Journal of Hate Studies
Abstract
In recent years, organizers of mass protests have used social and digital media to form large physical gatherings. These media allow protesters to exchange texts and visuals quickly across vast distances, providing means to organize protests widely and efficiently. Although social media and digital communication have played a constructive and positive role in citizen protests (Gerbaudo, 2012), lately these media have witnessed polarized political discourses. This article examines the 2017 Women’s March, the largest protest in the U.S. history (Fisher, 2019), as a case study of an effective but a polarized protest. I analyze the discourse related to the march based on its mission statement, media reports posted on the march website, and two authoritative books about the march, including a volume published by the march organizers. In my analysis, I use insights of South Korean Philosopher Byung-Chul Han in ways that may help illuminate the problem of polarized online political discourses. My analysis shows that the march succeeded in unifying diverse allies, but it did not engage the other side of the political spectrum. Polarized political discourses weaken governance and encourage a climate in which intolerance and hate find sustenance. A protest is not just an exercise in declamation but also an appeal to a disagreeable other. To support this point, I discuss practices by a master protester, Mahatma Gandhi, who unfailingly reached out to a disagreeable other. I briefly describe his philosophy of nonviolent protests, his three exemplary protests, and discuss Gandhi’s relevance for present-day protesters.
Recommended Citation
Dave, Anish
(2021)
"#MassProtests: The Abjuring of the Other and Lessons from Gandhi,"
Journal of Hate Studies: Vol. 17:
Iss.
1, Article 5.
DOI: 10.33972/jhs.202
Available at:
https://repository.gonzaga.edu/jhs/vol17/iss1/5
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.