Garbage littering the streets, buildings slowly withering away in flames, glass shattered everywhere while smoke turns the sky black, as city officials try to put together the pieces of what's left of their city. All this is a classic scene of the aftermath after a protest. While having the right to freedom of speech, and the ability to express them openly, there is still a right and wrong way to do so. Protesting is the least effective and most harmful. Although many argue that protesting is manageable and proficient, protests cause more issues than benefits because they hurt people and property, send bad messages to the communities and waste people's time and resources. In the process of protesting many people get hurt and injured while …show more content…
property gets destructed and destroyed. This alone should be the red light, signally that protest does no good. A recent example would be the Trump Inauguration, more than two police officers and one civilian were taken to the hospital (Krieg). Why are we endangering the people that protect us, when all of this could be solved by not protesting? Not only does it endanger police but it puts civilians at risk. These major cities where protesting takes place are homes to thousands of people, and when protesters are in action we endanger every single one of them. During protests, threats not are only targeted towards people but to property. A prime and devastating example would be the Ferguson Protests. After the released news that Officer Darren Williams would not be indited for the shooting and death of Michael Brown, an unarmed African American teenager, the whole city paid through the burning of 25 buildings, drug store robberies and vandalism, all of this, signs of protest against the grand jury's decision. Furthermore, public storage units got burned and so did cars(Ferguson Unrest). These valuable pieces of property got destroyed all for people who didn’t get there way. Imagine all your families sentimental, priceless, and irreplaceable items getting burned in the storage unit. How terrible and inconsiderate can one human being be to possible do such a thing? From here on the violence did not stop. After a report on the Ferguson police department was release stating that the department was being racially bias, a few days later 2 police officers were shot and injured(Ferguson Unrest). After all the direction and damage that these protesters caused, still they were not ready to give up. Not only did the actions of the shooters were dumb and irrational, they changed nothing. No good nor change came out of there actions, only the harsh consequences that followed. Ultimately through many experiences we have still not learned the lesson that protests cause more damage and still solve nothing. As a consequence to the actions of protesters, the cities of which they caused destruction in are left dumbfounded and with a cloud of negative stigma over their heads. For instance after the grand jury decided not to charge officer Darren Williams with the murder of Michael Brown, outbreaks of protests begun all over the United States. As a result protesters continuously, by violent actions and protests, dispute the skills and abilities of our grand jury(Ferguson Unrest). We as Unites States citizens should be able to trust and believe in our judicial system. If we can’t then we have some serious problems to face in the near future. Ferguson, MO is not only left with a destructed city but also a reputation that follows with a negative cloud over the city. For instance when you google a city you tend to find results of restaurants, a wikipedia page, history, attractions, directions and more. However when you google “Ferguson, Missouri” the first link is a city website, and the second one is a Wikipedia page. However from there on all the links contain the words, “Shooting of Michael Brown”, “What happened in Ferguson?” and “Protest…..”. The point being that Ferguson is, and will always be known for the protesting, destruction and the questioning of their police force along with the jury’s decision. With Ferguson only being 12 miles, 20 minutes to the great tourist city of St. Louis there has been uprising concerns. According to USA Today News spoken by Mike Rush, the convention and visitors commissioner of St. Louis, Brian Halls says that tourism and convention rates of St Louis are not going down although he has reached out to the convention officials that are planned to host their events in St. Louis and have reassured them that the riots and destruction is only happening in Ferguson with a small radius. There have also been some concerned event planners and tourists, worried about their safety while visiting St. Louis. It is scary to think about all the terrible things that have happened to the city of Ferguson, let alone thinking about how it could happen while you're on vacation forsay visiting the St. Louis Arch. Before you act upon your actions always consider the facts of: who is this going to hurt? And how am I going to achieve my goal through my actions? If some, even a small percentage of protesters would have asked themselves these questions, maybe all the corruption that has be placed upon the city of Ferguson would have not been so brutal. When people think about all the damage that is already done, they are blindsided by the fact while protests take action.
A voluntary action of violence wastes resources and the time of government officials who are trying to control and manage these large events. For example during the Trump Inauguration in Washington D.C police had to utilize smoke and flash-bang devices that were so loud they could be heard from blocks away. The purpose of these devices was to try to get crowds and mobs to disperse(Krieg). In other words the crowds were so large and overpowering that police had to waste resources and their own time to deal with something that was planned to make this much attention and be this hard to manage. In the same way Audrey Cronin and Max Abrahms, protest analysts, have shown that violence most often does no more that harm people, property and things without getting any closer to achieving a goal. For that reason it supports the fact that violence is counterproductive. The main reason people protest is to try to get attention about the subject they want to make change. However protesting does the opposite, it cause more problems than it does solve the problems they are protesting for. Lastly, the reason protesting gets out of hand and makes government officials involved, is because of government repression(Pinckney). By protesting violently, they are asking for the government to fight back and have to restrain them. As a result while protesting law enforcement …show more content…
tries to control the protest, it turns more violent endangering the officers and also wasting their time and efforts towards something planned and not their real job of protecting people. Ultimately while protesting due to government repression, the acts of protesters waste the time of greatly need police officers in other places and situations. For this reason protests are proven counterproductive and a waste of time. While some may argue that protest are crucial to a healthy community with a representative democracy because it allows citizens to express their feelings and human rights, it is more true that there are other routes to express your views towards a subject other than protesting such as writing a informative letter to the person it concerns or to make a petition. Some evidence to prove this reason is that 60% if violent campaigns from 1900 to 2006 were a complete failure, while a little over 20% of nonviolent campaigns were a failure(Fisher). This shows that non violence campaigns such as petitions, civil disobedience and written forms of statements are way more effective than violent campaigns such as protests. The sun shines over the city while adults go about their daily lives and children head to school.
