Many watchwords highlight the divide between our political
tribes as the 2020 election approaches.
Over the past several weeks, “good trouble” as proclaimed by deceased
Congressman John Lewis to describe nonviolent protest against authority in the
face of inequality has become a popular phrase. It has been invoked to support
the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement and rallies protesting the murder of
George Floyd.
On the other side of the divide, “dangerous outsiders” has
become a rallying cry of the President and his supporters. The term is used to
convince voters that out of town lawless anarchists and violent agitators are
appearing at local, peaceful demonstrations in an attempt to destroy democracy
in America. This commentary will provide some context for “good trouble” and
“dangerous outsiders” in past history and current events.
This year celebrates the centennial anniversary of women’s
constitutional right to vote. The battle
for women’s suffrage was long and arduous.
When Susan B. Anthony was arrested, tried and convicted for illegally
voting in the national election of 1872, she addressed the jury: “You have trampled underfoot every
vital principle of our government. My natural rights, my civil rights, my
political rights, my judicial rights, are all alike ignored." Anthony’s
“good trouble” led to years of women’s activism before the 19th
Amendment was assured.
Martin Luther King Jr. took
inspiration from Gandhi, drawing heavily on his principles of nonviolence in developing
his own techniques to jumpstart social change. King’s “good trouble” throughout
the South saw him and many of his supporters beaten and jailed. The result was
America’s second reconstruction when President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the
1964 Civil Rights Act dismantling official segregation; the Voting Rights Act
of 1965 prohibiting racist voting laws; and the 1968 Civil Rights Act ending
discrimination in housing sales. Johnson also appointed Thurgood Marshall as the
first African American on the Supreme Court.
More recently, in regard to
the BLM movement, Congressman John Lewis in one of his final speeches urged
young Americans to: “Get into good trouble, necessary trouble, and help redeem
the soul of America.” He was amazed, as were many first generation civil rights
leaders, that BLM had grown from a twitter hash tag in 2013 into a worldwide
decentralized organization. In addition, on June 6
alone, an estimated half a million people joining
protests in 550 places in the United States to protest the murder of George
Floyd.
While “good trouble” encourages Americans to leave the couch and
social media behind, put on a mask, pick up a sign and take a stand for racial
justice, something much more sinister is going on with presidential talk of
“dangerous outsiders.” Trump and his Republican allies have doubled down on
fear by invoking the four horsemen of the political apocalypse: chaos,
disorder, domestic terrorism and anarchy. These efforts are designed to keep
the red tribe locked down and fearful until it votes to return the President to
office.
The invocation of outside agitators
into issues of social change has a long and sorry history. Pennsylvania mine owners spread stories that
striking coal miners in 1869 were being “led by the nose” by outside
exploiters. During reconstruction in the
South, the gossip was that but for those “northern mischievous outsiders”, the cordial
southern way of life, loved by black and white alike, would endure
forever. A southern Jury concluded that
the murder of Emmett Till in 1955 was a hoax dreamed up by northern outsiders
to make Mississippi look bad. By 1965,
communist infiltrators from the north had become the outside force to worry
about as the South was forced to integrate.
The nationwide protests that were
ignited by the murder of George Floyd gave the President the ideal opportunity
to revive a political campaign centering on “dangerous outsiders.” Early on,
there were several days of looting and property damage associated with the
protests. Most cities, like Pittsburgh, were able to identify the criminal
element and bring them to justice. Extensive FBI investigations disclosed no
coordinated plan to cause violence by any outside agitators or organizations.
The past
several weeks have centered on the events in Portland, Oregon after Trump sent federal
officers to protect the federal courthouse. Neither the Mayor of Portland nor
the Governor of Oregon asked for or wanted federal troops. During the Portland
episode, the White House narrative continued to emphasize in a conference call to
all 50 governors the use of “dominate force” against “dangerous outsiders”.
It was with
great interest that I followed the dispatches of investigative journalist
Nicholas Kristof. He reported from Portland for over a week during the height
of the Portland disturbances. While
Trump and his minions spoke from Washington of a war zone and a city destroyed
by an outside mob, Kristof witnessed local protestors trying to protect their
city from violent federal intruders. No
one was trying to burn down the courthouse as suggested by the acting Director
of Homeland Security.
The history of
America is filled with examples of how effective it is for those seeking change
to endure violence rather than to commit it.
Those seeking “good trouble’’ will always win out over violence caused
by real or imagined “dangerous outsiders.”
This is especially true when the outsiders are federal troops intended
to provoke violence in order to draw attention away from the pandemic and a
tanking economy.
No comments:
Post a Comment