I Will Not Bury the Lead: Or, What I Will Say, to Whom, and How, about the Protests

#1. I will focus my energy on speaking out against state-sanctioned white supremacist lynching. I invite my fellow white folk to do the same. There would be zero protests—peaceful or otherwise—if there were not an epidemic of Black and Brown Bodies being slaughtered with impunity by a militarized police force that was engineered from the start to police Black Bodies and terrorize Black People into submission. That is the first and last issue. Everything else is secondary and/or a distraction.

#1.1. I do have empathy for those who are affected—in myriad ways—by protests that have tragically turned violent. I also care and have thoughts about the protests. I just refuse to be sidetracked into a debate about protest tactics until I know who I’m talking with and what we’re talking about. I won’t debate protest with you unless you have proven that my #1 is your #1, too.

#2. Because of #1, before I engage in any debate on social media about the protests, I must know we agree on what the problem is. I will check your social media accounts and see where you stand—and, more importantly, where you stood, on #1, before you started expressing [pick your emotion] about the [pick your noun to describe the protests, etc.].

#2.1. Also because of #1, we’re done before we start if your social media feeds say anything that even approximates these words:

“I was/we were/it was cool to be with them until they started looting.”

Because you were never “with them.” If property damage made you decide not to care anymore—or as much—about slaughtered Black and Brown Bodies, then your “solidarity” was cheap at best, and likely nonexistent. If you first started spending your emotional social media capital when some windows were smashed, but you haven’t invested a single Tweet (let alone actual time or energy) on agonizing over the constant terror inflicted on Black and Brown Bodies and Communities by a militarized police force propping up a tyrannical white supremacist System, then you were never with “them” in the first place. So what’s the point in discussing how “they” lost “you” when “you” were never with “them” at all?

You are entitled to your feelings. You’re just not entitled to my time engaging in a conversation about how “best” to protest about an issue you haven’t shown you care that much about.

Because #1 is the issue. I will discuss #1 with anyone, anywhere, anytime, even if you’re new to the discussion. I confess I have much to learn from folks of all kinds regarding #1. 

But until I know you care about #1, I won’t engage on the issue of protest. Again: There would be no protests if not for #1. And it demands all our attention.

#2.2. Also because of #1, the debate stops the minute I hear anything about “a few bad apples.”

Don’t get me wrong: I know some good cops. And because policing in the USA was constructed to keep families like mine safe from “people like them,” I’m mostly not afraid of cops. I respect the courage and sacrifice of all first-responders. I’m not “anti-cop.”

But I will not pretend the “problem” is “a few bad apples.” There are some—probably many—“good” cops who do their best, risking their lives to serve and protect, in the midst of a law-enforcement/criminal-(in)justice/correctional-industrial-slavery system (System) that is invested in white supremacy from its start and to its core.

“A few bad apples” is a failed analogy. There are some good apples trying to stay good in a basket of worm-infested produce that is aflame in a dumpster full of burning dogshit. That makes me appreciate the good ones even more, but I cannot allow my appreciation to distract me from the problem.

Perhaps a better analogy comes from my privileged travels around the globe, where people from every walk of life have told me something like, “We don’t hate Americans, we hate America.” I don’t hate cops, but I hate the System built to protect my white children at the expense of Black and Brown Bodies. I also am not the target of that System, so I refuse to judge those who can’t or won’t always draw the distinction.

#2.3. Also because of #1, the debate stops the minute I hear anything about “black-on-black crime” (BOBC).

(a) Most crime is intra-, not inter-racial, because of intimacy and segregation. We can have a sociological/criminological debate about that some other time. That’s not really the point, because (b):

(b) No white person talks about BOBC when BOBC is happening. It only comes up when Black people are murdered by the police and rise up in anger. It’s another distraction/deflection tactic, and I won’t engage it.

(c) Black Communities respond to BOBC all the time. We just don’t care or pay attention.

(d) The solution to BOBC, as with most issues in the USA, is full-scale investment in Black Empowerment, a reparations-scale Marshall Plan for communities we have underdeveloped, devastated, divested from, and ignored for 401 years.

