“Getting its history
wrong is part of being a nation.”
(Ernest Renan, 19th
century French philosopher)
“Above that 3.5%
threshold, there hadn't been any failed movements...”
(Erica Chenoweth,
political scientist)
Only 20 years ago something
like 70 percent of protests pushing for major political change were
successful. This trend, however, reversed in the mid-2000s and
success rates have now dropped to around 30 percent, this according
to The Interpreter, published in the NYT, October 25, 2019.
Global mass protests have
been growing year after year since World War II but have now reached
an unheard-of level? Many people are aware of the unrest roiling
countries across our planet, including here in the U.S., but possibly
a lot less are aware that protests are now more likely to
fail.
The “why” is of course
extremely important. Here in America, as well as globally, failure to
understand protest objectives and strategies will certainly lead to
frustration, unsatisfactory results and increasing cynicism. Too much
is at stake for those of us seeking systemic changes. It is important
to remember that the anger and the resistance is not going to stop,
regardless of what governments might do to control the desire for
change, equality and economic justice.
Some of the answers, in
part, may come from the work of Erica Chenoweth, a political
scientist at Harvard who studies civil resistance across the globe
and has written numerous articles on the subject. She published a
book several years ago entitled, Why Civil Resistance Works: The
Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. The Extinction Rebellion
movement has credited Chenoweth's ideas for their success.
It is a complicated subject
but Chenoweth offers four broad reasons why protests have stalled at
the present time. First, more countries are favoring authoritarianism
over democracy. Second, social media makes protests easier to start
but also makes them more likely to fail as well. Third, social
polarization has risen dramatically. Four, authoritarians are getting
better at manipulating their citizens.
Nationalism has risen across
the globe brought about by economic uncertainty, immigration and fear
of losing one's social and cultural place in society. Climate change
could exacerbate all of the above. Global corruption has entrenched
defective political systems and working “within” the system is
perceived to be less likely to bring about positive democratic
changes for increasing numbers of people.
Chenoweth points out that
dictators in general in recent years have emerged gradually rather
than by overnight coups. It becomes a slow, steady drip toward
repression. Orban's Hungary may be a good example of this as well as
Turkey. Poland appears to be following the pattern, wrapping itself
in “national identity” and Catholic conservatism. What happens
right here in the U.S. remains to be seen.
Omnipresent social media may
be the most interesting factor of all. We all know that large groups
can be mobilized rapidly with cell phones and Facebook accounts. But
putting large numbers on the street quickly with no underlying
structure or deep commitment to a particular cause ultimately leads
to very little.
For anyone that remembers
the civil rights movement of the 60s or for that matter the anti-war
protests, the women's movement or the environmental movement knows
that organizing and planning was essential along with building
support at the grass roots.
Chenoweth believes social
media “really advantages” repression. Governments across the
globe have certainly learned how to co-opt media and push their own
messages as well as rally sympathizers without, and this is
important, sending in the tanks and the usual heavy handedness.
Erica Chenoweth states that
nonviolent campaigns are successful 53% of the time compared to 26%
for violent protests. Within this framework she refers to the “3.5
Rule,” a tipping point.
What this means is that
success is very likely when 3.5% of the entire population is actually
participating. In the U.S. this would amount to some 11 million
citizens, in a country of more than 320 million people.
Hong Kong, an autonomous
region of China, at the present time offers an interesting
perspective on protests. The participants remain disciplined and
focused on their goals. It started out as a protest by students and
academics confronting a law that would allow China to arrest Hong
Kong residents and bring them back to the mainland. It began with a
particular interest group or class of people but has now spread
across all sectors of society as more residents can envision their
own self-interest.
Some 2 million residents of
Hong Kong, out of a population of more than 7 million people, are
protesting and marching daily, with very little violence committed by
the participants. This is more than 3.5 percent of the population.
Another million non-participating residents are probably sympathetic
to the overall goals of the campaign.
Successful
protest campaigns require much more than a crowd gathering and waving
placards periodically. It means that, while quantity is important,
the quality of the commitment and the discipline of the participants
is far more significant in sustaining a long term movement. We
Americans, among others, ought not to be under any illusion that oppression—gradual
or otherwise—that we see across the globe won't happen in the U.S.