The fresh bread smell of the bakery warms the air as people, old and young live in peaceful harmony. All these things can be accomplished without the collateral damage that protests have on cities. Some of these include the destruction it has on a city businesses and livelihood, the distraught citizens left dumbfounded and the counterproductivity placed upon many. We should take the many cities such as Ferguson as a lesson in which we can now act upon behalf of all of the people affected by the Ferguson protests and show them that it doesn’t have to end the way it did. So next time you are asked to participate in a protest think twice about the consequence that could be faced upon you, others and everyone not only in you community, but others as
well.
A Civil Rights leader and a member of a religious organization, Cesar Chaves in his article “He Showed Us the Way” (1978) suggest that the correct way to protest is through a non-violent protest than a violent one, because many people would rather see a problem be solved without violence than with violence. Causing mayhem to property or/and livestock is defying the message that he is trying to put out to the world, also why would someone join a protest if the protesters are just harming or destroying innocent people’s property or/and livestock.
today, perhaps it could be justified. For one, President Donald John Trump’s Immigration Executive Order, which practically bans all foreign immigrants from residing nor entering the nation. America is what it is today because of its diversity. Yet, President Trump and a considerable number of people believe that the country should be of its natives instead of those who seek the privileges of its constitutions and hence potentially violates the Declaration of Independence, which says that all men have the right to seek asylum. Considering how the Declaration of Independence originated the U.S., it is ironic for the nation to limit it. Therefore, civil disobedience is required. As it is apprehended that the matter requires civil disobedience, the negotiation comes in; however, a president could be convinced, but not negotiated with his own nation, and thus this step is nullified. Moving on, the enactment of non-violent direct actions is legally safe from the nation’s military forces, but it could be met with a group of people, potentially possessive of deadly weapons, who support the Immigration Executive Order. As it could be life threatening to some extent, one should be ready to self-defend, but not retaliate to the extent where the other is harmed. Finally, launch coordinated systematic direct actions nationwide for the maximum effect. In doing so, President Trump would eventually have to nullify
In response to a protest at the McCormick Harvester factory in Chicago where the police reportedly killed six workers, local radicals led by Albert Parsons organized a meeting at Haymarket Square in downtown Chicago. Several thousand showed up to hear the speakers. The speakers were very careful to not incite violence in the already agitated crowd. After the speeches had been given large numbers of people left, however those who remained behind would be forever remembered in our history books. An army of police descended on the crowd and gave them an order to disperse. During the confusion, an unknown person threw a bomb into the crowd of police, killing one officer. Police began to fire on the crowd; the agitated strikers retaliated with a hail of bullets as well. A riot broke out in which one worker was killed and twelve were wounded, one policeman wa...
Protests have long been a way for people to display their difference in opinion and gain support. One of the many protests against the war that had a powerful effect on public opini...
In 1968, Martin Luther King Jr passed away from a sniper’s bullet. He gave us thirteen years of nonviolent protest during the civil rights movement of the 1950’s. Before I can give my opinion on the history of race relations in the United States since King’s assassination in 1968 strengthened or weakened his arguments on the necessity and value of civil disobedience? You should know the meaning of civil disobedience. The word civil has several definitions. “The one that is intended in this case is "relating to citizens and their interrelations with one another or with the state", and so civil disobedience means "disobedience to the state". Sometimes people assume that civil in this case means "observing accepted social forms; polite" which would make civil disobedience something like polite, orderly disobedience. Although this is an acceptable dictionary definition of the word civil, it is not what is intended here. This misinterpretation is one reason the essay (by Henry David Thoreau that was first published in 1849) is sometimes considered to be an argument for pacifism or for exclusively nonviolent resistance”.
If something isn’t right, there is a way to fix it. Violence of course is never the answer therefore, non-violent protests were started. Non-Violent protesting had a slow start then it spread around the world when it hit media attention. Non-violent protest also had more effectiveness than violent protests. Non-Violent protests may have taken a while, but the results were successful.
Over the centuries, some leaders have believed that private citizens should rebel against injustice in a non-violent rebellion. These leaders have had courage and passion to start or encourage revelations; they have committed acts of civil disobedience to protest these laws put up by a corrupt government. The leaders were willing to give up their lives or freedom because their conscience would not let them rest and accept the unjust laws. Some of these leaders include Henry David Thoreau, the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, Aung San Suu Kyi, and Malala Yousafzai.
