Lawyer's Tea House (Volumes 1-4 Combined Edition)

Author: None
Publisher:
Publish Date: None
Features: The rules of protest have been in place abroad for several years, and I have witnessed many protests. Protest is a constitutional right of citizens in modern society, falling under the category of freedom of expression. It is a way for citizens to express their support or opposition to certain issues. However, like other rights, the exercise of this right must comply with constitutional order and cannot infringe on the rights and freedoms of others. Although the principle is clear, different countries and cultural backgrounds have distinct characteristics when exercising the right to protest.
During my childhood, I experienced the Cultural Revolution, where I rarely missed participating in demonstrations. Back then, the society had already lost its normal order. Even as a "Red Little Guard," I knew that the more disruptive the protest, the more attention it would receive. For example, at the entrance of the city committee building, we demonstrated, demanding the mayor support our battle team. If he didn’t come out, bold boys would throw stones at the windows. In my view, there are two types of protests: those expressing support and those expressing opposition. Regardless of the type, as long as it’s a protest, it seems to have to provoke some reaction.
In the early 1980s, I studied in the United States at the University of California, Berkeley, known as the "paradise of liberals." There, I witnessed American students’ campus protests for the first time. At that time, South Africa was enforcing an apartheid policy, and many countries in the world had imposed sanctions on it. Under these circumstances, Berkeley University engaged in research collaboration with a South African government agency. The students believed that the university’s actions were essentially supporting apartheid, which contradicted American political and moral values. At Berkeley, such protests were perfectly normal. What intrigued me was their method of protest. In front of the university’s administrative building, students had been gathered for days. Sleeping bags were scattered everywhere, some sitting, some lying down. They lay along the path leading to the building, ensuring their bodies did not cross into the road or block the passage. The police, chewing gum and arms crossed, strolled casually. If a protestor’s leg went over the line and disrupted the normal flow of traffic, the police cars nearby were ready to arrest and take them away.
Observing all this, I found it amusing, as if watching a game. Over time, I gradually understood the system and realized that it was indeed a game—a game played strictly according to the rules. Protest is a constitutional right of citizens, but the exercise of this right must adhere to rules. The basic rule is that exercising rights should not disrupt others’ lives or normal public order.
Another memorable protest took place in Memphis, Tennessee. This is where Martin Luther King Jr., a leader of the American civil rights movement, was assassinated. On April 4, 1968, he was shot in a motel in Memphis from across the street. To commemorate this advocate of nonviolent resistance, the modest motel was transformed into a memorial. Opposite the memorial, at the spot where the assassin’s bullet came from, stood a dilapidated red-brick building, resembling an abandoned factory. In front of the building stood a persistent protestor—a Black woman in black clothes, emaciated in appearance. Beside her was a flatbed truck loaded with ragged clothes and supplies, no different from a homeless person. From the banner standing on the truck, I learned that this protestor was not a supporter of Martin Luther King Jr. but an opponent, representing a group that opposed nonviolent resistance. Since the opening of the Martin Luther King Jr. Museum, she has been protesting there, with her political stance written on a large banner: "Resist the Wrong Museum" (the English word "right" also means "correct," so she used "wrong" to correspond).
I call her a "persistent protestor" because she has been demonstrating there for decades. Day after day, a young and beautiful girl has turned into an old woman. Politically, she is a violent extremist, opposing not the government or the assassin who killed Martin Luther King Jr., but the moderate resistance advocated by King. In terms of protest methods, she is gentle, expressing her political views within the bounds of constitutional order. She does not disrupt traffic or interfere with the museum’s operations. When she saw me approaching, she lowered her head and patted the banner beside her, handing me a flyer that primarily advocated violent action against social injustice.
I don’t understand how such a quiet, professional protestor could persist for years without stopping. My companion told me that behind her may be a church or a grassroots organization, using her dedication to express a political stance.
Later, when I shared my experiences with the protesters I saw in the U.S. with Anne, my landlord at Yale University, she smiled and said, "This is the right guaranteed by our constitutional amendments, part of 'peaceful assembly and petition.' Tomorrow, I’ll take you to our clinic to see the protesters." The clinic she referred to was actually a community abortion clinic. In the U.S., abortion is a sharp political issue. "Pro-Life" or "Pro-Choice" represents two entirely different social forces. Anne was a "Pro-Choice" advocate and volunteered at the clinic every week, primarily to pick up women coming for abortions and see them off.
That day, the weather was very cold. I asked, "On such a cold day, will the protesters come?" "Rain or shine," she replied. Sure enough, in the distance, I saw a minivan with the banner "Oppose Killing!" An old man holding a megaphone was shouting. His voice was hoarse but full of vigor. "God made women to be mothers, yet mothers kill their own children—you will be punished!" When we came out of the car, he shouted at Anne, "You’re the devil! You’re an accomplice!" Anne smiled and said, "You’ve crossed the line." The old man lowered his gaze at his feet and muttered, "Sorry," then quickly withdrew his feet from the lawn.
Anne told me that the old man had been protesting there for years. According to city regulations, his car could only be parked at the roadside, and he could not enter the lawn. People were not allowed to use megaphones during rest periods, and they had to take away their trash every day. I jokingly said, "This kind of protest is too restrained." The old man recognized me as an outsider, took out a roll of pamphlets from his coat, and handed them to me, saying, "Nine came yesterday—nine lives! God will not forgive them!"
Inside the building, I watched the old man’s performance from the window. He spoke rhythmically, alternating between using the megaphone to give speeches and reading materials. Even though there was no one around, he still performed with precision.
I have also seen protests that escalate situations. In the summer of 1998, I attended an international conference in Manila, the capital of the Philippines. After getting off the plane, I went to the arrivals hall to collect my luggage but waited for nearly an hour without any movement. Realizing this wasn’t just an efficiency issue, the passengers began asking around. Finally, someone replied in very difficult English, "The luggage can’t come out because the airport ground staff are on strike, demanding higher wages. They’ve locked the luggage in the hold as leverage against the authorities." This left the passengers in a tough spot.
My situation wasn’t too bad because my toiletries were in my carry-on, but my companion had checked all her belongings. We sat helplessly on the motionless carousel, unsure what to do. Hours later, an announcement sounded, telling passengers to go wherever they needed to go, but their luggage would only be released after the authorities and the workers reached an agreement. The Manila taxi drivers were extremely polite, constantly saying, "Yes, madam," because their accents were so strong that "yes, madam" sounded like "yes, mom."
I grumbled, "You’re so fake—holding our luggage while pretending to be polite." The drivers remained humble, "Yes, madam, our workers have no other choice." The next day’s front-page headline read, "Government Shows Tough Stance Against Airport Workers’ Strike." I thought, "Now we’re in trouble—no chance of getting our luggage before going home." It wasn’t until the third day that the government reached an agreement with the protesters, and our luggage was finally released. My companion had to buy new toiletries, which was quite expensive.
Upon reflection, protest as an expression of freedom has deep significance. Expression itself is the purpose, not the social consequences that may arise from it, which are then used as pressure to achieve certain goals. In international human rights documents, the exercise of the right to peaceful petition is explicitly stated to "be exercised in accordance with the law and in a manner consistent with the maintenance of national security or public safety, public order, public health, or morality, or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others in a democratic society." Any exercise of rights that violates these principles is inappropriate. A civilized order of protest is part of a mature democratic system. Therefore, observing different forms of protest is a window into the quality of a nation’s citizens. (P15-18)