(A good, in-depth analysis of last week’s protest in Burlington – promoted by JDRyan)

Vermonters of all stripes have taken on the task of reviewing, considering, spinning, and judging right or wrong the actions of both protesters and police outside the New England Governors and Eastern Premiers Conference in Burlington on Sunday, July 29th (“J29” in the parlance of what was once commonly called the “anti-globalization movement”) (see what they did there? clever).  There are three particular aspects to this conversation that I’ve seen given very, very little thought- particularly in the press but in the casual conversations I’ve heard and facebook posts I’ve seen- and I’d like to note them here.

First, the behavior of the police.  The Burlington Police Department and their sympathizers (both in the public and, most importantly, in the media) have been in high gear all week spinning the actions and events in front of the hotel, where protestors attempted to block a driveway and keep Conference attendees from leaving (which prompted the BPD to use both physical force and the firing of “non-lethal” weapons against the demonstrators).  First we were told that a protestor attempted to punch a cop, which prompted the BPD’s aggressive response.  When that allegation fell apart like a perfectly cooked pork rib we were then told that actually a protestor attempted to reach for an officer’s baton, which prompted the BPD’s aggressive response.  No sooner had BPD Chief Schirling made this allegation when he (and the press) were provided with a photo from the incident that showed with no uncertainty that no such attempt to grab a baton took place.

To me, this constant re-editing of the facts shows exactly what happened: the BPD reacted with un-justifiable force on regular citizens and are merely trying to spin a narrative that protects both their image as well as their (possible) legal defense should their victims take up a civil suit against them.  There were actual people behind all that riot gear; if there were a reasoned, justifiable story behind their actions we could just ask them “what prompted you to begin firing munitions at near point-blank range on unarmed citizens exercising their Constitutional right to free expression and political speech?”

Which brings up the latest spin from Battery Street: Chief Schirling now says

he believes protesters arrived outside the hotel intending to provoke a confrontation.

“There are a variety of things that seem to point that way,” Schirling said Thursday. “At the scene in front of the driveway at the Hilton there are people dressed in black bandanas wearing goggles. There are people that have milk, which was eventually used to decontaminate folks who had been sprayed with pepper spray. That’s a tactic that we’re familiar with from watching other protests unfold.” (VPR, 8/3/12)

OK, lets think about this, Chief.  The tactic of showing up to political demonstrations dressed in black or wearing a mask over one’s face began in Germany in the mid 1980’s and today is used in nearly every corner of the globe as a means of concealing one’s identity in order to avoid police harassment, intimidation and repression for those engaging in political activism against the State (such as the alleged visit to Burlington area activists by the FBI just days before the #J29 demo).  That activists arrived at the protests wanting to conceal their identity for purposes of protecting their political safety or prepared for the possibility of tear gas being deployed on them (which it was) is in no way a predictor of what they were or were not prepared to do as part of the protests.  It just means they were aware of the possibilities and prepared for them.

Or, maybe not.  Maybe we are willing to say that arriving at a protest dressed in a certain manner points to exactly how one is planning to behave.  In which case we can look at the BPD arriving in head-to-toe body armor and carrying rubber bullets, tear gas and batons and predict exactly what they were planning to do as part of the protests as well.  Personally, I’d guess that the BPD either had marching orders from higher up (likely a federal agency like the FBI or DHS) to react to protestors in such a manner, or they simply found themselves with all these fancy toys in their hands and jumped at the earliest provocation. It would seem that either they entered the situation intent on using such force or they reacted to the situation in a completely un-justifiable manner.  Either which way, the BPD clearly over-reacted and are now merely trying to cover their asses.  Completely typical and predictable, if we look at any other comparable protest situation.

Secondly, the reality of what the meeting itself actually is.  Completely absent from any of the coverage or analysis I’ve seen in the mainstream press (and often in alternative press as well) are any questions what so ever about the validity of representative’s of the State (supposedly working on behalf of the public good) in private, closed door meetings with corporate interests (certainly working on behalf of private, profit-driven interests) in order to plan and map out economic, environmental, social and political maneuvers.  The conference attendees have worked tirelessly (and it’s been merely repeated, rather than analyzed, by the press) to frame the meeting as a means towards addressing major social and political issues for our region.  This, of course, is the same line as all these international summits (WTO, IMF, EU, WEF, etc).  But if the purpose is for the greater good of society, and if the premise is that we’re living in a free and open society, for what purpose should such meetings be behind closed doors?  Do we not have public record laws and expectations of accountability and transparency? The basic assumption that the meeting itself, and it’s secretive format, were inherently legitimate is not only a fallacy but a complete and total failure on the part of the press, which is supposedly acting as a Fourth Estate in ensuring the strength and vitality of our supposedly free political system.

Without questioning the underlying assumptions of the very nature of the meeting itself the press proves itself inept at accomplishing their task of informing and the population at large proves itself incapable of basic critical thinking skills (no matter what conclusion one finally draws about the validity of such meetings).

Finally, the success of the demonstration itself.  More often than not, the narrative has been “environmental activists protested a possible tar sands oil pipeline through New England”.  While it is true that many, if not all, of the people at the #J29 protest were against said pipeline, and environmentally focused groups such as 350.org were a part in organizing the demonstrations, it is also true that people from throughout New England who are part of the #OWS movement, as well as indigenous peoples from Quebec, striking students from Montreal, and social justice activists of all kinds were who was protesting in Burlington on that Sunday.  Every time a “journalist” reported on “environmentalists” as the defining characteristic of the protestors they either willfully or ignorantly wrote an incorrect story which completely failed to keep us informed and educated on the events of the day.  And, in my opinion, they are important events; that over 500 people from throughout New England and Quebec come together in Burlington speaks to not only the building strength (some 13 years after the Battle of Seattle fired the opening shot) of a social justice movement that aims for a more equitable, more democratic, more free and more sustainable world but of the rich diversity of issues which passionately move people from different locations, different ages, racial and economic backgrounds to come together, to act in solidarity with one another and to speak with a singular voice against the status quo of violence, greed, oppression, and personal gain.

The protests in Burlington for #J29 were not a ‘success’ in that the meeting was stopped, or at least opened up to public participation or scrutiny; but they most certainly were a success for their small piece in the continued resistance that is happening everyday, throughout the world, against greed and global capitalism.