martin Luther King’s voter registration campaign. As she drove marchers between Selma and Montgomery on March 25, four Ku Klux

Klansmen shot and killed her. Southern resisters attacked and killed Reeb, a Unitarian minister from Boston, in Selma two

weeks earlier. A Klan-led mob murdered Goodman and Schwerner, along with black Mississippian James Cheney, in Neshoba County, Mississippi as they tried registering black voters during the Freedom Summer of 1964.

White people who didn’t make the sacrifice

Luizzo, Reeb, Schwerner, and Goodman made still contributed mightily to the civil rights cause in the 1960s. This isn’t the first time the races have joined forces in the struggle for equality.

A different feel

All that said, some things seem different this time. White participation in the protests following Floyd’s death just looks bigger. In

foreign countries, organic protests erupted in the streets. At a qualitative level, hope has surfaced that whites participating in this round of protests “get it.” White marchers seem invested in the grievances African Americans have with police brutality and systemic racism. White people are talking both with blacks and among each other about racial problems and seem fueled by a sense of responsibility.

Another big difference lies in the availability of social media. Platforms like Twitter,

Facebook, and Instagram mean the voiceless aren’t voiceless anymore. People have more opportunities for expressing themselves. They need worry less about accessing broadcast and print outlets controlled by others. People can speak out knowing many will hear.

Positive involvement of the corporate sector distinguishes what’s happening now from previous protest cycles. Large companies acknowledge they must respond to how their customers view racial justice issues. After consumer pressure, for example, Starbucks changed its policy so employees could wear “Black Lives Matter” shirts.

           

Finally, people hungry for information about racial matters can access more credible writing on the subject now than in the ’60s. More scholars, some black and some white, research and write about racial issues. Popular writers contribute to this growing, robust race discrimination literature. We suggested popular and scholarly works in a recent post concerning the education of white America about race.

Challenges

If this is different, what obstacles could derail the movement and destroy the moment? Revolutions

often have generals – commanders who lead foot soldiers, develop strategy, and direct operations. The 1960s civil rights movement certainly had a supreme commander in Martin Luther King, Jr.  A capable staff

assisted him, led by notables like his Southern Christian Leadership Conference deputy Ralph Abernathy, NAACP Executive Director Roy Wilkins, union stalwart A. Phillip Randolph, and Urban League leader Whitney Young. Ascending figures like Fannie Lou Hamer, John Lewis, and Andrew Young made significant contributions. Such a leadership team isn’t around today.

An argument also exists that protest movements don’t need a general on the order of a Martin Luther King. Eric Hoffer suggested in The True

Believer that mass movements require three elements: (1) readying the ground by those “whose chief claim to excellence is their skill in the use of the spoken or written word,” (2) the temperament and talents of fanatics, and (3) “final consolidation” by practical people of action.

We see elements of such an array forming. Writers like legal scholar Michelle Alexander, author of The New Jim Crow, essayist Ta-Nehisi Coates, and

sociologist Robin Diangelo, who wrote the best-selling White Fragility: Why it’s so Hard for White People to Talk about Racism might serve as Hoffer’s women and “men of words.” Identifying fanatics isn’t easy, but they’re showing themselves. Take, for example, the young people who’ve spearheaded the nationwide Justice for Breonna movement protesting the March shooting death of 26-year-old medical technician Breonna Taylor by police in her home in Louisville, Kentucky during execution of a no-

knock drug case warrant. As for practical people of action, we nominate William Barber, the North Carolina cleric who sometimes functions as the conscience of the nation on equality and fairness issues. Then there’s House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, trying to steer substantive police reform legislation

through Congress. Perhaps she can get help next year from a President Joe Biden and a Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.

We point out Henry does not accept Hoffer’s concept of “fanatics,” but recognizes the importance in social movements of those with “firm commitment and zeal.” 

We must end with a note of caution. The opposition has its general – the current occupant of the White House – and its chief of staff, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell. We need say no more.  

IS THIS DIFFERENT? CIVIL UNREST OR REVOLUTION?

If you watch much cable news, you often hear the question posed to guests appearing about

the George Floyd case and the ensuing demonstrations, “Is this different?” The question recognizes that there’ve been protests before about police misconduct and racial injustice, but many argue things didn’t significantly change. The hosts

ask if the length of time the protests have continued and the diversity of the crowds means something might happen this time that hasn’t happened in recent history.

We believe the “Is this different question?” suggests a number of answers, depending on

how the questioner defines “different.” If the question speaks to short term reform of police practices, that might warrant one answer. If the question refers to long term, systemic change regarding race relations,

income and wealth inequality, and universal medical care for all Americans a much different answer seems in order. Today, we wade into the question of policing.

A partisan divide: What did you expect?

Democrats and Republicans in Congress have

put out police reform proposals and  might vote on them soon in the houses of Congress they control. Some reports say House Speaker Nancy Pelosi already has the votes for a legislative package spearheaded by the Congressional Black Caucus. The measures would: 

Senate Republicans, led by the GOP’s only black senator, South Carolina’s Tim Scott,

and Jim Lankford of Oklahoma, put out their plan. Its highlights include: 

Republicans aren’t sure if they’d ever  accept

codification of a use-of-force standard, like a chokehold ban. Overall, the Republican plan focuses on record keeping and transparency, while Democrats prefer specific limits on police conduct. Representatives of both sides offered early conciliatory talk about the possibility of compromise and suggested patience during the legislative process. That’s admirable. The question of getting the gap bridged remains.

The absence of prohibitions against chokeholds and no-knock warrants in the Republican proposal stand out. Qualified immunity reform might become the biggest sticking point. Some Republicans called that Democratic proposal a “poison pill,” something Republicans could never accept. Scott said any “poison pill” in the legislation means getting nothing.

Waiting for the Election  

We don’t doubt members of Congress have an obligation to try getting something done now. Things keep happening. With George Floyd barely buried, another high-profile case developed in Atlanta, where a white police officer killed another black man, Rayshard Brooks, by shooting him in the

back as he fled after a scuffle with officers. The optics in the Brooks case were different than what happened to Floyd in Minneapolis, but the bottom line remained the same – a police officer used deadly force when reasonable alternatives existed. Experienced law enforcement observers said no reason existed for shooting Brooks. He wasn’t armed with a deadly weapon and wasn’t likely to get away or harm anyone else since police had his driver’s license and vehicle. 

 

The Brooks case and the continuing protests highlighted the need for action but the truth remains that with Donald Trump in the White House and Republicans in control of the U.S. Senate, passing the kind of bill Democrats want just may not happen this year. That puts them to a choice – accept something like what the Republicans now propose or wait things out until the election in the hope of getting a senate majority and winning the presidency. Then, Democrats could pass their version of police reform legislation.

The Long Run

Whatever happens with police reform measures, the debate about race and whether this moment is “different” will continue.  Whether or not this is “different” depends on changes in the heads and hearts of Americans and in the structure of institutions. How different it becomes depends first on individual decisions

Americans of all races make about their own attitudes and behaviors concerning racial issues. Do white people finally recognize the role white supremacy has played in American society and decide they will help eradicate its effects? Will people of color embrace the idea of equality is within reach? How “different” this time becomes also depends on public policy decisions political leaders, businesses, and institutions make in the weeks, months, and years ahead in response to the protests.

The debate over police reform constitutes a significant part of our current racial angst, but it’s not all the problem. As the developing controversies over income and wealth inequality, the lack of universal health care

coverage, names of military bases and monuments in cities and on college campuses, even university alma maters, make clear, this is a multi-faceted problem and we have miles to go before we sleep.