Issues & Controversies

Last Updated: February 6, 2012 Protest Movements: Are protest movements effective ways of bringing about social and political change?

Introduction

SUPPORTERS ARGUE OPPONENTS ARGUE Nonviolent civil disobedience in the form of street While some disciplined, focused protests in the past demonstrations, rallies, marches, and sit-ins have a have been effective, street demonstrations have solid history of effectively raising consciousness more recently devolved into noisy, bothersome free- about political issues and changing things for the for-alls lacking organization and unified messages. A better. By working outside the political system, more effective way of bringing about political or protesters are more able to identify fundamental social change would be active political participation flaws and call for dramatic reforms. With the social such as voting or running for office. Furthermore, networking tools of the Internet, protesters are even protests have put a strain on municipal resources by more capable of organizing and sustaining mass requiring law enforcement attention. movements. AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana

Protesters with the group Occupy D.C. march in December 2011 in opposition of rising income inequality. Occupy D.C. was an offshoot of the Occupy Wall Street movement, and was one of many mass protests that arose globally in 2011.

The term "protest movement" conjures for many images of street demonstrations of previous eras. Some of the most notable protests in U.S. history occurred during the 1960s, when Martin Luther King Jr. led marches for civil rights and antiwar protesters demonstrated against U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War (1959–75). Time contributor Kurt Andersen writes, "Back then, when citizen multitudes took to the streets without weapons to declare themselves opposed, it was the very definition of news—vivid, important, often consequential." By contrast, protests in more recent decades have been on smaller, less dramatic scales. Andersen writes, "Credit was easy, complacency and apathy were rife, and street protests looked like pointless emotional sideshows— obsolete, quaint, the equivalent of cavalry to mid-20th century war. The rare large demonstrations in the rich world seemed ineffectual and irrelevant."

The year 2011, however, saw the resurgence of mass protest movements on an international scale, as North Africa, the Middle East, Europe and the U.S. experienced large-scale protests. Some of those movements toppled governments or, as in Syria, led to bloodshed as the government resorted to military force to remain in power. Others spurred heated political debates, rattling establishment politics. In the U.S., the Occupy Wall Street movement—which squared itself against income inequality, unemployment and corporate greed—sprouted protests in cities nationwide. As Andersen wrote in December 2011, when Time magazine picked "the protester" as its person of the year, "'Massive and effective street protest' was a global oxymoron until…it became the defining trope of our times. And the protester once again became a maker of history." [See Occupy Wall Street]

A protest, loosely defined, refers to the gathering of people in a public area, usually on a street or public square, to express opposition to a policy, leader or social or economic trend. Such demonstrations can take many forms and can complement or include other methods of political action like sit-ins, boycotts, labor strikes, picketing and blockades. Protests often take the form of marches through a city, and involve speeches or chants of political slogans. The theories behind the use of protests tend to be closely associated with the strategies of nonviolence and civil disobedience—the idea, embraced by many different thinkers ranging from U.S. writer Henry David Thoreau to Indian independence leader Mohandas Gandhi, that nonviolent civil resistance is the most moral and effective way to bring about political or social change. Despite an ideological foundation in nonviolence, protests have often led to clashes with police or counterprotesters, and some have deteriorated into riots or even spurred violent revolutions. Indeed, the revolution that resulted in the founding of the U.S. began with protests from disgruntled colonists opposing British policies.

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits Congress from passing any legislation that infringes on the right to freedom of speech, press, petition and assembly, is the legal basis of the right to protest. That right is not absolute, however. Various laws and Supreme Court decisions have stipulated that the right to protest can be restricted because of concerns over maintaining the peace, protecting property and ensuring public safety. In fact, questions about where and when demonstrators can legally assemble have been the subject of several Supreme Court cases, most recently Snyder v. Phelps. In that case, the Court affirmed the right of the controversial Westboro Baptist Church to picket at military funerals. [See Supreme Court Affirms Controversial Church's Right to Demonstrate at Military Funerals (sidebar)]

Some critics have recently characterized protest movements as disruptive, inefficient and sometimes dangerous ways of accomplishing political goals as opposed to more conventional methods, such as voting. Are protest movements an effective way of bringing about political, social or economic change, or are activists better off working inside the political system?

