{"id":4774,"date":"2016-07-20T21:05:12","date_gmt":"2016-07-20T21:05:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/?p=4774"},"modified":"2016-07-21T21:08:02","modified_gmt":"2016-07-21T21:08:02","slug":"what-anti-trump-activists-can-learn-from-chicago-68","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/what-anti-trump-activists-can-learn-from-chicago-68\/","title":{"rendered":"What anti-Trump activists can learn from Chicago ’68"},"content":{"rendered":"

David Farber<\/a>, University of Kansas<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

So far, anti-Trump protests at the Republican convention in Cleveland have been relatively small in number, with marches in the hundreds, not thousands, and mostly peaceful.<\/p>\n

On the campaign trail, however, anti-Trump activists have, on a few occasions, as in San Diego, turned confrontational and even violent.<\/p>\n

Based on the research in my book<\/a>, \u201cChicago \u201868,\u201d on the effect of mass protests on elections, anti-Trump grassroots activists would be wise to avoid angry confrontation that might lead to violence and focus instead \u2013 as most have \u2013 on getting progressive sympathizers involved in the electoral process.<\/p>\n

The obvious case in point, here, is the protests that took place at the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago.<\/p>\n

Protesters at that convention had a right to be angry. In 1968, the presidential nominating process had been rigged. The citizens\u2019 right to make their votes and their voices heard had been trampled. Party bosses rejected voters\u2019 overwhelming support for the antiwar candidacies of Eugene McCarthy and Robert Kennedy, nominating instead Hubert Humphrey, a candidate who had won not a single primary.<\/p>\n

In that fraught moment in American history, as thousands of demonstrators \u2013 peaceful anti-war protestors and radical revolutionaries alike \u2013 came to Chicago, they were met with violence. Chicago\u2019s police, directed by Mayor Richard J. Daley, laid into them with nightsticks, fists, mace and tear gas. Reporters and television crews were not spared.<\/p>\n

In Chicago, the right to assemble, the right to free speech, the right to a free press, all took a beating. In 1968, democracy itself seemed on trial.<\/p>\n

\n \"\"<\/a>
\n Chicago Mayor Daley at the 1968 DNC.<\/span>
\n Library of Congress\/Warren K. Leffler<\/span><\/span>
\n <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The result<\/h2>\n

What happened next \u2013 if lessons can be learned from history \u2013 should give pause to those who might now, in 2016, deploy militant, confrontational \u201cdemocracy in the streets\u201d tactics to challenge the legitimacy of Donald Trump\u2019s candidacy at the convention or on the campaign trail.<\/p>\n

In 1968, some 89 million Americans had watched the convention and its attendant protests on television. They had seen the police brutally attack the demonstrators. During the worst of it, as television networks broadcast violence into Americans\u2019 homes, the demonstrators had chanted<\/a>: \u201cthe whole world is watching.\u201c They had expected their fellow citizens to be repulsed by the police brutality, to be moved to join them in demanding greater democracy.<\/p>\n

They were wrong.<\/p>\n

Chicago Mayor Daley stated<\/a> that he had received more than 135,000 letters supporting his use of police \u2013 and only 5,000 complaints. Public opinion polls verified his claim<\/a>. Only 10 percent of white voters believed that the police had used too much force on the protesters, while 25 percent believed the police should have been tougher. On the other hand, 63 percent of African-Americans thought the police had been too violent.<\/p>\n

Senator Ribicoff protests \u2018Gestapo tactics\u2019 at the 1968 Chicago convention.<\/em><\/p>\n

In the immediate aftermath of the convention, white voters fled the Democratic Party, blaming liberals for somehow creating an atmosphere of lawlessness. Humphrey dropped nine percentage points in polls. They aligned themselves with the \u201claw and order\u201d candidacies of Republican Richard Nixon and Independent George Wallace. Indeed, Wallace came within just seven percentage points of Humphrey in post-convention polling<\/a>. Wallace, infamous for championing white supremacy, had told voters that he\u2019d run over any demonstrator that tried to get in his way.<\/p>\n

Protests, law and order, and elections<\/h2>\n

In 1968, like today, Americans were tired and scared of violence.<\/p>\n

Rioters had burned city neighborhoods. Tens of thousands of Americans had died fighting an unwinnable war in Vietnam. Assassins had gunned down two of America\u2019s greatest leaders. A majority of Americans just wanted the death and destruction \u2013 whatever its cause \u2013 to stop. They were far less concerned about the Bill of Rights and democratic practice than they were with order and security. Richard Nixon understood Americans\u2019 fear. He promised to restore what he called the \u201cfirst right of every American\u201d \u2013 \u201cto be free from domestic violence.\u201d Nixon rode that message to the White House.<\/p>\n

Donald Trump hopes to do likewise. Even more than Nixon, Trump feasts on voters\u2019 fears<\/a>. Disorder, violence and chaos are his allies. Thus confrontational protesters, whether at the Republican convention or on the campaign trail, are more likely to help his candidacy than to hurt it. Trump wants voters stirred up, angry and afraid. Disorderly and confrontational protesters play into his hands.<\/p>\n

\n \"\"
\n Anti-Trump protesters face police in Cleveland.<\/span>
\n REUTERS\/Andrew Kelly<\/span><\/span>
\n <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

After the 1968 Chicago convention debacle, a leading anti-war organizer, Todd Gitlin, warned<\/a> his fellow \u201cmovement\u201d activists to be wary of the \u201cfetishism of the streets.\u201c With hard-won knowledge of democratic practice, Gitlin emphasized that raucous demonstrations and public confrontations with the police might feel empowering for protesters but too often did not benefit their cause.<\/p>\n

Similarly, civil rights organizer Bayard Rustin told his fellow activists at the Atlantic City Democratic convention in 1964 that they needed to understand the difference between protesting and politics. This distinction remains pressing for contemporary activists, as well.<\/p>\n

Confrontational protest politics have a critical role to play in moving people from ignorance and apathy to understanding and empathy. Social movements, especially when organized by people locked out of normal political channels, depend on that process.<\/p>\n

But presidential political campaigns demand a different kind of democratic practice. In a political moment \u2013 when a concrete policy decision is possible, or an electoral campaign is to be decided \u2013 democratic activists have to find a way to win what is possible, not simply voice their outrage.<\/p>\n

Based on my historical scholarship, grassroots activism aimed at getting more progressive voters to the polls will be a far more effective tactic than angry street protests, whether at the convention or on the campaign trail. To defeat Trump, knocking on doors, not chanting in the streets, is more likely to win the day.<\/p>\n

\"The<\/p>\n

David Farber<\/a>, Professor of History, University of Kansas<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

This article was originally published on The Conversation<\/a>. Read the original article<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

David Farber, University of Kansas So far, anti-Trump protests at the Republican convention in Cleveland have been relatively small in number, with marches in the hundreds, not thousands, and mostly peaceful. On the campaign trail, however, anti-Trump activists have, on a few occasions, as in San Diego, turned confrontational and even violent. Based on the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":40,"featured_media":4775,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[46,4],"tags":[482,778,479,699,777,475,420,779],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4774"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/40"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4774"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4774\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4776,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4774\/revisions\/4776"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4775"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4774"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4774"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4774"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}