Introduction
Black Lives Matter is an important event that has influenced the reality of the modern United States arguably more than COVID-19. The social causes and prerequisites of this protesting movement have been thoroughly discussed and studied due to the high rate of controversies and polarized opinions on its circumstances. As such, Hooker’s article on the topic aims to comprehend the nuanced reaction to the recent Black Lives Matter rallies against police brutality. In turn, Mir and Zanoni claim to dedicate their research to highlighting and confronting anti-Black discrimination in the existing theories, behaviors, and organizations. Although both articles articulate the repressive actions of the police and the violent response of the protesters, they differ in their view of the scale of the movement, as well as its significance.
Black Lives Matter
The descriptions of the participants of the Black Lives Matter movement in the articles could be compared. For example, in Hooker (451), “unarmed black persons—men, women, and children, queer, straight, trans” are mentioned as traditional protesters of the past who differ from the modern, somewhat violent Black thinkers. In this article, the actions of Black people contain the disruption of retail stores and public property. Hooker believes that this behavior is the expressed anger against the systematic racism and striping of the Black persons of their democratic freedom in the US. In turn, Mir and Zanoni (4) claim that protesters are “not just in the United States but across the world.” Their actions are interpreted in the paradigm of global history of discrimination rather than local conflict. Mir and Zanoni (3) emphasize “the Black community’s outrage” as the significant behavior of the movement’s participants. Hence, although both articles center around the aggressive demand for justice of the protesters, they differ in their understanding and description of the actions of these people.
There are other people involved in the enactment of the protesters’ will. Namely, Hooker (449) mentions “disproportionate police repression against citizen protesters” of “violent, predominantly white … officers.” Apart from the authorities, Hooker describes white observers’ public that acts with condemnation of the “riots” and behaves in a way that could be explained by the notion of systematic racism. Mir and Zanoni in their article, concentrate on the role of the police in the Black Lives Matter movement, also describing the actions of its participants as aggressive and their behavior as prejudiced. Namely, Mir and Zanoni (4) argue that officers act as though “Black lives are degraded and devalued.” Hence, the studies somewhat coincide with the view of the forces outside of the protesters’ domain.
As a result, each article tells a somewhat different story about the event, even though it is based on the same facts. While Hooker describes a local American uprising caused by police discrimination, Mir and Zanoni claim that Black Lives Matter is a global movement against prolonged racism. Hence, these studies lead readers to varying conclusions about the events: the first one presents the uprising as a fight for democracy, while the second is an outrage against the existing system of discrimination worldwide.
Conclusion
To conclude, the articles demonstrate a difference in the comprehension of the meaning, cause, and purpose of the Black Lives Matter movement. Although both studies describe the oppressors in similar terms as violent and aggressive systemic racists and protesters as angry individuals, they form varying conclusions. Thus, the movement is viewed as a resistance to the American system of discrimination in the democratic organizations and, in other research, as a protest against global discrimination.
Works Cited
Hooker, Juliet. “Black Lives Matter and the Paradoxes of U.S. Black Politics.” Political Theory, vol. 44, no. 4, 2016, pp. 448–69. Crossref, Web.
Mir, Raza, and Patrizia Zanoni. “Black Lives Matter: Organization Recommits to Racial Justice.” Organization, vol. 28, no. 1, 2020, pp. 3–7. Crossref, Web.