Supporters of protest movements argue that demonstrations throughout history have proved effective at accomplishing political, social and economic goals. By working outside the political system and separating themselves from the corruption and complacency of traditional political establishments, proponents say, protesters can bring about more dramatic change. Even if some protests seem unfocused, they can serve as launching pads for targeted and effective movements, supporters say. Furthermore, supporters argue that in the age of the Internet, protesters have become even more capable of organizing and spreading their message.

Critics, on the other hand, argue that protest movements are not effective ways of bringing about substantial change. Instead of bothersome street demonstrations, critics contend, protesters should participate in the political system and utilize democratic institutions by voting or running for office. While some protests of the past may have been organized and dignified affairs, critics say, recent protests have too often devolved into unfocused, radical demonstrations that are a drain on the taxpayer and a strain on law enforcement personnel.

Protest Movements of the 20th Century

Protests have occurred around the globe and throughout history with a wide variety of goals and with an array of results. Some protests have been peaceful; others have led to violence or even revolution. Some of history's most notable protests are:

• Boston Tea Party: In December 1773, protestors opposing the Tea Act, which they felt gave unfair powers to Britian's East India Company, dumped 342 barrels of tea into Boston Harbor. The Tea Party led to a deterioration in the relationship between Britain and its American colonies that ultimately resulted in the American Revolution (1775–83) and the founding of the U.S.

• Suffragist Movement: The battle for women's right to vote in the U.S. involved many marches and demonstrations. In 1916, suffragist Alice Paul led a congregation of the National Woman's Party to the White House, where picketers were arrested by police and physically assaulted. Supporters of women's suffrage hoped that President Woodrow Wilson (D, 1913–21) would urge Congress to pass a constitutional amendment giving women voting rights. Legislators passed such an amendment, the nineteenth, and it was ratified in 1920. • Salt Satyagraha: In 1930, Gandhi led tens of thousands of Indians on a 24-day march to Dandi, a seaside town in India. India was a British colony at the time, and the British controlled the production and sale of many commodities such as tea and textiles. Gandhi led the demonstration to protest a British law prohibiting Indians from making and selling their own salt; at the end of the march the protesters illegally obtained salt from the ocean. That protest and Gandhi's philosophies of civil resistance and Satyagraha— meaning "insistence on truth,"—led to years of similar protests and acts of civil disobedience until the British Parliament finally granted India autonomy with the Indian Independence Act of 1947. [See Protesting and Civil Disobedience (sidebar)]

• Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Civil Rights March on Washington: In the late 1950s and early 1960s, King led numerous demonstrations and boycotts to protest the mistreatment of African Americans in the U.S. In 1963, he led more than 200,000 demonstrators on a march from the Washington Monument in Washington, D.C., to the Lincoln Memorial, where he delivered his famous "I Have a Dream" speech. Historians credit the march and other civil rights protests for the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlawed segregation and unequal voting requirements, along with other institutionalized civil rights violations. King strongly adhered to the principle of nonviolence, a stance that Malcolm X and some other civil rights leaders rejected, arguing that force may be necessary for victory of the movement.

• Vietnam Protests: In the 1960s, U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War became increasingly unpopular. Liberal groups staged numerous protests against the war, but the biggest was in November 1969, when half a million antiwar activists held a demonstration in Washington, D.C. Smaller protests in such cities as San Francisco and London echoed the antiwar demands. Despite mass participation in antiwar demonstrations, the U.S. did not end the war until 1975.

• Muharram Protests: Starting in 1978, massive protests in Tehran, Iran's capital, led to the resignation of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi, Iran's U.S.–backed leader, the following year. About 10 percent of the entire Iranian population took part in the protests, which put Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, an Islamic leader who had been living in exile, in power in Iran. The U.S. has had tense relations with Iran since then.

