What's In a Protest?

 By Marilyn Moore

Note to readers:  I have frequently said that I write in order to figure out what I think.  This blog is a classic example of that.  It’s long, and it doesn’t hold together at every step of the way.  This is what my thoughts look like right now….  If you find the length daunting, you’re welcome to scroll to the end and see where I land...for the moment.  When I learn more, I may think differently.

The front pages stories on local and national newspapers and the lead-off stories on local and network broadcast news have featured protests, i.e., marches, encampments, demands, confrontations, occasional use of police forces to disperse, arrest, maintain order, clear out an occupied building or plaza.  What it is that is being protested is not always clear, but generally it focuses on the current realities of the war between Israel and Hamas, realities that include dire (as in life-threatening) circumstances for the people living in Gaza and the ongoing conflict between the Israeli government and the Palestinians.

The protests that have received the bulk of the news coverage have been on major college campuses; Columbia University and UCLA have been in the spotlight for many days.  Marches and gatherings have turned into encampments, with tents set up on plazas and common green spaces on campus.  There has been property damage, there has been disruption to the normal daily life of a campus, including the regular schedule of classes and the usual spring graduation ceremonies.  It’s loud, it’s unruly, it’s messy.  Some students have been suspended, some have been arrested, and some have gone home for the remainder of the semester.  

State and federal elected officials have weighed in with advice for university leaders, sometimes following a short visit to a campus and sometimes based on what they saw in the news.  That advice is usually along the lines of, “Get control of the situation,” sometimes followed by, “Call in the National Guard if you have to.”  

Protests are kind of an American thing.  The Boston Tea Party was a protest, complete with destruction of property.   The ruling government at the time, the British, regarded it as an insurrection.  Women marched for the right to vote in the 1900's, and farmers drove their tractors to Washington D.C. to demand federal assistance during the farm crisis of the 19u80's.

For those of us who remember the protest marches of the 60’s and 70’s, it all seems eerily familiar.  The causes were different – civil rights and the Vietnam war.  The strategies are similar: make a noise, cause a disturbance, disrupt the normal activity of the campus, take over a building, and rally others to the cause.  And, from the perspective of fifty years later, the protests served a purpose, rallying citizens who would never march but who would vote, to vote for change.  Civil rights legislation was passed, and the Vietnam war ended.  

In neither case was it perfect.  Civil rights are still not equally granted and protected, and in fact seem to be more out of reach today than twenty years ago; particularly disappointing is the gutting of the Voting Rights Act by the Supreme Court.  The Vietnam war did not end with peace with honor, no matter what the headlines, and the president, said. Soldiers who fought in that war came home to criticism and abuse, with PTSD still being experienced.  The Vietnamese who had been American’s allies did not fare well under the new regime that ruled when the last American helicopter left.  Nevertheless, change happened, and one could argue that the protests were a force in making that happen.

The comments and remarks about today’s protests have taken on a political tone, with office holders and candidates for office from both parties using them as campaign talking points.  President Biden, in his remarks about the protests earlier this week, said that this is not a time for politics, but a time for clarity.  And therein lies the difficulty, how does one bring clarity to this moment in time.

The issue itself is complex.  This little strip of land, which today is home to the nation of Israel and the Palestinian territories, Gaza and the West Bank of the Jordan River, has been the site of competing claims for land for thousands of years.  It’s a conflict that is historical, religious, political, and cultural.  The current conflict started with an attack from Hamas, the defacto ruling party of Gaza, on the nation of Israel.  More than 1300 Israelis were killed, and more than two hundred hostages were taken.  Hamas is housed, or hidden, within Gaza, which is home to more than two million people, most of them Muslim.  Israel retaliated with air power and an invasion of on-the-ground soldiers.  Death and destruction have ensued; more than 20,000 residents of Gaza have died, either from bombs and warfare, or starvation and illness.  Some Hamas cells have been discovered and eliminated; some remain.  Homes, hospitals, supply chains of food, water, and medicine, have all been disrupted. Widespread famine has been reported.  Some hostages have been released, in a brief cease-fire a few weeks ago; many are still being held.  How many have died in captivity is not known.  It is the position of Israel that their nation was attacked, and they will not cease their retaliatory military action until all of Hamas has been found and destroyed.  It is the position of Hamas that Israel has created intolerable conditions for the Palestinians living in Gaza and on the West Bank of the Jordan for decades, and that the only way to get the world’s attention is through a terrorist strike.  

The world’s attention is certainly there.  Many philanthropic groups have joined efforts to get food, medicine, and water to the people living in Gaza.  The US has persuaded Israel to allow some humanitarian aid in.  Secretary of State Blinken has visited Israel several times, trying to mediate a cease-fire.  President Biden has traveled to Israel and since talked with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, affirming Israel’s right to defend itself, while urging restraint in response, citing the international code of war that innocent civilians are to be protected.  Iran launched an attack on Israel of more than 200 drones; most were repelled by the Israeli defense system known as the Iron Dome.  Other countries have attempted to intervene, with referrals to the United Nations and with cooperative humanitarian efforts.  What other countries have not offered is to take in refugees from Gaza, providing a safe landing spot to a people increasingly under attack with no place to go.  

