My response to white people who didn’t like some of the tactics used during the July 4th protest at the ICE Detention Center in Baldwin, Michigan

Last weekend I wrote a post about the No Detention Centers Michigan protest that took place at the Geo Group’s detention facility in Baldwin, MI, which you can read here.

There were several white people who attended the protest who were not happy with those who were engaged in a disruptive action, nor were they happy with how the crowd safety team (which included me) handled the situation. In my July 5th article, I wrote: 

I mention this, because there were several people who not happy with those that were involved in the disruptive tactic at the GEO Group protest on Friday. One white woman told me directly that she felt that what they were doing was “not what you do at a peaceful protest.” I responded by saying that disruptive tactics have been central to all social movements throughout US history and that just because disruptive tactics are often confrontational, they are completely appropriate. 

In the past few days the same white women who were unhappy with those using disruption as a tactic, have been escalating their frustration by attacking No Detention Centers Michigan, GR Rapid Response to ICE and myself. I don’t much care about any attacks directed my way, but I do take issue with the attacks against No Detention Centers Michigan and GR Rapid Response to ICE. Both of these autonomous, grassroots groups have been doing amazing work in Michigan since 2018 and 2017, respectively.

So how do we make sense of the idea of a “peaceful protest” and how do we interrogate our own privilege and possible complicity during protests that the police or the state refer to as “peaceful?” 

First, it is important to come to terms with the use of the word peace, which for many people means the absence of conflict. If we think about peace in terms of a protest, then we have to ask ourselves if there is no conflict. The very nature of a protest, whether we are talking about climate change, US militarism or police violence against black people, there is always an inherent conflict. People protest because some injustice has occurred, because they want to express some grievances, grievances often directed at the very institutions that are at the heart of the conflict. Therefore, we can conclude that a protest cannot be peaceful, since there indeed is a conflict. 

Second, it is important that we frame the issue of ICE attacks against immigrants as a form of racism, White Supremacy and state sponsored violence against immigrants, and it is especially important that we frame it through the lens of power. Systems of power, like ICE, have the backing of the legal system, the political system and propaganda systems like news media, popular culture and schooling, all of which present a general narrative that the oppression of undocumented people is necessary. All of these systems of power protect and legitimize ICE and very function of ICE. In addition, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) are just one clear example of structural violence, which we are conditioned to not think about. As Alex Vitale, author of the book, The End of Policing, states: 

Well-trained police following proper procedure are still going to be arresting people for mostly low-level offenses, and the burden will continue to fall primarily on communities of color because that is how the system is designed to operate – not because of the biases or misunderstandings of officers.

Third, the presence of police at a protest, means there are people with guns, tasers, mace, clubs, tear gas, rubber bullets and a whole range of other high tech weapons. As anyone who has ever participated in a protest knows, it doesn’t take much for the police to use any number of these weapons. In fact, one could argue that the police are looking for a reason to use such weapons. However, even if they don’t use these weapons, there is always the threat of their use, which means that whenever cops are at a protest it CANNOT be a peaceful protest. 

Fourth, calling a protest peaceful, when protests are anything but peaceful, is a way for the system(s) to dictate the narrative about what is happening. When the police say a protest was peaceful, they mean that those protesting obeyed their orders, did nothing to disrupt business as usual, and often it means that protest organizers cooperated or collaborated with the police. In fact, one could argue that if this happens, then it is not really a protest, instead it becomes a performance. Such forms of “protests” are almost always organized by white liberals to make other white people feel good about themselves, without having to interrogate systems of power and oppression.

If people want to denigrate groups like No Detention Centers Michigan or GR Rapid Response to ICE then they need to interrogate why they are attacking these groups. I would argue that attacking organizations that have a history of resistance against state violence ends up benefiting the state or other systems of power. 

Additionally, No Detention Centers Michigan and GR Rapid Response to ICE both center the voices and lived experiences of the affected community, and work directly with groups like Movimiento Cosecha, and only do the work that groups like Cosecha are asking allies to do. 

These are the things that I believe that white liberals need to interrogate. Otherwise, they end up doing the work of systems of power and oppression, whether or not they are even aware of it.