• People Power Revolution: In the 1970s and 1980s, the Philippines were ruled by a corrupt, repressive and ineffectual regime led by Ferdinand Marcos. In 1986, Marcos declared himself the winner of an election that was widely perceived as fraudulent. Led by Corazon Aquino, the wife of a pro-democracy politician who had been slain several years earlier, hundreds of thousands of opponents of the Marcos regime gathered in Manila, the capital of the Philippines. After some of Marcos's armed forces defected to the opposition, Marcos stepped down and Aquino eventually became president of the country.

• Tiananmen Square: In 1989, tens of thousands of Chinese gathered in public spaces to mourn the death of Hu Yaobang, a Chinese politician who had argued for reform of China's repressive communist government. The gatherings eventually turned into protests against the Chinese government, and a crowd of 100,000 demonstrated in Tiananmen Square in the center of Beijing. On June 4, government troops opened fire on the protesters after the communist regime ordered a crackdown. Estimates of the deaths from the massacre ranged from a few hundred to several thousands. A photograph from the tragedy—that of a lone protester, unknown and unarmed, standing in front of a military tank—became an iconic image for peaceful opposition movements.

• Purple Rain Protest: Also in 1989, widespread street demonstrations in Cape Town, South Africa, preceded parliamentary elections. Activists protested the National Party regime, which had enforced a system of apartheid, or racial segregation, for decades. The demonstration earned the name Purple Rain Protest after police sprayed protesters with water and purple dye in order to make it easier to identify and arrest activists. Protesters wrestled the water cannon from police, however, spraying the National Party headquarters and other government buildings purple. The apartheid regime eventually fell in 1994.

Many other protests marked 20th-century history, including those in Soviet Union satellite states, like the former Czechoslovakia and Poland, that preceded the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. More recently, some protests have descended into violence. In 1999, protesters gathered at the World Trade Organization (WTO) conference in Seattle, Washington. Although many of the protesters were peaceful antiglobalization activists, a contingent of the demonstration were anarchists who sought conflict with police. At a similar demonstration in Quebec City, Canada in April 2001, riots broke out after police allegedly fired rubber bullets at protesters. The property damage and injuries resulting from such demonstrations have fueled the debate over protest movements.

Protests Erupt Around Globe in 2011

In December 2010, 26-year-old Tunisian street vendor Mohamed Bouazizi was harassed by police while trying to sell produce in Sidi Bouzid, a Tunisian town. After failing to get a response when he complained at the provincial capital building, he lit himself on fire in protest. The act set off street demonstrations attended by thousands of people, a rare sight in Tunisia, where President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali had ruled the country with an iron grip since 1987. Protests started in Sidi Bouzid, but soon spread to Tunis, the nation's capital, as thousands protested high unemployment and official corruption. After Bouazizi died from his injuries in early January 2011, protests continued until January 14 when Ben Ali—long perceived to be a corrupt leader—fled the country and an interim government took control. Dubbed the "Jasmine Revolution," the unrest surprised many observers, because Tunisia had long been considered one of the most stable countries in the region.

In what many observers have described as a domino effect, protests in Tunisia inspired similar demonstrations in other Arab countries. In Egypt, Egyptian Google executive Wael Ghonim planned a "day of rage" protest in Tahrir Square, a public space in downtown Cairo, the capital, to protest the death of an Alexandria man, Khaled Said, who, like Bouazizi, had undergone maltreatment at the hands of the police. Ghonim was detained by the police, but that only exacerbated public anger against the regime of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who had ruled the country for three decades. A violent crackdown on demonstrations by the government merely fueled larger protests over the next few weeks. In February, Mubarak relinquished power, temporarily handing control of the state to the Egyptian military, which ruled as the country prepared for new elections.

