Arak Journal

Politics, Patriotism, And The Public’s Perception of Protest

By Emma Rigaud

“It is hideously rude to protest during a national anthem that is a cherished expression of unity, of admirable patriotism, and of the very freedom that allows your protest in the first place,” says Quin Hillyer, a columnist for the Washington Examiner (Hillyer). Declarations of dissatisfaction with society, like this one, are not uncommon these days. Social, political, and economic conflicts of interest have led to unrest in the United States and mass protests have become a frequent subject of national news. With the level of exposure that modern-day protests receive, it is no surprise that they generate opinions from people like Hillyer who have varying backgrounds and political affiliations. But in his declaration, Hillyer gets a few things wrong. Protest does not signify the absence of patriotism; rather, it is an exhibition of patriotism. Protest provides all people with an equal opportunity to raise awareness of the issues that plague their country and argue for ways in which it can be made better. Despite the fact that our country was founded based on a protest, and that positive change has been brought about by protests of the past, like Hillyer, the public frequently views protesting as something negative and destructive. While this may seem counter-intuitive, past movements for change, like the Civil Rights Movement, had each received a fair share of backlash from the public when they began. However, Hillyer is correct about one thing: it would serve us well to relearn a few lessons about protest. One key lesson being that protesting is an essential part of American democracy whose practice should be valued and respected by all.

The past decade has seen a rise in the number of movements for change, as well as in the number of participants. Events like 2018’s March for Our Lives and 2017’s Women’s March on Washington called upon marginalized groups of people to stand up for the fate of their future in this country. A staggering number of people showed up to the Women’s March in January, with transit services logging 275,000 metro riders at 11:00 that morning (Loesche). Crowd sizes were comparable to the 1963 March on Washington, which drew some 250,000 people (History.com “March on Washington”). The growing inclination of the public to participate in recent demonstrations indicates that there is a sufficient amount of unrest prompting people to take action. The same was the case during the height of the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War protests, when people saw protests as a way to counter practices that were detrimental to their way of life. The Vietnam War protests sought to bring an end to a war whose outcome was becoming less and less hopeful. By 1967, 15,058 Americans were killed; 109,527 Americans were wounded; the cost of the war had risen to $25 billion per year; and about 40,000 troops were being called to service each month (History.com “Vietnam War Protests”). Additionally, the Civil Rights Movement sought to eradicate the moral divide amongst citizens when it came to equal rights, by advocating against racially-based segregation and discrimination. The March on Washington garnered the attention of several significant figures, including Roy Wilkins, then-president of the NAACP, and performers like Bob Dylan. Both Wilkins & Dylan participated in the protest in the hopes that their presence would draw attention to the injustices that black Americans were facing (History.com “March on Washington”). Nowadays, most Americans view these protests as justified and helpful in establishing a more equal and conscientious society. People today are trying to do the same. Even though others may misconstrue the meaning behind today’s protests, most are not meant to be malicious. Their desired outcome is often always positive change that will better the state of the American union.

Protesting is not only a right, but an American value that should be upheld. It is often forgotten that America’s founders were protestors themselves. Revolutionaries took active stances against the British government, like Samuel Adams, who became the leader of the Boston Tea Party and the Sons of Liberty. Moreover, some of America’s most venerated historical figures are venerated precisely because of their decision to protest. For example, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the most recognizable face to come out of the Civil Rights Movement, was an advocate for nonviolent protest and civil disobedience. In his 1963 “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, in which he rebuts claims that he should not have broken an Alabama law that prohibited demonstrations, he acknowledges the value of disruption. In defense of his protest he says, “nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and establish such creative tension that a community that has consistently refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue” (King, 1963). Americans view King’s preferred method of nonviolent direct action, described here, as the “correct” model for how people should protest today. They value him because of how peaceably he was able to enact positive change, although King wasn’t as revered in the 1960s as he is today. Instead, he was portrayed as a troublemaker with ill intentions, which proves that it takes time for people to adjust to the positive change that is so often brought about by protest. In his letter, King is also adamant that the right to protest should never be taken away, like it was in Birmingham. He argues that it is unjust “if laws are used to preserve segregation” as well as “to deny citizens the First Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and peaceful protest” King, 1963). As citizens of a free country, if we desire, we have the right to raise our voices, make a speech, march in a rally, or take a knee in protest (Brooks). Modern protests are often viewed differently from those of the past, perhaps because we lack a figure like King to lead us through them and remind us why we are due for change. But they are the same in essence. Regardless, it is necessary that the right to participate in demonstrations continue to be protected at all costs.

