What Are These “Protests” You Are Talking About?
by Jason Arvak
League members Scott Payne and Mark Thomspon have recently engaged in a debate over the value of protests. In one sense, I agree with each of them. Like Mark, I am skeptical as to the value of protests to move the ball of social change in any meaningful sense. Like Scott, however, I am mindful that protest movements can have benefits beyond the merely instrumental.
There is, however, somewhat of a disconnect between Scott and Mark in that they have left a persistent ambiguity regarding what they are talking about. To put it punchy: who are protesters? If we conclude that they are merely actors seeking particular changes, then Mark’s critique holds much more bite. But if we are to conclude that they are merely expressing what sociologist Robert Bellah called an “American civil religion” that values participation in its own right and views apathy as the primary threat to the health of democracy, then Scott’s defense of protesters becomes much more persuasive.
I would argue that modern protest movements encapsulate both elements at the same time and, as a result, undermine their own effectiveness even at the same time that they enhance their ability to recruit new participants. [Read more →]
April 28, 2009 Comments Off