Over the next few months, protests erupted in Jordan, Iran, Bahrain, Morocco, Yemen, Algeria, Syria and other countries. In Libya, demonstrations led to a civil war that unseated Libyan dictator Muammer el-Qaddafi, who was killed amid the fighting. Europe—which like many Arab countries had been suffering from high unemployment, economic troubles and lack of opportunity for many of its citizens—soon saw its own protests. Demonstrators protested the Spanish government in Madrid in May, and protests in Greece soon followed. Many of those protests were in response to austerity measures—cuts in government spending combined with tax hikes—intended as a reaction to massive debt incurred by European governments. In August, riots broke out in London. Although the riots took a more destructive and violent form than protests in other countries, observers concluded that the unrest stemmed from the same frustrations about unemployment and lack of opportunity for young people as in other European countries. [See European Debt Crisis]

In Russia, protesters gathered in Moscow in late 2011 and early 2012 to call for the ousting of former President and current Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. In early December, the Russian government had held parliamentary elections widely considered to be fraudulent, and protesters urged Putin—who had been the most prominent figure in Russian politics for the previous decade—to step aside and allow opposition politicians to take power and reform what many experts agreed was Russia's imperfect, corrupt democracy.

In the U.S., the most visible protest movement in 2011 was Occupy Wall Street. An economic recession had hit the U.S. in late 2007 and worsened in 2008, when the largest banks in the U.S. were stricken by a devastating financial crisis that led to government bailouts. The banks, bolstered by those bailouts, soon became profitable again, but the economy nevertheless struggled as a result of the crisis, with unemployment reaching 10% in 2010. Many observers had blamed Wall Street financial firms and national banks at least partially for the economic downturn, arguing that greed had led to the irresponsible speculation and lending that caused the financial crisis. In July 2011, the Canadian liberal magazine Adbusters published a poster calling on protesters to "occupy Wall Street." A coalition of liberal groups organized a protest in Zuccotti Park, a small park in New York City's financial district. Demonstrators set up camp in the park and stayed for months, having occasional standoffs with New York City police. Although the Occupy Wall Street movement encompassed a variety of goals, its main slogan of "We Are the 99%" represented a frustration with what protesters saw as growing income inequality in the U.S. As the wealthiest 1% of Americans amassed more and more wealth, the "99%," protesters said, had increasingly struggled to make ends meet.

The Occupy Wall Street movement attracted some criticism for occupying private property and defying city orders to vacate. Additionally, critics lambasted the movement for being disorganized and not having any clear demands. According to some observers, Occupy Wall Street was a liberal reaction to the tea party, a conservative protest movement that had emerged several years earlier to protest what it saw as high taxes and excessive government spending. [See Tea Party Movement] The Occupy Wall Street movement led to various "Occupy" protests in cities across the U.S., such as Occupy Oakland and Occupy D.C. In some cases, protesters clashed with police, who used tear gas and pepper spray to disperse crowds. As pointed out by Kurt Andersen in Time, protesters in the Arab world faced greater risks than those in Europe and the U.S. He writes, "The stakes are very different in different places. In North America and most of Europe, there are no dictators, and dissidents don't get tortured. Any day that Tunisians, Egyptians or Syrians occupy streets and squares, they know that some of them might be beaten or shot, not just pepper- sprayed or flex-cuffed." While police in the U.S. have undergone criticism for using too much force with protesters, clashes between protesters and state police forces in places like Yemen and Syria have resulted in deaths and prompted human rights concerns.

Though recent protests around the world have encompassed wildly different aims and conditions, some observers have noted a common thread—a fundamental distrust of or dissatisfaction with existing political systems. New York Times journalist Nicholas Kulish writes:

Their complaints range from corruption to lack of affordable housing and joblessness, common grievances the world over. But from South Asia to the heartland of Europe and now even to Wall Street, these protesters share something else: wariness, even contempt, toward traditional politicians and the democratic political process they preside over. They are taking to the streets, in part, because they have little faith in the ballot box.

Supporters Argue: Protests Are Effective, Peaceful Methods of Promoting Change

Supporters argue that history shows that street demonstrations have proven effective in achieving tangible and dramatic goals. Time journalist Tim Newcomb writes, "Whether the Tea Party, women's movements—that one took 80 years, but got what it desired and then regrouped for a new effort—civil rights and even the labor movement (weekends, anyone?), large-scale protest movements such as Occupy Wall Street have proven effective in getting their way. This is the most common end for such movements—if an end ever comes."