            That said, there is a dangerous notion floating around that protesting is something destructive, as opposed to something constructive. Especially on social media, malicious ideas are spreading about protesting and the kinds of people who participate. Similar to King, protestors have been branded as disruptive troublemakers, who should have something better to do with their time than take to the streets. Images like the one shown below have been shared to diminish the appeal of protesting as well as to advance the agenda of the person who shared it’s political party (“Hey anti-Trump idiots” meme). The authors of these posts are frequently anonymous which gives them little credibility, but the images’ meme form is a widespread media tool that can be used as propaganda to feed the public certain ideas of America. The image below was viewed 9,496 times, not including the number of times that it was shared separately on social media. It provides insight on what some people truly think about protesting, which is troublesome because opinions towards protesting itself should be non-partisan. Protesting is an activity that typically results in more good than harm, and in which everyone should feel welcome to participate.

In some situations, protesting has even been declared unpatriotic. This mentality made headway during Arizona’s race for Senate between opponents Martha McSally and Kyrsten Sinema. In the weeks leading up to the 2018 election, McSally was caught on camera saying, We’re going to spend the next 70 days making sure people see a contrast between a protestor or a patriot? (Stanley-Becker). The danger here lies in suggesting that there is a difference between the two terms. Merriam-Webster defines patriotism as love for or devotion to one’s country.? But what shows more love and devotion than fighting against something that one thinks would do their country harm? In this particular case, redefining protest as something negative appears to be an attempt by McSally to attack her opponent as a ?[protestor] at odds with American patriotism? in order to improve her chance of winning (Stanley-Becker). McSally?s comment may be less of an attack on the art of protesting itself than an attack on a political opponent, but it is still harmful in that it shapes the public?s perception of what protest should be into something more negative.

In another form, this same argument is taking place. Colin Kaepernick?s decision to kneel during the national anthem in 2016 quickly became one of the most controversial topics in the news. His protest has been denounced as disrespectful, ill-timed, and unpatriotic. As exhibited by the graphs below, the public?s acceptance of Kaepernick’s kneeling very closely resembles the public?s acceptance of the Freedom Riders when they rode the interstate bus system. In May of 1961, 61% of adults who were part of a national sample disapproved of what the Freedom Riders were doing (Gallup Organization). In May of 2018, 51%, of adults who responded to an online survey thought that kneeling during the national anthem was an unacceptable form of protest (?Which of the Following Statements?). Only 35% of people approved of what Kaepernick was doing, and 13% had yet to form an opinion. These surveys emphasize the general unpopularity of Kaepernick’s protests with the public. Yet while the majority of people in 1961 disapproved, many people today would argue that the Freedom Rider protests were patriotic and exemplify what patriotism means, in terms of the definition provided above. By the same logic, Kaepernick’s protest could also be classified as patriotic. His protest may not be accepted today, but given time, its full impact might finally be realized.

In general, one might question whether the backlash is being directed towards the protests themselves, or to the ideas behind the protests. Labeling the act of protesting as unpatriotic is a way for people to draw attention away from the principles that others are fighting for and, instead, make the public view protesting as a nuisance to their daily lives. It is worrisome that an integral part of the democratic process would be considered unpatriotic, but then again, this should have been expected. The public has never found civil rights protests appropriate in the moments when they?re happening. As Ta-Nehisi Coates explains, Whatever symbols they embraced, civil-rights activists – much like black activists today – never successfully connected with the hearts of the majority of adults of their own day? (Coates). But as he further explains, the goal of a protest is not to change the opinions of contemporaries; it is to reach their children, and influence the future in this manner (Coates). It is the unwillingness of the people to adapt to changes in society, much like the unwillingness of whites to grant black Americans equal rights during the Civil Rights Movement, that perpetuated the backlash towards protest at the time. I believe the same can be said about today?s society, and how white Americans are unwilling to acknowledge the continued oppression of blacks. Politics also plays a significant role in the amount of backlash a protest receives. In her article The “Anti-Protest Backlash”, Clio Chang argues that some politicians portray protests to the public in a negative light in an attempt to silence dissent. Some local legislatures have even gone so far as to pass laws prohibiting the blockage of roadways by protestors, which would specifically target those nearby the Dakota Access Pipeline. In a statement to a news agency, Republican State Senator Daniel Bishop of North Carolina was recorded as saying, about people who were vocally disagreeing with him, that criminalizing dissent is necessary because lines are being crossed? (Chang). The outright denial of the right to free speech and the right to assemble peaceably clearly conflicts with America?s ideals. It is unreasonable for a person to take out their anger on the act of protesting itself, as this is only a way to discredit what others are protesting for. The issue of backlash being directed towards the ideas behind the protests presents legitimate concerns about partisanship and how it can become a threat to American democracy everywhere.

