‘It felt like history itself’ – 48 protest photographs that changed the world

The Guardian

Protest can change everything. Which is why governments around the world want to suppress it. In a week when thousands in the US expressed their fury over Roe v Wade, we look back at some of the images that helped rewrite laws and change the way we think.

Governments tend to define democracy as narrowly as possible. The story they tell goes as follows: you vote; the majority party takes office; you leave it to govern on your behalf for the next four or five years. (...)

We have seen what happens if we leave politics to governments. Fairly elected or not, they will, without effective public pressure, abuse their power. (...)

Trust in governments destroys democracy, which survives only through constant challenge. It requires endless disruption of the cosy relationship between our representatives and powerful forces: the billionaire press, plutocrats, political donors, friends in high places. What challenge and disruption mean, above all, is protest. (...)

A government that cannot tolerate protest is a government that cannot tolerate democracy.

Such governments are becoming a global norm. In the UK, two policing bills in quick succession seek to shut down all effective forms of protest. (...)

In the US, state legislatures have been undermining the federal right to protest, empowering the police to use catch-all offences such as “trespass” or “disrupting the peace” to break up demonstrations and make arrests. (...) In Russia, a new law against “discrediting the armed forces” has been used to prosecute dissenters engaging in actions as mild as writing “no to war” in the snow. Similar draconian laws are being imposed by governments in many other nations.

Why do governments want to ban protest? Because it’s effective. Why do they want us to accept their narrow vision of democracy? Because it makes our power ineffective. (...)

The extraordinary people in these images understand this – from suffragettes picketing the White House in 1917 to Patsy Stevenson being manhandled by police at last year’s Sarah Everard vigil; from relatives of those killed at Amritsar in India in 1919 to those taking to the streets after George Floyd’s murder in the US.

Almost everything of importance is disintegrating fast: ecosystems, the health system, standards in public life, equality, human rights, terms of employment. (...) Business as usual is a threat to life on Earth. Disrupting it is the greatest civic duty of all. (...)

Complete article with photos

Tags: #protest #pictures #photographs #china #tiananmen #tank_man #abortion #abortion_rights #ireland #democracy #freedom_of_speech #strike_action #great_britain #police #policing_bill #us #united_states #right_to_protest #russia #george_floyd #sarah_everard #pussy_riot #india #amritsar #amritsar_massacre #civil_rights_movement #alabama #racism #discrimination #birmingham #martin_luther_king #mlk #gezi_park #turkey #barbara_kruger #poland #rosa_parks #Thich_Quang_Duc #vietnam #israel #gaza #occupied_territories #palestine #palestinians #Emma_Sulkowicz #rape_culture #march_on_washington #egypt #tahrir_square #mexico #may_day #black_power #olympic_games #march_on_montgomery #handmaids #euromaidan #kyiv #kiev #ukraine #stonewall #gay_rights #standing_rock #dakota_access_pipeline #native_americans #indigenous_people #thailand #rubber_duck_protest #japan #tokyo #vietnam_war_protest #vietnam_war #narita_airport #war_protest #south_africa #soweto #soweto_young_lions #apartheid #earth_day #czechoslovakia #prague #russian_tanks #Dubček #pakistan #Notabugsplat #sweden #Växjö #neo-nazi #neo_nazis #ocasio-cortez #tax_the_rich #colombia #bogota #LGBTQI+ #woolworth #whites_only #germany #hitler #holocaust #posner #lviv #prams #Jan_Rose_Kasmir #south_korea #hong_kong #umbrella_movement #sudan #Alaa_Salah #jamaica #royalty #republican_protest #Greta_Thunberg #climate_strike #sufragettes #Arlen_Siu #Sandinistas #nicaragua #black_muslims #police_violence

I Invented Gilead. The Supreme Court Is Making It Real.

I thought I was writing fiction in The Handmaid’s Tale.

Margaret Atwood (The Atlantic)

(...) Although I eventually completed this novel and called it The Handmaid’s Tale, I stopped writing it several times, because I considered it too far-fetched. Silly me. Theocratic dictatorships do not lie only in the distant past: There are a number of them on the planet today. What is to prevent the United States from becoming one of them?

For instance: It is now the middle of 2022, and we have just been shown a leaked opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States that would overthrow settled law of 50 years on the grounds that abortion is not mentioned in the Constitution, and is not “deeply rooted” in our “history and tradition.” True enough. The Constitution has nothing to say about women’s reproductive health. But the original document does not mention women at all. (...)

Women were nonpersons in U.S. law for a lot longer than they have been persons. If we start overthrowing settled law using Justice Samuel Alito’s justifications, why not repeal votes for women?

Reproductive rights have been the focus of the recent fracas, but only one side of the coin has been visible: the right to abstain from giving birth. The other side of that coin is the power of the state to prevent you from reproducing. The Supreme Court’s 1927 Buck v. Bell decision held that the state may sterilize people without their consent. Although the decision was nullified by subsequent cases, and state laws that permitted large-scale sterilization have been repealed, Buck v. Bell is still on the books. (...)

Thus a “deeply rooted” tradition is that women’s reproductive organs do not belong to the women who possess them. They belong only to the state.

Wait, you say: It’s not about the organs; it’s about the babies. Which raises some questions. Is an acorn an oak tree? Is a hen’s egg a chicken? When does a fertilized human egg become a full human being or person? “Our” traditions—let’s say those of the ancient Greeks, the Romans, the early Christians—have vacillated on this subject. At “conception”? At “heartbeat”? At “quickening?” The hard line of today’s anti-abortion activists is at “conception,” which is now supposed to be the moment at which a cluster of cells becomes “ensouled.” But any such judgment depends on a religious belief—namely, the belief in souls. (...)

It ought to be simple: If you believe in “ensoulment” at conception, you should not get an abortion, because to do so is a sin within your religion. If you do not so believe, you should not—under the Constitution—be bound by the religious beliefs of others. But should the Alito opinion become the newly settled law, the United States looks to be well on the way to establishing a state religion. (...)

The Alito opinion purports to be based on America’s Constitution. But it relies on English jurisprudence from the 17th century, a time when a belief in witchcraft caused the death of many innocent people. (...)

Similarly, it will be very difficult to disprove a false accusation of abortion. The mere fact of a miscarriage, or a claim by a disgruntled former partner, will easily brand you a murderer. Revenge and spite charges will proliferate, as did arraignments for witchcraft 500 years ago.

If Justice Alito wants you to be governed by the laws of the 17th century, you should take a close look at that century. Is that when you want to live?

Complete article

Tags: #abortion #abortion_rights #freedom #dicatatorship #books #atwood #reproduction #womens_rights #constitution #sterilization #forced_sterilization #reproductive_rights #human_rights #religion