Part 2

This is so because when people peacefully band together to achieve positive change, that change will eventually arrive.  The power of the collective, united human spirit to guide its destiny toward greater equality, democracy, and justice can be temporarily impeded, but it cannot be forever beaten.

But what do demonstrations in oppressive regimes where public gatherings are usually met with the fatal force of the military or police have to do with us in Canada?  Plenty.  These events teach the skeptics among us two things:  first, protests do change the course of history;   second, we must resolutely defend our right to protest peacefully.

Recall just a few months ago when critics derided Toronto’s G20 protestors for trying to effect change through demonstrations.  “Protests achieve nothing,” they jeered.  “If you go out and protest, then you’ve got to accept the risk that the police may beat you or arrest you, so quit complaining.”  These detractors had no sympathy for the cause or the fate of the protestors.

Even once image after image, account after account, revealed shocking police abuse of power during the G20, these critics seemed to regard the incidents as excusable exceptions.   The entire country should have been on the verge of revolt, so to speak, at least to denounce the actions of the police and the complacency of our government.  Yet none of that happened. The apathetic sentiment continued, “Why bother protesting?” “Protests may be a necessary ‘evil’ in dictatorships or in countries where people have no other means of participating in government, but they are a waste of time and unworthy of protection in Canada.”

In other words, while oppressed people are justified in demonstrating against state tyranny, people living in democracies should not indulge in such vulgarities. Or, if they do protest, they should accept a little police brutality.

These conclusions run counter to our democratic principles.

The right of individuals and groups to voice their opinions directly, openly, and through the most basic method of participation in demonstrations is a fundamental element of democracy, is essential for its survival and instrumental to both attaining and promoting it.

Without people’s desire to participate, democracy is rendered meaningless.

Demonstrations are particularly important in capitalist democracies because they give voice to disenfranchised members of society, allowing them to partake in democracy alongside the more powerful in a manner that is more accessible than making submissions to Parliament or writing policy papers. No other form of democratic participation offers this crucial benefit.

Demonstrations give people a sense of belonging and solidarity, which helps to strengthen their resolve and determination to make change.

When properly conducted and properly reported in the media, demonstrations grant visibility and exposure to issues that are otherwise ignored.

Specifically, the annual demonstrations during the G8/G20 summits send a message to leaders about the priorities of large segments of society:  focus on the environment;  don’t abandon the poor;  reinforce Aboriginal rights; stop corporations from committing or enabling human rights violations in other countries which we would not tolerate in our own democracies.

If Canadians and Americans, or, for that matter, Egyptians and Iranians avoid protests for fear of being arrested, assaulted, detained and threatened by the state, or for the pessimistic view that nothing will change, then, indeed, nothing will change.   Democracy will never be attained nor, once attained, will it survive without people’s ability and desire to participate directly in their own governance.

Martin Luther King Jr. said, “There is more power in socially organized masses on the march than there is in guns in the hands of a few desperate men.” That conviction holds as true now as it did sixty years ago.

Of course, it is perhaps for all these same reasons that so many people, the police, and the state often fear and attempt to curtail demonstrations.

It is, therefore, never more important to protect our democratic rights to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom from unlawful and abusive police (state) interference with our rights than when people voice dissent and try to participate, peacefully, in democracy. To punish them for their participation is an attack against democracy.  If we reserve demonstrations only for dictatorships, we in the free world will surely lose our own liberty.

Every Canadian must defend and value our right to protest peacefully.  We owe it to our fellow human beings in the Middle East.  And our democracy depends on it.

(To see a short list of demonstrations that changed history…or at least, gave it a helping hand, click here: http://justicerequiresempathy.wordpress.com/?p=140&preview=true)

Watching the events unfolding in Egypt is emotionally draining. I observe them as a third party to both, America and Egypt – I am Polish. (That also means something – I remember army tanks rolling through the streets of my hometown during anti-communist protests in 1981.) At the same time, I have very close ties with both of the places – I lived in Egypt, I have friends there who are close to my heart, and I intend to go there again. But, I am living in America with my American husband and it is my home now. So what have I learned here?

I have grown accustomed to the fact that major political events in the world will automatically include American involvement, whether openly supportive, resistant, or both, depending on the economic and strategic interests of the US.  The revolt in Egypt has been no exception.  International public opinion has been strabismal, with one eye watching the demonstrations and the other following the responses of the American administration.  In the first few days of demonstrations, Hillary Clinton called for an “orderly transition” to greater democracy in Egypt, a position that was echoed by her European colleagues.  None of them, however, went so far as sending envoys to Cairo, the Administration’s next step. Frank Wiesner, former US ambassador to Egypt, was dispatched to inform Mubarak that he should not run for reelections in September; nor should his son. The White House has also reached out to the opposition.

Ambassador Margaret Scobey met with Mohammed El Baradei and a few other opponents of Mubarak to test the waters. More “envoys” from America to Egypt are currently under consideration. And finally, the phone-calls from President Obama and his deputy, new statements from Hillary Clinton, and discussions of reducing military aid to Egypt made it clear that America is going to have its say on the situation in Egypt.  Meanwhile, the Egyptian people on Tahrir Square know they are being watched by the rest of the world. Many of the signs photographed and filmed by foreign journalists have been written in English, expressing deep levels of frustration and disappointment.  But, the protesters are also eagerly watching the reactions of the world, and America in particular.  They are not going to stop their protests, but their expectations, like their hand-held signs, are up in the air.  

Is it enough to overthrow Mubarak’s regime? The press headlines commenting on the last days’ events make it obvious that a lot depends on the decisive or indecisive stance of the American government.

As more blood has been shed on Tahrir Square, more support for the Egyptian uprising grows among the average American. Comments posted on blogs and newspaper sites are, for the most part, urging the White House to be more bold in condemning Mubarak’s regime and its assaults on the Egyptian people.  Although many Americans see the tradeoffs of such an open confrontation (after all Mubarak did provide “stability” in the region), nevertheless the pressure on President Obama to decisively act is growing.

Demonstrations in some American cities and petitions, such as the “Open Letter to President Obama in Support of the Egyptian People” (http://www.petitiononline.com/egyltr/), are adding to that pressure.  But as much as I, like many other people, want to see the Obama administration act more decisively (I, too, signed the open letter) I’m somewhat ambivalent and wonder:  How long is America going to play the world’s savior?