When we think of the word “Protest,” we may think of the events that have happened recently. Egypt, Turkey, Libya and other countries where citizens have come out to the streets protesting their government. Not all protesting approaches are like this. Many, throughout history, have been based around peaceful actions. This approach was used during one of the great line of protests in American history. The Civil Rights movement. Many leaders used peace to promote their cause and promoted the passing of laws such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The many leaders of this movement, Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks, and others influenced others to join the strive for equality. One of these people that they influenced was John Lewis.
Peaceful protests was one of the ways African Americans tried to make a change. Many sit-ins occurred where whites and blacks would sit together integrated at white bars and refuse to move. By refusing to move many people through things such as ketchup, mustard, fries, milkshakes, vinegar, and everything on the counter. Mobs of people would harass them and even hurt them to try and get them to move. (Document 4) White cops would arrest those people sitting at the counter eventually, but they wouldn’t protect them from white violence. Police officers also used fire hoses and dogs on peaceful protesters showing that they would not protect African Americans. (Document 5) African Americans also started to integrate into schools. John Meredith
According to Apel (2014), on August 9,2014, Michael Brown,18, an unarmed black man of Ferguson, Missouri was shot and killed by a white police officer named Darren Wilson. Considering the evidence, a grand jury decided not to indict Wilson. This sparked a nationwide protest. People came from near and far to protest the judge’s decision. It was no peaceful protest, it might have appeared to start out as a nonviolent protest, but like many protests, it quickly turned violent. People wanted justice and the people felt as though the system once again had felled them. Barnett (2014), a reporter says that after the shooting groups such as the “New Black Panthers,” demanded a rebellion against the officer who shot Brown. For a while the head of police was not going to reveal the name of the officer who killed the Brown, but after a series of violent protest, the head of police released the officer’s name. If violence was not used during the protest it would not have received worldwide attention. Furthermore, the public would not have known the officer who killed Brown. Due to the amount of attention the Michael Brown’s case received and because of the amount of passion the protestors had and how they were willing to die to get their point across sparked attention. Requiring many people who were in the political spotlight to
According to St. Augustine “an unjust law is not a law at all”(p186). This belief has been shared by many influential leaders in the past, including Henry Thoreau, Mahatma Ghandi, and Martin Luther King. They all believed in a non-violent approach to solving their social grievances. In most cases their approach was successful and was noticed by society and brought about a change in the laws. This nonviolent perspective stems straight from Jesus, who says, “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.”(p192). Others believe that by being disobedient you are under minding the laws and thus creating chaos within society. But, if unjust laws are not brought into light or under minded, then there will be no change in those laws. Martin Luther King felt there is a misconception of time in that the very flow of time cures all ills. On the contrary, time is neutral and it can be used either destructively or constructively(p190).
In the late afternoon of April 29, 1992 sparks of anger and alienation erupted in Los Angeles, California, USA. For 4 days violent civil unrest raged in this Metropolis of 9,000,000 (U.S. census population estimate for Los Angeles County, California State demographic Research Unit, California Department of Finance), causing the deaths of 54 people, injuring over 2,400 (University of Southern California, “The Los Angeles Riots 1992”, http://www.usc.edu/ isd/archives/ la/la_riot.html) and causing property damage of approximately $1,000,000,000 USD (Falkenrath & Rosegrant, 2000). Over these four days, more than 7,000 people were arrested on looting, assault, arson and weapons related charges (Salak, 1993, pg. 33).
If a person want a peaceful protest, then sit at home and use social media to protest and wait for change. However, violent protest raises awareness and get the issue resolved much quicker than just holding hands and chanting. Violent Protest shows the anger and frustration of the person or people. It also shows how people are willing to risk their life by standing by something they believe in. When violence is used during a protest it gets the point across much quicker. Violence cannot be ignored and it forces the authorities or whomever to take notice.
By definition, civil disobedience means to actively refuse to obey certain laws, demands, and commands of a government or of an occupying power without resorting to physical violence (Wikipedia 2007). Many of the influential people in history have felt passionately about what they believe. These passions caused them to rebel against a government or authority. Many times they felt so strongly about what they believed and how they were being treated was wrong they became disobedient. They would take physical and verbal abuse for being disobedient but would never retaliate. They believed in what they thought was wrong and tried to change the way they were governed. Albert Einstein once said 'never do anything against conscience even if the state demands it.' Albert Einstein's views seem to be reasonable. The claim by Albert Einstein is accurate because people should stand up for what they believe, they should know when they are right and their government is wrong, and they should trust in themselves and their own beliefs.
Protests have a strong meaning and have mostly produced successful and favorable outcomes just like the wall-sitting protest. We even reviewed a powerpoint presentation in class based on protests at Rittenhouse Square and the conclusion was that protests have a major influence at Rittenhouse since there are many people visiting the park. If nothing is done to prevent these crimes occurring at Rittenhouse, then criminals are taking this to their advantage and just committing more crime since they know that they will not get