Today, the organizing tools available on the Internet and through other modern technology have enabled the planning of protest movements and communication of a message to the broader public to be more effective than ever, supporters observe. Supporters note, for example, that movements in Tunisia and other countries have benefited from the networking tools of social media, as protestors took to Facebook and Twitter to voice support and organize. Chrystia Freeland, an editor for Reuters, notes

how easy it has become to transform mass dissatisfaction into mass protest. That was true both in chillingly repressive regimes and in ones where the hurdle to collective action had been thought to be public apathy.… [T]he communications revolution, ranging from satellite television to Twitter to camera phones, has made it easier than ever before to organize protests and to keep them going once they start.

Although critics sometimes urge protesters to express their opinions within the system by voting, the gulf between street demonstrations and the political establishment is what gives protest movements their unique power, supporters say. Salon columnist Glenn Greenwald writes of the Occupy Wall Street movement, "[T]he reason this is a street protest…is precisely because the protesters concluded that dedicating themselves to the President's re-election and/or the Democratic Party is hardly a means for combating Wall Street's influence, rising wealth inequality or corporatist control of the political process." He adds, "[T]he unique value and promise of these protests is that they are independent of prevailing political institutions, and it's difficult to see how these protests can simultaneously be fully integrated into those institutions while preserving that value." Independence from traditional political organization, Greenwald says, allows the "protests to remain real, organic, independent, and passionate."

Some supporters have argued that the physical occupation of space increases the strength of a movement by bonding its supporters together. Sidney Tarrow, an emeritus professor of government at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, writes that street demonstrations and occupations that may lead to standoffs with police are "powerful solidarity-creating experience[s]." He told the New York Times, "People in the same encampments, and people in different encampments, are now in constant contact and can share experiences. They'll build a community. That's why occupation of space is important."

When law enforcement does attempt to disperse protesters, supporters say, the resulting tension often wins not only media attention but also public sympathy for demonstrators, spreading their message even further. Jeff Goodwin, a sociology professor at New York University in New York City, said that attempts such as those made by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg to clear Zuccotti Park "will backfire.…People are having a conversation about what's wrong with the country. The police are not going to dissuade them from protesting or remaining active. It's just going to anger people and radicalize them, and maybe draw new people into the conversation."

Though protests are often criticized for being disorganized or containing too many messages, supporters note that even movements that started out disconnected have resulted in real change. Gary Gerstle, a historian at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee, told Salon that, for example, the labor movements of the 1930s led to the rise of unions and federal jobs programs. Gerstle states, "[W]e do know that past insurgencies that became very important and transformative began in very fragmented, unexpected and surprising ways."

Successful protest movements are underpinned by an influential and inspiring platform of nonviolence, supporters say, which is the key to their eventual victory. Supporters of protest movements argue that nonviolent demonstrations can elevate protesters to a moral high ground, making the wider public critical of any repression of demonstrators. In a study published in International Security, Maria Stephan, a strategic planner with the U.S. Department of State, and Erica Chenoweth, an assistant professor of government at Wesleyan University in Middletown, Connecticut, found that nonviolent demonstrations—such as protests, boycotts and strikes—were more effective in bringing about substantial change in countries like Georgia and Nepal than violent insurgencies in those same countries. They write:

Whereas governments easily justify violent counterattacks against armed insurgents, regime violence against nonviolent movements is more likely to backfire against the regime. Potentially sympathetic publics perceive violent militants as having maximalist or extremist goals beyond accommodation, but they perceive nonviolent resistance groups as less extreme, thereby enhancing their appeal.

Finally, supporters argue that the root idea of the protest—that the masses can enact change through use of their collective voice—is fundamentally democratic and fundamentally American. Time editor Rick Stengel writes, "The root of the word democracy is demos, 'the people,' and the meaning of democracy is 'the people rule.' And [in 2011] they did, if not at the ballot box, then in the streets. America is a nation conceived in protest, and protest is in some ways the source code for democracy—and evidence of the lack of it." He adds that in protests, "[L] eadership has come from the bottom of the pyramid, not the top."

