Politics is not a philosophy seminar. My recent discussion of respectful pluralist engagement with disagreement can make it seem as if all politics takes place between a few relatively equal, well-off people sitting in a room and chatting about an issue before coming to an agreement or at least respectfully agreeing to disagree.
In many ways this is the ideal of political dialogue sketched by proponents of deliberative democracy. It is a powerful ideal and there are many, many settings when we should strive for this. In addition, respect for fellow humans is always important. But politics will not always resemble a calm discussion between equals. And sometimes disagreements are irresolvable. As Madison recognized in the Federalist Papers, disagreement and freedom of speech go together. Furthermore, the desire for total agreement and the elimination of dissent is a totalitarian drive that has no place in a democratic polity. This is why it is necessary to briefly consider the power and value of protest.
In the face of persistent injustice protest is justified, even necessary. Peaceful protests serve many different purposes and accomplish a diverse range of goals. Protests can motivate citizens to get involved and stay involved in politics. They can put pressure on elected officials and on those considering a run in the future, as well as targeting the behavior of corporations and other powerful private actors. They are a demonstration of popular strength and power. They can also change the discourse surrounding an issue—see the potential impacts the Tea Party movement (in 2010-2011) and then the Occupy Wall Street Movement (in 2011-2012) had on the discourse surrounding jobs, debt, and inequality. We have seen similar impacts with the more recent movement against police brutality.
Peaceful, democratic protests also have an intrinsic value. Protests empower the citizens who participate, increasing their sense of efficacy, as social scientists say. At their best they are an act of direct democracy that is deeply rewarding in its own right—ordinary citizens coming together collectively with one another to state their positions and make demands. Anyone who has been at a protest feels the collective democratic power of the people. Protesters are also frequently innovative, often engaging in symbolic forms of protest (like die-ins to protest a war). Protests at their most powerful, such as during the civil rights movement, dramatize an issue, making it more poignant and salient, which gets back to the first part, protests at their best help to mobilize and persuade people to think and act differently.
Of course there are questions of both principle and strategy to consider when protesting. At their worst protests could make a cause less popular. And however intrinsically fulfilling they may be, we generally don’t protest with the goal of making our cause less likely to win. So protesters, particularly those organizing and leading them, must take these considerations into account. There are many different goals to balance when organizing.
But, as the Berrigan brothers discussed in the context of Vietnam War protests, we can neither fully predict nor control the future. So there is a case to be made that in the face of an unjust cause (say, the invasion of Iraq) citizens have an obligation to protest without any certainty that their protest will make a difference.
Protests and other forms of direct action are also necessary because much of the world is defined by closed doors and unequal power relations. Many economic and political institutions don’t provide citizens with direct access to decision-making procedures. When decision-making is not democratic, like at a corporate board meeting, the only options we have are various outsider actions. When we don’t have a seat at the deliberative table, so to speak, we can turn to protests to draw attention to an issue and pressure decision-makers from the outside. As I discuss in Democratic Knowledge: Why There Are No Political Experts, protests have a legitimate and significant role to play in all polities, including deeply democratic ones.