Norfolk’s Black Lives Matter Protest: Responses to the July Editorial

I was reading the July issue of the Norfolk Now and, at first glance, was very pleased to see that the recent Norfolk BLM protests had made the cover. However, once I began the column written by Colleen Gundlach, I was quickly disappointed in her take on the event and larger issue.
To praise Norfolk for its peacefulness (and essentially condemn more aggressive protests) is dismissive of the emotion and anger felt by protestors, and an attack on what people are fighting for. In addition, by completely ignoring the fact that Norfolk is 97 percent white (as of the 2000 census) and has all of zero policemen, Gundlach neglects to point out just why Norfolk managed to be so “peaceful.”
There are countless instances of policemen instigating the violence that Gundlach condemns, and yet she draws more attention to the death of David Dorn than she does to that of George Floyd.
Gundlach’s approach mirrors the manner in which children are taught that Martin Luther King Jr. is “good,” while Malcolm X and the Black Panthers are “bad,” and is in no way a neutral piece. On that note, I am happy to recommend my colleague Cady Stanton’s recent articles in The Hill and the Winsted Phoenix, and her Twitter feed (@cady_stanton).
I was extremely proud of my town for participating in the Black Lives Matter movement, and it disappointed me immensely to read the way in which it was portrayed in this column.
—Amelia Lockwood

It was refreshing to read Colleen Gundlach’s uplifting piece in last month’s Norfolk Now. Today, we read of rallies and protests laced with violence and political undercurrents that undermine any possibility for positive outcomes. Our Constitution guarantees the right to peaceful expression, a right that needs to be honored and protected by our political and law enforcement leaders.
It is wonderful to live in a town where our neighbors express their opinions peacefully and with respect for differing points of view. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.” 
It is my hope that as a nation we will find a way to follow Dr. King’s advice and begin to address the problems that face our country—problems that are far more fundamental and run much deeper than incidences of police violence.
—Jennie Brown

About the only point I can bring myself to agree with in last month’s View about the Black Lives Matter protest on the village green published in last month’s edition of Norfolk Now is that violence is unacceptable in civil discourse. But rather than acknowledging the desperation that led to such violence in cities all over our country over the past months, the author instead repeats some of the most overplayed and tiresome themes of the Fox News playbook by elevating the privileged to a place of victimhood (and the sole upholders of the Constitution), while demonizing and dehumanizing the faceless black mob. Why did the writer decide to name only white victims of violence while reducing nameless black people to a monolith? (Every single human being in those “mobs” has a human story that led him or her to this brink.) Why didn’t she call the “death” of George Floyd what it was: a murder at the hands of the police? As Jelani Cobb wrote in The New Yorker,the protesters have carried out “acts of lawlessness that mirror the excesses of those charged with upholding the law.” The author justifies her sentiments by quoting no less a figure than Lincoln. The next time she considers the Black Lives Matter movement, she might also keep in mind the words of another great American, Martin Luther King Jr.: “A riot is the language of the unheard.”
—Ben Sosland

Colleen Gundlach brought up several interesting points in her View about the June 8 gathering on the green to protest the continued murders of unarmed African Americans and support the efforts of the Black Lives Matter movement. The theme of the value of peaceful protest was clearly articulated throughout, and I particularly appreciated the historical references.
However, I take issue with the absence of any historical explanation of why some African Americans have expressed their outrage in violent destruction of property. These expressions today echo those in places like Newark and Watts in the early 1960s, several northern cities after the assassination of Martin Luther King in 1968, and in Los Angeles in 1992, to name a few. It is important to recognize the irony in the fact that crimes against property were being perpetrated by people whose ancestors had violence done against them as pieces of “property” on this continent from 1619 to 1865.
Additionally, Gundlach’s review referred to the 13th Amendment, which, she said, prohibited “slavery and involuntary servitude.” That’s absolutely correct. However, this excerpt ignores the parenthetical phrase in the amendment “except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.” This disregards the seed that sprouted a system where African Americans account for 13 percent of the nation’s population, and 38 percent of the nation’s prison population (FBOP stats 6/27/20).
She also talked about how peaceful change involves dialogue and compromise. If one looks back over the compromises in this country’s history, starting with eliminating any mention of slavery in the Declaration of Independence, to the 3/5 compromise, to the compromises leading up to the Civil War, to the compromises that first excluded most African Americans from Social Security (domestic and agricultural workers were exempt at the outset), and so on, one might understand the rage at being targeted by law enforcement from the get-go, and spending centuries at the short end of compromise.
I am a great proponent of peace and do not want my words to be interpreted as meaning that I want to see our cities on fire once again. What I do want to promote is a deeper and fuller understanding of what is behind the rage we see exploding in our cities. Given these historical contexts, I even wonder why more members of the African American community aren’t participating in the violence. If supporters of a more peaceful society really want to see less violence, they must work toward an antiracist society. The goal of that work must be to break down old systems of oppression in order to build up new, more equitable systems of economy, law, education and politics that will make our children proud to live in a country that actually lives up to the ideals of its Constitution.
—Tom Vorenberg

Soccer Season to Begin

The Norfolk Soccer season is about to start, with social distancing in mind. We will begin the third week of August, so now is the time to sign up with the Northwest Connecticut Recreational Soccer League, at nctrsl.com. If you have any questions, email norfolkrecsoccer@gmail.com. We would love to have all the kids signed up early in the month. All children are welcome, and no experience is necessary. Teams are  Pre-K to K, Juniors (grade 1-2), Lower (grade 3-4), Upper (grade 5-6) and Senior (grade 7-8). Any parent interested in coaching should please contact us, since we can always use a helping hand.
Most importantly, we want to wholeheartedly thank Jess and Matt Bannerman for their eight years of service in managing Norfolk’s soccer program.  They have developed a program that has taken kids with no soccer or sports experience and given them the opportunity to understand teamwork and leadership, while also having fun. They have kept the program running smoothly, collecting and distributing uniforms, patching the nets, marking the fields, purchasing a storage unit to store the equipment, managing the coaches, securing the teams, running countless meetings and so much more—and of course planning the highlight of the year, the end-of-season BBQ.
We are thrilled to be taking over the Norfolk soccer recreation program.
—Marinell Crippen, Peter Crippen, Chris Gomez