Opponents Argue: Protests Have Become Unfocused Disturbances

Critics argue that while protests such as Martin Luther King Jr.'s civil rights marches or Gandhi's salt Satyagraha movement were focused on one goal, more recent protests are unfocused and undisciplined and thus ineffective. Foreign Policy writer Joshua Keating says of recent antiwar protests, "Rather than organizing around a specific political goal, these marches tend to devolve into general lefty free-for-alls encompassing everything from Palestine to free trade [to] the environment to capital punishment." With such a fragmented message, Keating argues, it is no wonder such protests did little to stop recent U.S. wars.

Similarly, opponents contend that protests have devolved from dignified demonstrations. Contributor James Joyner writes for Outside the Beltway, an online political journal:

Protests reached their zenith during the civil rights movement of the 1960s when a group of literally disenfranchised people were able to demonstrate their grievance in a very visible way. People dressed in their Sunday best quietly marched, listened to speeches, and questioned why the country wasn't living up to its creed that all men are created equal… Eventually, though, this device was expropriated for niche causes and by more radical elements. They became a nuisance and, sometimes, violent. Mostly, though, they were silly and generally attended by the usual suspects, who would show up to protest whatever.

Additionally, in contrast to the orderly protests of the past, recent protests have been overrun by professional protesters who deliberately attempt to incite violence and cause chaos, critics say. Peter Bella, a retired Chicago police officer, writes for the Washington Times that some protests are "designed to provoke, wreak havoc, and create chaos… They want the Internet to be flooded with images of police officers pepper spraying them, running them over with scooters, kicking, punching, dragging and beating them up." Purposeful disorder is not a civilized means of getting a message across, critics say.

Instead of engaging in street demonstrations, protesters should utilize democracy by exercising their right to vote or run for office, critics say. Real change, critics argue, comes from working within pre-established democratic institutions. According to a USA Today editorial on the Occupy Wall Street movement, misbehavior in the finance sector "won't be changed simply by people in parks, especially when the monied interests they are up against are so well organized politically.… By confining themselves to unfocused public live-ins rather than using mass protest and other efforts to attain specific goals through the political system, the Occupiers are only hurting themselves." Indeed, lack of participation in politics can lead to the conditions that eventually spur protests, and responsible participation in the electoral system can prevent them, critics say. According to the Economist, "Many of these aggrieved youth believe that the government has become unresponsive, that their voices have been silenced, and therefore protest is the only option. But this strikes me as a fundamental misreading of the past three years. It is likely that few of the protesters have actually taken part in the more mundane aspects of the system they'd like to take down." The editorial adds, "[P]erhaps the biggest reason young people feel so alienated by their government is because they have removed themselves from the process of choosing it."

Furthermore, critics say, protests have become common occurrences, lacking the impact such movements used to have. Joyner writes, "I find [protests] even more inane since they're so ever-present. Some gaggle of folks are within earshot of my 11th floor office at least once a week, banging drums, blocking sidewalks, and protesting somethingoranother.… These protests remind me of car alarms, which still produce noise but no longer get people's attention."

Protests put a burden on the taxpayer and strain law enforcement resources, critics say. Michelle Malkin, a contributor to the Fox News Channel and a conservative columnist, writes, "The trash generated by the 'Occupy Wall Street' protests keeps piling up. So do the bills." She further notes that protesters "neither sought nor obtained any proper permits at any level…. Instead, city and park officials have been cowed into providing them gratis electricity and camp space lest there be 'conflict.'"

What Comes After Protests Is Most Important, Some Say

Protests can often signal only the beginning of a very long process of change. As Andersen notes in Time, "[I]t took a decade to get from the Montgomery bus boycott to the federal civil rights acts, which were just the end of the beginning." And observers note that even movements as consequential as the civil rights movement do not really end, but undergo a series of transformations.

Since protests are often signals of movements in their very nascent stages, then, judging whether such protest movements "work" can be impossible, observers say. While some protests—such as those in Tunisia and Egypt— led to the overturning of regimes, the effects of others might not be so concrete.

