- It would seem that the true function of demonstrations is not to convince the existing State authority to any significant degree. Such an aim is only a convenient rationalisation.
The truth is that mass demonstrations are rehearsals for revolution: not strategic or even tactical ones, but rehearsals of revolutionary awareness. The delay between the rehearsals and the real performance may be very long: their quality – the intensity of rehearsed awareness – may, on different occasions, vary considerably: but any demonstration which lacks this element of rehearsal is better described as an officially encouraged public spectacle.
- Either authority must abdicate and allow the crowd to do as it wishes: in which case the symbolic suddenly becomes real, and, even if the crowd’s lack of organisation and preparedness prevents it from consolidating its victory, the event demonstrates the weakness of authority. Or else authority must constrain and disperse the crowd with violence: in which case the undemocratic character of such authority is publicly displayed. The imposed dilemma is between displayed weakness and displayed authoritarianism. Almost invariably, authority chooses to use force. The extent of its violence depends upon many factors, but scarcely ever upon the scale of the physical threat offered by the demonstrators.
Here in Seattle these protests are just seem to be a the highest form of virtue signaling. Most people protesting in Seattle don’t want a revolution or really any actionable change. If they wanted that they would just put up a ballot initiative that forbids any state or local government authority from negotiation or any contracts with police unions. That would easily get a large set of the issues solved and allow for future resolution of some of the other issues. But I don’t see any real legislative action happening.
I mean, the CHAZ seems to be a pretty clear example that the protests are, in fact, a surprisingly successful rehearsal of a revolution. Sure, not everyone wants it, but the point of the demonstration is to show people what is possible in a very non-theoretical way. Given the proliferation of other autonomous zones in other cities, it seems that people are learning from Seattle's demonstrations. In quite a few cities, electoralism has failed to control the police: many of these demonstrations are being held in cities with Democratic leadership and the police have universally stepped up the brutality in response and defied or used loopholes in rules and laws meant to restrain them. It's perhaps understandable that demonstrators aren't excited about more of the same approach. A ballot initiative that passes is only as effective as the people implementing it, and politicians seem wishy-washy on the whole defund/abolish point still. See also this reading on legibility which is a salient issue at this point. Black people in particular have been denied state legibility systematically; describing their needs in language the state understands is thus a challenge. A friend looked into recalling the Seattle mayor by ballot and found that it'd be a pretty difficult process, especially given social distancing right now. Not sure how similar that is to getting a ballot initiative, though.
I saw in the news today a former Marine who was deployed to L.A. after the Rodney King riots talking about how his "heavily armored" Marine unit would have gotten wasted by today's police, if the level of armament is any indication....the police have universally stepped up the brutality in response...
The recall elections and referendums are not simple. It requires a real effort to get this stuff done I think 256k signatures + buffer for challenges and you can bet whoever works the effort will be beaten arrested and otherwise harassed but that’s what it takes to get real change.