The Art of the Counter Protest

Invariably, protests seem to be viewed as the domain of left-leaning individuals – “taking it to the streets” has, for quite some time, not been regarded as a conservative tactic for effecting change or, perhaps more accurately, preventing change. If asked why protests are not common among the right, a conservative would probably respond by claiming that, as eminently practical people, his fellow conservatives refuse to “waste” time by acting on the streets in a such a manner that will probably have no tangible effect on the issue at stake.

Further, there are often overt class considerations at work in a conservative’s reluctance to wage ideological guerilla warfare among the commoners on the street. Why focus one’s attention on the peasants who roam the streets in small cities such as Providence – even that part of the city where an Ivy League University is located – rather than on the government officials, congressmen, lobbyists, et al, whose decisions can more immediately affect the course of our country?

I will explain why exactly it is that, although a traditional conservative’s criticisms are fairly cogent, they do no apply to the art of counter-protesting.

First and foremost, a good counter-protest has the express intent of confounding the initial protestors’ message and confusing their would-be audience. In other words, a counter-protestor seeks to reduce the effectiveness of the initial protestor as the latter attempts to win a victory in the court of public opinion. For, often times a protestor, such as the anti-Iraq War protestors at the corner of Thayer Street and Waterman Street that I will address later, will attempt insidiously to create the aura of consensus on an issue by artificially aggrandizing the amount of people who support or care deeply for their cause. Such protestors have, apparently, heeded the words of the late community organizer and activist, Saul Alinsky, who wrote in Rules for Radicals:

“[I]f your organization is small in numbers, then do what Gideon did: conceal the members in the dark but raise a din and clamor that will make the listener believe that your organization numbers many more than it does.”

Such a tactic is, in effect, used by those protestors who desire that a driver “honk to end war” or do a similar thing that attempts to give an image of community solidarity behind a cause toward which, in all likeliness, most people are apathetic. Therefore, a good counter-protest would attempt to confound the message and confuse the would-be audience, in order to nullify the protestors’ actions.

Case in point: On September 26, October 3, October 10, and October 17, members of the Brown College Republicans have successfully infiltrated and degraded anti-Iraq War protests that were held by local left-wing activists and several Brown University students. By brandishing signs such as “honk to end this protest”, “Americans hate Iraqis, withdraw now”, “honk to bomb Iran”, “genocide is good! withdraw now”, “I am protesting”, and “I like platitudes”, those counter-protestors greatly reduced whatever effect the initial protestors would have had on the community members and their outlook toward the Global War on Terror in general, and Operation Iraqi Freedom in particular.

Second, a tactful counter-protest can often attract new members to a cause, in either active or passive capacities. At Brown University, and probably at other left-dominated universities in the country, the President and his foreign policy are highly unpopular and even derided on a fairly regular basis. But a little courage and a lot of consistency in presence can go a long way in drawing out those members of the community who may happen to agree that an aggressive post-9/11 foreign policy is vital to our national security and the best means by which liberty and peace can be realized by more members of the human family.

Believe it or not, many people do in fact recognize satire and irony when they see it. Moreover, they often will appreciate tasteful humor when they see it, especially if it is in the public sphere, on the streets. One must understand the reality that, for most people, work and family – rightly so – occupy much of their time, and so the ability to participate in political activities that require thick skin and free afternoons are limited largely to college students, academics and professional peaceniks.

As a consequence, a well-staged counter-protest can serve as the best way to proffer a competing point of view into the public struggle for ideological supremacy, and to achieve said supremacy. Think of it this way – would a passer-by be more sympathetic to a pro-war point of view if all he saw were anti-war activists on a street corner, emboldened by their many platitudinous slogans, who appeared to be receiving many honks from operators of automobiles? Or, would he be more sympathetic to a pro-war point of view if he saw a group of young anti-anti-war protestors, who had clever signs satirizing the initial anti-war protestors, and who seemed to have pointed criticisms of peacenik mentalities?

Third, and I cannot stress this enough: counter-protests are largely desirable and successful because they normalize what may be seen as radical points of view in certain communities. As most levelheaded persons know, supporting the War in Iraq is not an extreme position. It is certainly a sub-majority view, but many millions of Americans still support the initial liberation, and oppose immediate withdrawal.

Yet, as I have mentioned earlier, many students at Brown University and in the greater Providence community are seemingly unaware, or refuse to acknowledge, the fact that reasonable, intelligent persons can support the Bush Doctrine of attacking, unilaterally if necessary, nations who harbor terrorists, foment terrorism, and present a danger to the world community, and of attempting to form stable democracies/republics in the aftermath of removing the previous leaders.

A good counter-protest, then, can demonstrate that the anti-war crowd does not have the intellectual high ground on this issue, and that rational, compassionate persons can in fact support a war. Heeding Plato’s dictum that “only the dead have seen the end of war,” it is quite possible that such persons are seen as being wiser than the peaceniks who seek a heavenly utopia on earth, only to find that they created an earthly hell.

Counter-protests can be very effective, as I have attempted to make clear in this article. However, the two most important aspects of an effective counter-protest are the intended audience and the chosen means. Know thyself and thy community, is the most appropriate wisdom that I can impart from my limited days as a seeker of social change. For if one counter-protests in such a way that the audience cannot even comprehend the intended message, then no good has been accomplished. Further, if one stages a counter-protest and unwittingly strengthens the opposition by coming across as conservative jerks, then harm has likely been inflicted on the cause.

And please never let yourself be spiritually defeated. There will be trying times, for certain, but never lose heart. As American General Nathanael Greene stoically said during the American War for Independence, “We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again.” You must realize the transcendental nature of your mission, and never lose the passion that will, inevitably, help you to change the world and contribute mightily to the Common Good. Virtue, as it were, never comes without a price.