I confess to being (pleasantly) surprised; I was too skeptical.
The protests that began with the killing of George Floyd seem to be defying the historical pattern for street action. As I write (morning of June 23, 2020), they have neither fizzled out nor launched a self-defeating backlash. Thousands of whites, many with their children, have joined the protests in towns large and small across the country. Clear majorities of Americans have told pollsters that they agree with the concerns of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) protesters. Major institutional leaders, including heads of major corporations, have rushed to acknowledge racism and to take a virtual, sometimes a literal, knee in solidarity–even the NFL. And there appear to be some successes beyond charges against specific officers on the horizon.
Why have these protests have done so well so far in broadening their appeal when so many other takings to the street–Occupy Wall Street, anti-Iraq War, anti-Vietnam War, the 1968 Chicago convention clashes, the ghetto “rebellions” of the ‘60s, and so on–did not? And what are their chances for bringing significant change?
What Makes This Time Different?
Many commentators point to the Floyd video, but such brutal videos are common. Rodney King’s beating was televised; so was Walter Scott being shot in the back. Neither sparked this sort of movement. The first led to a race riot, including gun fights between Korean-American shop owners and looters, that took 63 lives; the latter to comparatively small protests. Gruesome as it was, the Floyd video was, sad to say, not that distinctive.
Here are three other speculations about why this time seems different.
Donald Trump. Donald Trump is the Bull Connor of 2020. Repeatedly, he has said or done something that created sympathy for the protesters. Organizers of the Civil Rights Movement knew the political power of being seen on nightly TV and in the morning newspapers as innocents victimized by bullies. Cue Donald Trump. Additionally, many anti-Trumpers have found the BLM protests to be a great opportunity for action.
Covid-19. Covid-19 has bared the cumulative, fatal inequalities of American society. But this injustice is not novel. What is novel is that tens of millions of people who would otherwise be in class or at work or, in the evenings, preparing for class or work, have unscheduled time. The protests beckon.
Better organization reduced violence. Early on, peaceful daytime protests were followed by nighttime violence and looting, even raids on shopping malls. After a couple of days, the destruction seemed to subside. Did police get reassigned from confronting protesters to protecting property? Did looters run out of targets? Or, did the protests get more organized? (One march through Berkeley was clearly managed by folks wearing SEIU union insignia.) The public increasingly saw pacific demonstrators bullied by authorities or in some cases menaced by armed vigilantes.
Now What?
So far, surprisingly good politically. But there is still time. The protests could peter out from loss of interest or Covid infections or loss of public sympathy. Some young protesters on television have said, roughly, that they will march every day until the end of structural racism, or reparations, or abolition of the police. If so, they will be still marching with their grandchildren.*
There is time for the backlash that Trump seeks. So, far, interpersonal violence has come not from the protesters but from overactive police and, fatally, from right-wing shooters. But developments like the gun-play in Seattle’s “liberated” zone echoes the disorder that emerged in Occupy encampments and led to their forcible dismantling.
What, then, is next? If and when do the protest leaders declare victory and turn from the streets to long-term institutional work?
The Civil Rights Movement had definable, attainable, short-term goals–integrated seating on buses, a chain store hiring blacks, voters free to register–which allowed activists to pocket wins and turn to the next goal, each a step toward greater national change, like the Voting Rights Law. Andrew Young, a veteran leader, recently commented, “it took us three or four months in Birmingham to organize. It gave us time to define what we really thought would work, and how to go about it. We knew what we wanted. We knew what victory was. That’s the only thing I’m concerned about” with the present movement. What is the definable, attainable, pocketable “win” here? What follows?
Vox recently asked four BLM leaders what was next. They expressed some defined goals in policing, but none talked about converting the energy into bigger change through broader politics–bigger changes that will not only allow young children of color to grow up unafraid of the police, but also to grow up with better chances for education, good health, safe neighborhoods, and economic security. Meeting these goals requires deep institutional changes in government policies, in laws, in judicial decisions. They require national politics.
The example of the 2017 Woman’s March leading to the 2018 election’s Blue Wave could be doubled if BLM marches produce a Blue Tsunami in November. Would a Democratic takeover end structural racism? No. It wouldn’t even end police malpractice. But, at least social change would reverse the direction of the last three-plus years and start moving forward again.
————————————————————————————–
Other people’s views on what might make this time different are here.
* One young protester told a reporter that she would march until, “like they do in other countries,” the protests force the government to step down. This does not happen in the U.S. and won’t. The only events comparable that come to mind are not promising: Murderous white mobs displaced some southern state and town governments during Reconstruction. Most of the recent examples abroad, during the Color Revolutions and Arab Spring uprisings, did not end well.
Update, Sept. 25, 2020: Losing Support
“The [9/11 to 9/14/20] poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds that 44% of Americans disapprove of protests in response to police violence against Black Americans, while 39% approve. In June, 54% approved…. The poll [also] finds the percentage of Americans who believe police violence unequally targets Black Americans and that greater consequences for police brutality are necessary have also fallen from June….” [Source]
One might argue that the street action went on too long while the political action did not start soon enough.
P.S. March 8, 2021: Columnist Charles Blow of the New York Times reported more evidence of a sharp drop in support for BLM, even among African-Americans. The violence is surely the most likely explanation for the drop in support–and, in all likelihood, the loss of a dozen Democratic house seats in the 2020 election. Too much out-of-control street action for too long.
Update, May 24, 2021: Accelerating Loss of Support
A report on longer trends in support for Black Lives Matter shows continuing declines since a peak in mid-2020 (circa George Floyd). The drop was especially sharp among whites, but also notable for other ethnic groups. The only ones that expressed as much support for BLM as they had even before the Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, and George Floyd cases were Blacks and “Others.” The accompanying news story refers to “fickleness” in public opinion. Perhaps, but it is more likely that, as I noted in the first update, “the street action went on too long” to sustain BLM’s political influence.
MADE IN AMERICA 
