Dems need to oppose vandalism
Democrats are cruising toward an electoral cliff, yet we are too busy to notice because we’re adulating over graffiti. The right to protest doesn’t include the right to pillage. The former is constitutional and the latter crime. Just like there’s no protection for screaming “fire” in a dark theater, there should be no protection to throw bricks, start dumpster fires, smash windows, and play Pablo Picasso all over our state Capitol.
We’re told that these “activities” are for the purpose of proving a point. And we’re okay with this? One should use the freedom of expression — protesting — to prove a point. The point of vandalism? No more than destroying property.
And Democrats pretty much have been standing idly by. Hello? Anyone there? The sound of crickets has been deafening. Too many are scared to speak up, afraid of the small swath of the far left and the mob of Twitter trolls. We may not pay a political price this election cycle, but if we keep this up, we will.
Now I want to be clear. I unequivocally support peaceful protests. I, like nearly all Americans, am appalled with the deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Elijah McClain, and no telling how many others, at the hands of police. I’m appalled that Black people in America make less per hour, have significantly less economic opportunities, are less likely to own a home, and, well, have been getting the short end of the stick for decades.
For too long we have turned a blind eye to the existence of this systemic racism, racial and economic inequality. Although the average voter, even the average protester, probably can’t define “systemic racism,” it doesn’t matter. The mere fact that parents of Black children must teach their kids specific, clearly non-threatening ways to act when stopped by the police, ways that no white child ever has to know, screams systemic racism. It should be no surprise there’s a Black Lives Matter movement, and no surprise people are pissed off.
Should we be exercising every nook and cranny of the First Amendment to express how pissed we are? Absolutely. Should we march? Of course. Should we demand sweeping change now? Most certainly. But use our state Capitol as a canvass for art to make a “point?” Are you kidding? I would hope we all hold our First Amendment rights so dear that such destruction would be seen as a grave offense.
Granted, social change happens, in part, because of radical action. Disruption. But when the overall movement is defined by the fringes — thugs (yes, I went there) — it loses credibility and public support. Suburban moms, blue-collar workers, farmers on the Eastern Plains, and a lot of us others won’t put up with trashing the Capitol. And we shouldn’t.
Some claim the only way to build a house is to burn the “bad” one down. But it’s this very house — a democratic institution — that is the path to reforms that many of us are fighting for. Case in point, the passage of one of the most expansive police reform bills in the country. The very institution that many have defaced without consequence, enacted significant reforms during the 2020 legislative session.
Yet, we’re now being told by some apologists it’s inexcusable to be worried about the trashing of our Capitol when we’re facing all these other justifiably pressing problems. Our elected leaders, and the rest of us for that matter, can walk and chew gum at the same time.
These times are calling out for more than one-off democratic leadership and passing on this opportunity would be a disservice to us all. Too many are trying to ride this out, waiting for the “moment” to pass, effectively saying it’s a phase. That’s a mistake.
To stay quiet is an implicit, actually complicit, condoning that protesting includes wanton criminality. This is not only wrong, it’s bad politics. If we keep this up, it’ll mean jumping off the electoral cliff.
Power to change the law comes with winning elections. Winning elections comes with public support. And to keep that, we democrats must be true to ourselves and the politics. It is reality.