I think that civil disobedience may sometimes be helpful to the Black Lives Matter movement, but other tactics are more important. The Black Lives Matter movement wants to address beliefs and prejudice in society rather than specific laws. Certainly those prejudices can manifest themselves in specific laws and actions by police, and in those cases civil disobedience may be applicable. For instance, if police tried to shut down a non-violent protest, it would be appropriate for the protesters to continue. Doing otherwise would likely be considered by Gandhi to be "cowardice," and from a practical perspective continuing the protest (hopefully) draws media attention to the movement and to the fact that police unfairly tried to shut it down.
However, other tactics may be more widely applicable. Holding a lawful protest, for example, is a tool for bringing attention to and gaining support for a movement. Likewise, activists speaking out individually, which often happens over the internet these days, can help others see their point of view. While changing people's biases is a long and difficult process, these are some of the first steps that can be taken towards shifting public opinion. We have seen protests, as well as dialogue from activists, inspire a lot of public discourse about what can be done to combat racial bias especially within the police force. While these methods are not really civil 'disobedience,' Gandhi would likely approve of them because the are not violent but do not constitute giving in.
I do believe that nonviolent methods are much more effective for the Black Lives Matter movement than violent ones. Unfortunately one of the prejudices the movement is fighting is the tendency of whites to believe that blacks are dangerous. Thus violence, whether or not it is justified, likely would only serve to reinforce that stereotype. We already see some people using instances of violent Black Lives Matter protests as excuses to condemn the entire movement.
I agree that civil disobedience tends to reinforce stereotypes about blacks held by non blacks, which only increases bias in communities and eventually in police forces, which perpetuates the violence. However, while Gandhi would approve of the non violent protests that black lives matters usually tries to hold, they have had trouble in the past with getting results through these actions. I guess I wonder if cowardice is extended to stepping down from a non violent protest when the result isn't immediate. If this was the case Gandhi would consider it cowardice to stop the black lives matters movement before getting the results they desire.
ReplyDelete