With the mind that man has, there has always been a reason to resist or protest something. No one says that a protest needs to be a collective group effort – there are plenty of examples in history of protests at the individual level -and many we have been doing as a little kid.
Look at some very simple examples. We have been protesting our early lives by putting up a “stopping” hand to eat certain vegetables, stomping our feet if our parents don’t give us something that we want, to silently skipping class to avoid those boring subjects.
We quietly protest the escalation of the increased cable or internet bill by switching service providers. We humbly protest going to certain restaurants if the service was bad and go to others. We silently protest the use of gasoline vehicles by purchasing electric cars. We even secretly protest our current boring jobs by interviewing with a new company.
All that a protest is defined as is “a statement or action expressing disapproval of or objection to something.” There is nothing in here that says violence is necessary to make a protest. In fact, majority if not all protests actually happen in silence without the intent to hurt others, and keep from hurting ourselves allowing us to move into spaces where we are happy.
If you look at things from a wider lens, If a protest is a disapproval of something, that means that you have to balance that out by moving toward something of approval. Flow is created by movement – which by default means that you have to move away from something to get to somewhere.
Protests are always sparked by a legitimate human cause. I actually think every material thing has been protested from war, abortion, elections, crime, race, company products to politicians and jobs. The way we even ask questions is in some way protesting our position about other’s position, beliefs, and ideas.
Recently, we all faced a major protest from a terrible incident with a white police office taking the life of an innocent black man by restraining him in an awkward position that compressed his neck limiting the intake of air. Movements such as the Black civil rights movement in the 1960’s, the struggle for India’s independence against British rule in the 20-40’s, and the anti-Vietnam protests in the late 1960’s are some other examples of protests in my opinion.
However, these movements differed from the protest we have been seeing recently in that violence was not a huge part of it. People made a fuss and commotion but there was no extreme looting of stores, smashing of windows, and vandalism.
Taking a stance is human nature. Fighting for rights is human nature. The strong position for civil liberties is a honorable stand. We love making a point and our egos tells us to march forward with our feelings – and to follow our hearts.
Without action, it become impossible to meet what our hearts desire – but the mind plays a terrible trick on us- in some cases it says to lay low, be calm, and make your point in firmness of voice, and in others it says to strike with the strongest blow possible and make an impact.
What we don’t understand is that with a calm mind we can achieve the same results as the strong blow. This is the premise behind non-cooperation where we deter the aggressor by absorbing the punch. This has been an effective practice in civil movements leading to more effective results than those that go violent. They work only when the cause is just and driven by the heart, not mind.
My point is a simple one: any cause that is protested that turns violent deters the cause and doesn’t provide a solution to the problem. This is the case as the same protests with the same incidents keep coming back again and again – there is no end to it. For it to end, somebody needs to unfortunately absorb the punch – as this is the only way it can end – to not strike back.
Just look at history and you will see that the reason why the issue doesn’t end is because the aggressor that is performing the violent act has marketed themselves as being violent and it puts everyone on guard. The ultimate truth is that a brand image is created of the aggressor that people can’t get out of their minds.
If you draw a circle, you will see that egos exist both on the inside and outside of the circle and they flutter between the circle based on where you stand. The issue of the ego is that it is largely one of inferiority that belongs on both sides. A clash of egos is the main issue that needs to be destroyed.
If the inside has built an image of being violent, than the outside will develop a perception of being threatened by the inside, and the outside will feel inferior and be on guard – they need to be as their safety will be at stake and they must show that they are stronger. The counter to this is that to repel this feeling that the outside is not standing strong, the inside needs to show even greater superiority by standing even stronger on guard to counteract its feeling of inferiority.
The result is that the inside feels inferior because the outside is standing guard, and they can’t be seen as being small so they stand taller and also stand at guard and this cycle never ends.
So, you have one prey and another the predator, and vice versa the predator and the other the prey – you can’t keep both apart as they are both predators and both prey to each other.
It’s like 2 people who have an argument. One puts up their dukes ready to fight and the other then guy then puts up their dukes. Now you have 2 people ready to fight. If it gets violent no one really wins. If you walk away and no one gets hurt then both win. But get this – if one throws a punch and the other absorbs it – who wins? It’s the one who absorbs the punch – as causing harm is always seen as a negative trait. The stronger one is the one to take the punch particularly if their cause is just.
The cycle ends when both sides drop their egos and get a strong handle of things. It must be done collectively. The ring needs to be established where both are superior, not as a result of inferiority, but also not a an ego trip of one being greater than the other. Inferiority comes from a threat that exists on a both sides. To truly eliminate the threat you need to move toward grounds of feeling safe which is where superiority is gained.
One thing that I have realized is that violence doesn’t destroy the root cause of the issue. Martin Luther King said it best that “Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”