So any talk of BOBC, and this conversation is dead in the water.

#3. Once we’ve established that #1 is your top priority, and you haven’t engaged in the distractions of #2, then—and only then—will I be willing to engage in a conversation about protest tactics.

#3.1. I have little to say, because I have lots of words but not a lot of blood in the game regarding #1. I’ve mostly avoided #2, but I protected myself and my family for 15 years as a pastor in the whitest denomination in the USA by keeping mostly quiet about #1 because I got shat on over and over by folk who thought I was “too political” for being 1/100th as “political” as I wanted, and I believe the Gospel called me, to be. But that’s another story, and this is not about me. I’m called mostly to keep my mouth shut unless I am speaking in full-throated support of those who struggle for Black Lives to Matter for once, again, more, and forever.

#3.2. My B.A. is in Peace Studies, a comprehensive study of sources of conflicts and actively nonviolent means to resolve them. Of course I don’t “condone” violent protest—much less “encourage” it. I am, however, far less concerned about property damage than I am about the murder of Black and Brown Beloved Children of God. But I’m not unsympathetic about the loss of livelihoods. I’m particularly empathetic about the fear in which many of my friends live as their communities experience this violence. I worry for my friends’ lives first, and, secondarily, their property and jobs. That is a perfectly legitimate emotion, and I feel it too—from the comfort of my suburban home.

#3.3. I agree—to a point—that violent protest may not be strategically helpful. I’m pragmatic at heart, and because the System still listens to me, I want to see effective, strategic protest.

I’m also aware that literally nothing Black and Brown People have done to protest the System has done a damn thing to move the hearts of those who belong to, benefit from, and prop up the System. Every form of Black and Brown Protest bothers white folk.

“I was with ‘them’ until ‘they’ started looting” is a bold-faced lie. The truth is: “‘You’ were 'with' ‘them’ until ‘they’ knelt for the anthem, marched without a permit, gave a speech at the Oscars, elected a Black president, made a movie or performed a comedy routine you couldn’t handle, said ‘Black Lives Matter’ out-loud, spoke too loudly, dated your white daughter/son, preached a prophetic sermon, blocked a highway, prayed for justice in front of the legislature, tried to vote, and on and on and on and on…”

As in: You were never with “them,” no matter the “strategy.” That makes conversation about the “strategic value” of any form of protest a little empty.

#3.4. Violent protest is profoundly “American,” and it has, indeed, been strategically successful.

The craziest asshats in Congress belong to a caucus that is literally named for a violent protest in which a disguised horde trespassed onto corporate property and destroyed [at present-value] millions of dollars of merchandise in Boston Harbor. In response, the legitimate legal authorities waged war. Which ones are our heroes today?

The Revolutionary War was almost exclusively won by guerillas who sabotaged, stole, and destroyed (often private) property.

More recently, the Queer Movement was catapulted by Drag Queens throwing bricks at the police—because the police had been raiding, raping, beating, and otherwise terrorizing marginally “safe” Queer spaces, and the Queens were no longer having it. If not for Stonewall, many of my dearest friends would not be legally married. (By the way, most of the Queens of Stonewall were People of Color. Intersectional rioting is as American as collard greens and bratwurst.)

So sometimes it works. And it’s certainly understandable. Even if I don’t personally condone it, I have trouble accepting the argument that it’s never right and/or effective, in light of our history.

On the other hand, the peaceful demonstrations of the Civil Rights Movement accomplished some great things (legislatively). They were also met by fascist violence, no matter how peaceful the march--a pattern being repeated today. Also, many of their accomplishments are being systematically rolled back by Congress, executive action, and the Supreme Court. So strategically, it’s hard to say what works better.

I’m still an advocate for active-nonviolent protest, but I’m also aware that for most of my white cohort, nothing Black or Brown Communities do in protest makes a damn bit of difference, so I’m not going to judge.