The protest movement is also complex.  The protests, moving across the country from the coasts to the center, are largely focused on the Palestinian people, who claim a religious heritage to that land as do the residents of the nation of Israel.  The protesters raise the specter of lack of housing, medical care, food and water, and safety for those living in Gaza.  Some are calling for a two-state solution, establishing a Palestinian nation along with the nation of Israel.  Such a solution has also been proposed by elected officials in the US and in other countries.  It is a solution that is championed by some and is a total non-starter for others.  The protesters frequently call for their universities to divest any endowment monies from funds that are connected to Israel and to end all international programs with Israel, including study abroad opportunities.  

Most of the citizens of Israel are Jewish, and some/many/most Jewish students on the campuses where protests are being held report being harassed or threatened because of their religion.  Some protestors say that they are not opposing Judaism, or Jewish people, they are just advocating for justice for Palestinians.  Some Jewish students say they do not feel threatened, and that they agree that the Palestinians’ lives should be better.  There is not a monolithic Jewish student, nor is there a monolithic protester. The protests occur at a time that reports of antisemitic language and attacks are reported throughout the US.  

In the midst of all the complexity, and increasingly heightened tension, campus presidents and chancellors are attempting to navigate several higher ed values. One is the freedom of expression, related to the First Amendment right to free speech.  There are, of course, limits on this freedom.  My observation is that college campuses have given wide latitude to freedom of speech, while generally stopping at hate speech or speech that is threatening.  Hence, the student who said that Zionists should not be allowed to live was expelled.  It’s not an easy line to draw, and reasonable people will disagree.  Likewise, protesters on campuses have generally been able to gather in public spaces; that’s another part of the First Amendment, the right to peaceably assemble.  When is an assembly no longer peaceable?  When someone is uncomfortable?  When someone is prevented from going to class?  When someone is hurt?  When a building is broken into and occupied?  Depending on your views and your life experiences, different people will land at different places on this continuum.  

Those are the questions the university leaders are trying to navigate, trying to negotiate.  The content of the speech is a component of the response to the protests, in that generally the sentiment in this country has been more supportive of Israel than the Palestinian people; Israel is a major ally of the United States. That is true of most of our elected officials; the House of the Representatives has just passed a bipartisan Antisemitism Awareness Bill, which, among other things, defines antisemitic language.  Many significant donors to major universities are also supporters of Israel.  All are voices to which university leaders are attending.  They’re also attending to the voice of the students…attempting to turn this into some kind of a learning situation, sometimes successfully, other times, not so much.  It’s a case of trying to balance competing values, those of freedom of speech and an orderly environment.  

As I noted at the beginning, this is messy.  And clarity does not come easily.  I was impressed with UNL Chancellor Rodney Bennett, speaking of the protest that was held on the UNL campus last week.  He spoke of the value of freedom of speech, a value he described as dear in a higher education setting.  He also spoke of the need for safety of all on the campus.  It was clear from his comments, and from the comments of student leaders, that they had been in conversation before the planned protest and had come to a seemingly respectful agreement on the parameters of the protest.  Such conversation doesn’t always happen, and such conversation doesn’t always result in a mutual agreement.  It is complicated further when a significant portion of the protesters are not students, but outsiders (that is, outside the campus community) who have joined the protest.  

The question always in the mind of leaders is what happens when the protest exceeds what seems reasonable; sometimes further conversation results in a de-escalation, and sometimes it doesn’t. This week, police forces were called in to Columbia and UCLA to clear the encampments, arresting more than 2000 persons, not all of whom are students.  Those of us who remember Kent State in 1970 have qualms about any decision to send National Guard troops onto a college campus in an attempt to subdue protests.

A conclusion?  Not there yet.  Perhaps an attempt at what clarity looks like to me….

    o The conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is way too complex to try to summarize in this essay…and efforts by some of the world’s most foremost and skilled mediators have failed to bring about long-lasting peace.  

    o The United States, and any other country or international organization, has limited ability to influence the behaviors of other countries.  Whatever influence we have depends on our relationship with that country, the resources we choose to invest, or not, and the values and principles upon which we stand.

    o Israel is an ally of the United States.

    o The Palestinians, those in Gaza and on the West Bank, live in dreadful circumstances with no protection of basic human rights.

    o The First Amendment is a major component of our Constitution and the rights that are guaranteed to all US citizens.  That includes speech and assembly that some may find offensive and uncomfortable.  That speech is especially that which is protected.

    o Actions which cause damage and chaos and destruction are not protected by the First Amendment. 

    o I’ve been a higher ed administrator, though I did not have to deal with a student protest movement.  It’s hard work, and it can get explosively harder overnight.  Second guessing doesn’t help.  

    o De-escalation is usually a better option than escalation.  It’s also a lot harder.  This is true in conflicts between nations and in responding to student protest movements.

    o As my friend Tyler White, professor of practice in political science, said, “It’s okay to feel really bad about all of this.”  I do.

Like us and follow us on Facebook, @5WomenMayhem.