 |
| Imagine this picture of downtown Amesbury filled with people. |
On Tuesday, June 2nd, Andi
Egmont, Bob Ingalls and Caitlin LeMay of Amesbury, along with
Newburyport resident Trish Boateng hosted a Black Lives Matter
protest in Amesbury, MA.
Together the towns of Amesbury and
Newburyport include roughly 35,000 residents, a minor tourist
destination between Boston and South-eastern New Hampshire. For the
protest, at least 350 people turned out. They lined downtown,
standing around the rotary where Main St, High St, Market St, and Elm
St meet. The leaders of the protest stood on a small island in the
center and led the crowd in chants and cheers. The streets were
already packed when I walked downtown along Main St at 4:45pm for the
5pm – 6pm event. In spite of the congestion it was possible to
avoid walking too close to other protesters, though most people were
packed along the edge of the sidewalk. They wanted to be as close to
the street as possible to see the speakers, show their signs, and
wave to cars. Almost everyone wore masks, so the minuscule minority
that didn't were conspicuous.
I stood near the Market Square
Bakehouse, twenty feet or so from the wall of protesters along the
road. Even from that vantage point I heard the speakers' as they led
their chants, but it was difficult to understand the brief monologues
they sprinkled between slogans. Because they were standing in the
center of a rotary they turned constantly to speak to their audience.
The crowd waved signs with popular slogans like Black Lives Matter,
Racism is a Pandemic Too, and No Justice, No Peace. After each chant
protesters clapped, and they cheered as cars honked in support.
Protesters filmed the event with their phones and took photos.
Residents of every age attended, from young children with their
parents, to high school students, and the elderly. I would have
brought my five year old son, who I brought to the Climate Protests
in Newburyport last fall, but the threat of the coronavirus in a
crowd convinced me to leave him home.
The protest ended with a silent nine
minute kneel, after which the leaders thanked the crowd for being
there. The crowded started to dissipate though plenty remained. The
Mayor and the Police Chief attended, but Representative Seth Moulton
was missing. Moulton's 6th MA district includes
Newburyport, and Amesbury, among other towns. There are larger and
more diverse than these two, but it appears that as of this date
Moulton has not participated at any protest in his district,
Massachusetts, or Washington D.C. If a Representative of the people
can't bother to even make a brief attendance at one of the largest
nationwide protests in recent decades, it isn't clear whether that
politician cares to listen to their voters.
Perhaps Representative Moulton didn't
know about the event, and the question is, who did? A search of
Google five days later revealed that only the local papers of
Amesbury and Newburyport covered the event. On YouTube, viewers can
watch two minute extracts of the protest on two different videos, but
not the complete event. The question is what is Amesbury doing, and
who cares?
There are a number of questions without
any definitive answers. Is a protest in a small, predominantly (as
of 2000, 97%) white, city useful, or is it merely performative? For
those who can't afford to venture into Boston, or to other
significant protests, a local protest might be their only outlet.
But is this merely an excuse to defer responsibility, a failed
exhaust valve? The coronavirus seems like a reasonable deterrent to
avoid a protest, but then there are hundreds of thousands
volunteering in spite of the threat of the disease. Was it worth the
risk of spreading the coronavirus in Amesbury and Newburyport, for a
protest that most outside the immediate area of Essex County and
Southern New Hampshire won't hear about?
One defense for the protest in Amesbury
is that many wish to voice their support for the national protest
even if they are never noticed. It's also possible the protest will
affect local opinion, convincing unconcerned residents of the
seriousness of racial inequality in the United States.
But on a broader note, this wasn't
about Amesbury, because no one in Amesbury was protesting against the
Mayor or the Police Chief. No one in Amesbury seemed to be asking
anyone in Amesbury to change. The uncoordinated national Black Lives
Matter protest is pressing local, state, and the national government
to act, by making the people who hold the power discomforted. No one
was seeking to make Mayor Kassandra Grove or Chief William Scholtz
uncomfortable.
Yet, nationwide protesters have been
condemned for making the wealthy and politically connected uneasy.
The forces arrayed against Black Lives Matter have tried to make a
small minority of violent looters the story, and plenty in the media
have taken the bait. From the President on down, powerful figures
have accused peaceful protesters of being responsible or complicit in
the the violence. Instead numerous
videos show police instigating or escalating violence against
protesters. Governors and Mayors (Democratic and Republican
alike) increased the likelihood of violence when they passed
restrictive curfews and pressured police departments to clear the
streets. When protesters seek for justice against racial violence
enacted by the State, they have every right to reject coercion by the
State. They join the great tradition of Civil Disobedience against
an overbearing government seeking to curtail their inalienable human
right to peaceful assembly. The Constitution guarantees this right
in its first amendment, along with the rights to free speech, freedom
from a state religion, and freedom of the press which are continually
extolled. Videos of the press being attacked by police are numerous
and tv pundits are dumbfounded by this, but they forget that the
protesters and press have the exact same right, and an attack on one
is equal to an attack on the other.
It's difficult to see how a state could
justify circumscribing that right against peaceful protesters
marching in the street. The protesters did not threaten violence,
unlike those who protested against the Coronavirus lock-downs while
wielding guns inside state court houses. Coronavirus protesters hung
effigies of their political opponents so they could end the lock down
and risk the spread of a deadly disease. BLM protesters peacefully
walked through cities seeking to end violence. In blocking roads and
violating curfews they performed the most reasonable, peaceful
actions protesters can take to pressure the powerful to enact their
agenda.
And finally, many of the cities and
some of the states where police have enacted their brutal crack down
are governed by Democrats. Establishment Democrats may try to make
this protest about Donald Trump. He has worsened conditions
nationwide by
reducing transparency and oversight of police. Some of the
people joining the Black Lives Matter protest are likely connected
with the other protests against Donald Trump, like the Climate
Protest and the Women's March. Further discontent has built because
of his failure to adequately handle the coronavirus pandemic. But
through all of this President Trump is merely using a system which
has been built by Democratic and Republican politicians working hand
in hand. The Democratic candidate for President built these systems
more than most other Democratic politicians, with his opposition to
busing as a tool of desegregation, his eulogy of the segregationist
Strom Thurmond, and his
history of tough on crime bills in 1984, 1986, 1988, and 1994.
In response to the recent protests the candidate has said police
should be trained to shoot civilians in the leg instead of the heart.
He has said police departments should receive an additional $300
million in training, instead of the reduced funding protesters are
asking for. While it's a comfort to know that he would be unlikely
to unleash the United States military on a civilian population, it's
difficult to see how this moment, with anger and frustration
exploding around BLM, the devastating impacts of looming climate
change, and
desire of younger generations to make a serious change in many US
policies, can be overseen by a politician who thinks that nothing
should fundamentally change, even
if he is the lesser of two evils.
So, when is the next protest, Amesbury?
Recent:
Relevant:
Comments
Post a Comment