I won’t say some Black and Brown People engaged in violent uprising is right, and I also won’t say it’s categorically wrong. I will always value people over property, and until Black Lives Matter as much as every other life, let alone as much as private property, I’m not going to invest too much energy over property damage.

Keep in mind: The US has been waging war against Black and Brown Bodies for centuries. In a war zone, collateral property damage is sad but normal. I wonder if part of the reason “we” get so uncomfortable about protest and property damage is because US soil hasn’t known a declared war since 1865. Of course, Black and Brown Communities have been under siege for centuries, but white folk have mostly been able to avoid the collateral property damage of war. Most of Europe has burned and been rebuilt countless times. Jerusalem probably wins the wager. And unless you care as much about collateral property damage in Kabul and Baghdad as you do about the same in Minneapolis, your bias is showing alongside your historical privilege and/or ignorance. That doesn’t make it right; it just puts it in perspective.

Also, the reason we have to hear and say “Black Lives Matter” is because Black Lives were officially personal property from 1619-1865, and then many became state property by virtue of the 13th Amendment and the prison-industrial-slavery complex. So talk of “property” has a sting to it that we should also be aware of.

#3.5. A lot of the current street violence is, apparently, being provoked and accelerated by outside forces with dubious and/or downright evil motives. Largely white people from the extremes (apparently mostly from the far-“right” white supremacist wings) are apparently coming in from out of town and causing trouble—race-war-enthusiasts, anarchists, bored corona-stir-crazy suburbanites, etc.

That’s crazy and wrong and should be condemned wholesale.

#3.6. It’s hard to tell who’s who, but it absolutely makes a difference. Some people are burning shit down because they are justifiably angry about 401 years of “American” white supremacist tyranny. Some people are burning shit down because they are bored or, much worse, because they’re actively trying to provoke a race war. One of these things is not like the other. It’s hard to tell who’s who, but it matters. What a mess.

#3.7. Because of #3.6, it probably makes sense to arrest anyone actually caught destroying property, with an emphasis on those who initiate the destruction. Arrest them, don’t shoot them. Use tear gas, pepper spray, rubber/plastic bullets, etc., as an absolute last resort. Get them off the streets, let them cool down a bit—or at least hold them until the streets cool down a bit—and then decide who to charge with what.

If I were D.A.—and this is why I’ll never be elected D.A.—I would probably not charge any Black or Brown person caught destroying or stealing property during these protests. I would, however, charge any white agitator, from either end of the political spectrum, and especially those from out of state. But that’s just me. 

The point is, it makes sense to calm things down a bit, and it also makes sense to focus punishment on those who stir up trouble without having borne the pain that sparked the protests in the first place. I’m aware that’s racial profiling—but it would be super ironic if white folk suddenly started to care about that.

That said, people matter more than property, so obviously I categorically condemn any violence against other people—civilians, press, or cops—and believe perpetrators of violence against persons should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Badge or not. That’s kind of the whole point here: Murder is wrong.

But I damn well wish cops who murder would be prosecuted with the same intensity as cop-killers. Otherwise, we're just repeating the narrative and sowing the seeds. Unfortunately, our laws structurally aggravate crimes against people in uniform, and that should change. Murder is murder, no matter who is on either side of the weapon.

#3.8. I have profound empathy for those who live in and/or are impacted by collateral violence somehow associated with protests over white supremacist police brutality and murder. I confess my empathy is on a scale—like everyone else’s—and I’m more worried about folks in the line of literal fire, those whose livelihoods depend on impacted community businesses, those who have to close their windows to keep out smoke and tear gas, etc., than I am about folks who just don’t like to see this stuff on TV. But yes, it is possible to be concerned about the [whatever you're calling it] while also caring most about what matters first.

But, as I’ve said repeatedly, I won’t invest that empathy in dialog about protests with you unless your concern about property damage and other collateral concerns follows way behind a demonstrated, actual, heartfelt, and historical concern for the murder of Black and Brown Beloveds-of-God at the hands of the police.

Which brings us back to #1. Rinse and repeat until clean.