Even with "successful" protests, such as those that have unseated longstanding regimes, the real test, many observers say, is what happens after the street demonstrations are over. Andersen writes, "[T]he protesters, and the rest of us, are discovering that democracy is difficult and sometimes a little scary. Because deciding what you don't want is a lot easier than deciding and implementing what you do want."

The aftermath of protest movements varies—demonstrations such as those in Arab countries have led to debates and conflicts over the future direction of the countries involved. In Syria, the repressive regime continues to hold power by relying on military force against its citizens. Protests such as Occupy Wall Street have steered the national conversation toward income inequality in the U.S. Which protest movements will have longstanding, real success, and whether those movements adopted the right strategies in pursuing their goals, however, will continue to fuel debate.

Bibliography

Andersen, Kurt. "The Protester." Time, December 14, 2011, www.time.com.

Barry, Ellen, and Michael Schwirtz. "Vast Rally in Moscow Is a Challenge to Putin's Power." New York Times, December 24, 2011, www.nytimes.com. Bella, Peter. "This Is What Peaceful Protest Looks Like." Washington Times, October 15, 2011, www.washingtontimes.com.

"Do Street Protests Still Work?" National Public Radio, March 18, 2008, www.www.npr.org.

"Editorial: Time for Occupiers to Turn to Politics." USA Today, November 17, 2011, www.usatoday.com.

Elliott, Justin. "Occupy Wall Street: A Historical Perspective." Salon, October 8, 2011, www.salon.com.

Freeland, Chrystia. "How Anger Took Elites by Surprise." New York Times, December 26, 2011, www.nytimes.com.

Greenwald, Glenn. "Andrew Ross Sorkin's Assignment Editor." Salon, October 4, 2011, www.salon.com.

Joyner, James. "Protests Don't Work." Outside the Beltway, March 5, 2009, www.outsidethebeltway.com.

Keating, Joshua. "Do Protests Ever Work?" Foreign Policy, April 2, 2009, www.foreignpolicy.com.

Kulish, Nicholas. "As Scorn for Vote Grows, Protests Surge Around Globe." New York Times, September 27, 2011, www.nytimes.com.

Newcomb, Tim. "How Do Protest Movements End? They Win or They Fizzle." Time, November 16, 2011, www.time.com.

Stengel, Rick. "Person of the Year Introduction." Time, December 14, 2011, www.time.com.

Stephan, Maria, and Erica Chenoweth. "Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict." International Security, Summer 2008, www.mitpressjournals.org/loi/isec/.

Stewart, James. "An Uprising with Plenty of Potential." New York Times, November 18, 2011, www.nytimes.com.

"This Is What Ineffective Action Looks Like." Economist, October 3, 2011, www.economist.com.

"Top 10 Most Influential Protests." Time, June 28, 2011, www.time.com.

Additional Sources

Additional information about protest movements can be found in the following sources:

Hall, Simon. American Patriotism, American Protest: Social Movements Since the Sixties. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011.

Meyer, David. The Politics of Protest: Social Movements in America. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.

Contact Information

Information on how to contact organizations that either are mentioned in the discussion of protest movements or can provide additional information on the subject is listed below:

Adbusters 1243 West 7th Ave. Vancouver, B.C. V6H 1B7 Canada Telephone: (604) 736-9401 Internet: www.adbusters.org

International Center on Nonviolent Conflict P.O. Box 27606 Washington, D.C. 20038 Telephone: (202) 416-4720 Internet: www.transcanada.com/index.html

New York City Police Department 16 Ericsson Place New York, N.Y. 10013 Telephone: (212) 334-0611 Internet: www.nyc.gov

For further information about the ongoing debate over protest movements, search for the following words and terms in electronic databases and other publications:

Antiwar protests Civil disobedience Civil rights march Occupy Wall Street Tiananmen Square

Citation Information

"Protest Movements: Are protest movements effective ways of bringing about social and political change?" Issues & Controversies, Infobase Learning, 6 Feb. 2012, http://icof.infobaselearning.com/recordurl.aspx?ID=1686. Accessed 16 Aug. 2017.