The Morality of Protesting

How are peaceful vs disruptive protests perceived and who gets to dictate what is an acceptable form of protesting?

Zoë Meyer

Since the encampment last May and the beginning of President Cunningham's regime, the U has been cracking down on student protesting. These new guidelines include limiting protests to 100 people, only 1 bullhorn, signs smaller than 14 inches by 22 inches, and making students distribute printed material more than 25 feet from buildings. Even without discussing how these rules are mainly a way for the U to more easily arrest and discipline students, it brings up the question: who gets to dictate when and how people protest? 

This made me think of an episode of The Daily Show in 2017 where Trever Noah discusses how no matter how Black people protest, they are always criticized. In a very funny ending segment he says, “Yeah, but, you see, you still haven’t told us the right way for Black people to protest. We know it’s wrong to do it in the streets, it’s wrong to do it in the tweets. You cannot do it on the field, you cannot do it if you’ve kneeled. And don’t do it if you’re rich, you ungrateful son of a b*tch. Because there’s one thing that's a fact, you cannot protest if you’re Black”. There is always a discussion around the correct  way to protest, and people in political or institutional places of power, like the U of M, try to set guidelines on what is an acceptable protest. One organizer from the MN Anti-War Committee said it best in a speech, “Protesting with permission is just a parade.” By definition, a protest is a criticization of an organization, party, or person. Thus, to have this institution try to dictate how and when protests would make them the most comfortable—and will therefore dictate what is allowed—is absurd. It is inherently the objective of protests to disrupt normal life for people existing within and around the institution they are protesting. 

On Oct. 21, student protesters took over Morrill Hall and barricaded themselves while demanding for the divestment from Israel by the University. The U responded with a vague and ridiculously fast Safe U alert that misled people about what was really happening. In addition, there were dozens of cop cars, multiple SWAT vehicles, and a helicopter—all for 11 protesters. In an updated email the next day, President Cunningham wrote, “We have seen many peaceful protests this fall. However, what happened in Morrill Hall yesterday was not a form of legitimate protest.” What is a legitimate protest if it is not attention grabbing, disruptive and loud? And what was peaceful about the U’s overwhelmingly forceful response? 

I recently found a photo from my very first protest; I am bundled up in a hammy down coat wearing my beloved dog hat and holding a sign that said “Union Busting is Disgusting.” I was 8 years old in that picture. I bring this up to demonstrate that I am not new to protesting, it is something I have been doing for as long as I can remember, and I have attended many more demonstrations and walkouts in the 15 years since that picture was taken. Even with this history, never once have I been to a protest that was violent. I am, therefore, so incredibly confused when protests from groups I know, or even protests I have been to, are deemed in the media as being violent. 

Violence is defined as “using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.” Violence does not mean damaging or hurting property. When the word violent is misused for protests that are damaging property, it intentionally (or unintentionally) creates fear; and when outside people fear protesters it allows for protesters to be arrested, jailed, unsupported, and mistreated. It is a tactic used by the opposition to get otherwise uninvolved people to agree with them out of fear for the other. 

This happened extensively during George Floyd protests in 2020. I attempted to research people that were injured by protesters during May and June of 2020, and found very limited articles or personal testimony (it is also relevant that the many discussed how the attackers were people from the outside who were only at the protests to instigate them). However, I found a plethora of research around injuries sustained at the hands of police. Injuries and hospitalizations around tear gas, rubber bullets, beanbags and other “less-lethal weapons” were commonplace and some lead to permanent injuries. This is consistent with my own experience at protests—the majority of violence is perpetrated by the police; the destruction by protesters is towards property and, unlike police, rarely targeted at people.