            The right to protest should not be taken for granted because protest is essential for preserving democracy and keeping a country’s leadership in check. Protesting enables people to initiate change, bringing their country closer to its ideal form. Protesting also encourages people to participate in national conversations more frequently, making them more cognizant of the world around them and, hopefully, making them more open-minded.
In a way that is reminiscent of our country’s tumultuous past, Americans of today have become less inclined to sit back and do nothing when they believe something ought to be changed. Therefore, it is important to keep in mind that protest has become a fundamental part of American democracy and culture, and any infringement on the right to protest threatens the values that Americans hold most dear.

Works Cited

Works Cited

Brooks, Diallo. “Protest Isn’t Unpatriotic – Attacking The First Amendment Rights Of Black Athletes Is.” The Huffington Post, TheHuffingtonPost.com, 25 Sept. 2017, www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/protest-isnt-unpatrioticattacking-the-first-amendment_us_59c953a2e4b0b7022a646cc0.

Chang, Clio. “The Anti-Protest Backlash.” Opinion Archives, Apr. 2017, web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=0&sid=3f33ed9f-15ef-4518-8834-1d893b86e774%40sessionmgr4009&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=fjh&AN=121415177.

Coates, Ta-Nehisi. “Civil-Rights Protests Have Never Been Popular.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 16 Oct. 2017, www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/10/colin-kaepernick/541845/.

Gallup Organization. “Freedom Riders, Sit-Ins, (May 1961).” June 1961.

Hey anti-Trump idiots meme. Imgflip, Oct. 2016, https://imgflip.com/i/1dwiiq.

Hillyer, Quin. “Obnoxious NFL Players Protesting the Flag and National Anthem Need to Take Protesting 101.” Washington Examiner, 25 Sept. 2017, www.washingtonexaminer.com/obnoxious-nfl-players-protesting-the-flag-and-national-anthem-need-to-take-protesting-101.

History.com. “March on Washington.” HISTORY, A&E Television Networks, 29 Oct. 2009, www.history.com/topics/black-history/march-on-washington.

—. “Vietnam War Protests.” HISTORY, A&E Television Networks, 22 Feb. 2010, www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/vietnam-war-protests.

King, Martin Luther. “Letter from Birmingham Jail.” Birmingham Jail, Aug. 1963, Birmingham, Alabama.

Loesche, Dyfed. “Number of Metro Riders in Washington D.C. at Selected Big Events.” Statista, The Washington Post, Jan. 2017, https://www.statista.com/chart/7707/number-of-metro-riders-in-washington-dc-at-selected-big-events/.

“Patriotism.” Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/patriotism.

Stanley-Becker, Isaac. “‘A Protester or a Patriot’: Republicans Spot a Difference, and a Midterms Message.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 29 Aug. 2018, www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/08/29/a-protester-or-a-patriot-republicans-spot-a-difference-and-a-midterms-message/?utm_term=.bf7eea46e998.

“Which of the Following Statements Comes Closest to Your View, Even If Neither Are Exactly Right?” Statista, Morning Consult, www.statista.com/statistics/867228/anthem-kneeling-protest-acceptability-opinion/.

Paper Prompt

Writing Project 4: A Researched Argument

80 points

The prompt

• Join an important national or cultural conversation by using your own outside research to support A STRONG ORIGINAL ARGUMENT about an issue of national concern. Use one of the prompts listed on the other side of this page to develop your thesis. Like project 1, this project asks you to synthesize sources. Like project 2, this project has rhetorical components.  You should consciously use 2 of the three main rhetorical appeals.  (Logos is a given.)

Length and formatting

• 1300-1600 words (not including the works cited page. Lower limit fixed, upper limit flexible)
• double spacing, Page numbers in the bottom center
• Title page with relevant, arresting image and a descriptive, engaging title

Source Requirements

• At least 7 different sources, with the stipulations that
• You need a mix of scholarly and popular sources
• Scholarly:  academic articles meant for professors
• Popular: publications/websites meant for the general public
• At least 1 must be a scholarly journal article (we’ll discuss what that is)
• At least 1 must be a visual (graph, chart, illustration, etc.)
• At least 1 source must advance an argument or make a point with which you disagree
• Sources can do “double duty.”  That is to say, the source with which you disagree can also be an academic article.

Citation Requirements

• MLA format, internal citations
• Works Cited page (also MLA format) must be included at the end

Models

• Visit ______________for some examples of successful research papers from previous 110 courses.

The steps

1. Brainstorm & look at examples
2. Hunt for facts to give context for the pattern or problem
3. Hunt for arguments
4. Have a conference with Prof. Williams to discuss your own argument
5. Create topic outline (you’ll have a model)
6. Create sentence outline (you’ll have another model)
7. Compose rough draft (we’ll look at templates)
8. Receive feedback from peers & from Prof. Williams
9. Revise and edit
10. Submit final version via Canvas