Tactical Rage: On Violence and Resistance in Minneapolis
The denizens of Minneapolis are currently undergoing a violent attack on and occupation of their city by over three thousand heavily armed ICE and Border Patrol agents dispatched to the city by the Trump administration, over the strenuous objections of Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey. This military assault on the city by “Homeland Security” has already resulted in the murder by ICE agents of one unarmed person, 37-year-old Renee Good, a US citizen; the shooting by ICE agents of at least one other individual; and untold incidents of harassment, intimidation, kidnapping, and the use of brute force.
This attack poses a threat, either directly or indirectly, to everyone living in Minneapolis.
At the same time, the attack is part of Trump’s broader authoritarian agenda, which centers on (1) a xenophobic campaign to arrest and deport over one million undocumented immigrants a year, which has led to similar “surges” of heavily armed ICE agents in Los Angeles, Portland, Chicago, Washington, D.C., Memphis, and Charlotte, some backed up by federalized National Guard troops, and (2) the pursuit of “retribution” against Democrat-controlled cities and states and against political opposition more generally. What is happening in Minneapolis right now thus poses a threat to every citizen of the US, and indeed every resident of the country whatever their legal citizenship status. For what is going on is a direct and indeed deliberate assault on civil liberties that are guaranteed by the US Constitution, and on constitutional democracy itself.
State power is now being wielded directly and violently by the Trump administration against individuals “under suspicion” of being “illegal,” against the communities where these individuals live and work, and against all citizens who act in solidarity with the victims of administration assaults or who join in protest against these assaults.
Participation in mass protest is a deliberately chosen public act as well as an individual moral choice. And so practices of civil resistance also implicate challenging questions of political ethics.
Last year’s intellectual debates about whether this is “fascism” have now been rendered entirely academic, for the manifest violence and the cruelty are now obvious for all to see, however various political theorists may choose to describe it.
Resisting this direct attack on civil liberty and constitutional democracy is essential, for the people directly violated, and for all who care about such violations or who are themselves vulnerable to similar violations–and anyone serious about democratic citizenship or even about going out in public without fear is so vulnerable.
Such an observation is hardly “academic” or merely theoretical. For right now, as the city of Minneapolis is the site of an assault, it is also the site of resistance to this assault, by masses of citizens who have taken to the streets of Minneapolis to protest, obstruct, disrupt, and counter ICE violence.
The situation is very dangerous, because ICE agents are heavily armed; either poorly trained or expertly trained to kill enemies in war rather than to patrol US cities; and obviously contemptuous of civil liberties and disposed to react to perceived “threats” with overwhelming force.
It is also dangerous because Trump has very publicly and repeatedly stated that if the situation on the streets devolves into greater chaos or violent confrontation, as he defines this, he is poised to invoke the Insurrection Act, which authorize him to deploy thousands of National Guard soldiers and active duty US military troops to back up the ICE occupation. This would in effect place the entire city of Minneapolis under martial law, and it would likely lead to similar measures taken in every city where protests intensify–and in that event protests will surely intensify in every city. Trump’s hesitance to take such measures thus far should provide no comfort for anyone, given the possibilities for things to spin out of control through misunderstanding or ICE provocation, and given Trump’s very serious mental instability, which is a very real factor that should frighten everyone.
What is to be done to resist this assault on a city and on democracy itself?
I’ve followed much of the discussion of this question online and in the media. And while the urge to hold forth with categorical statements of praise or denunciation is understandable, especially in a time of such heightened danger, there is surely more than one thing to be done, and differently situated people will surely respond differently, in ways that are often complementary but will also sometimes be in tension. Being clearer about these different ways, and mindful that tension between them can be genuinely productive, is thus important. Towards this end, I think it is particularly important to distinguish between morally justified forms of self-defense, and forms of public collective action that involve less proximate, and thus more political, goals.
Individuals that ICE seeks to detain on the grounds that they are “illegal”—a vile term– have every right to refuse to cooperate, to attempt to flee, and to fight back if attacked. In a moral sense, the violence of the situation clearly makes the use of counter-violence in self-defense legitimate. Whether it is wise to do so is a secondary but important question. But it is entirely reasonable for anyone approached by ICE to consider arrest by ICE as an extra-legal infringement of one’s liberty and an endangerment of one’s very life.
Individuals who ICE seeks to detain, or merely to subdue, because they protest the above efforts to detain people suspected of being “illegal,” also cannot reasonably be expected to simply submit to ICE orders. For such orders have questionable legal validity, and following them places any individual at serious risk of harm, disappearance, or worse. Here too, whether or not it is wise not simply to flee but to resist, to the point of employing counter-violence, is a secondary question. What is primary is that every individual has the moral and even arguably the legal right to judge this for themselves.
But participation in mass protest is a deliberately chosen public act as well as an individual moral choice. And so practices of civil resistance also implicate challenging questions of political ethics. For here the moral question is also a political one, not “how should an individual threatened directly by ICE respond?” but “how should organized groups of citizens act collectively to oppose ICE threats to individuals and to resist the broader ICE occupation?”
It is uncommon for elected politicians to hold forth with seriousness and integrity on such questions of political ethics. But in the current crisis, Minnesota’s elected politicians have spoken publicly ways I consider exemplary. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey’s immediate response to the killing of Renee Good—an emphatic rejection of Trump administration bullshit about the killing and about Good, combined with an equally emphatic “get the fuck our of our city”—is one example. But here it is the response of Governor Tim Walz—who, let us not forget, was also in the cross-hairs of Justice Department allegations of corruption, even before it was announced that he and Frey were being investigated for their responses to the ICE occupation—that concerns me. Two nights ago, Walz put out a statement that has received much attention. It is worth quoting in its entirety:
My fellow Minnesotans:
What’s happening in Minnesota right now defies belief.
News reports simply don’t do justice to the level of chaos and disruption and trauma the federal government is raining down upon our communities. Two to three thousand armed agents of the federal government have been deployed to Minnesota. Armed, masked, undertrained ICE agents are going door to door, ordering people to point out where their neighbors of color live. They’re pulling over people indiscriminately, including US citizens, and demanding to see their papers. And at grocery stores, at bus stops, even at schools, they’re breaking windows, dragging pregnant women down the street, just plain grabbing Minnesotans and shoving them into unmarked vans, kidnapping innocent people with no warning and no due process.
Let’s be very, very clear: This long ago stopped being a matter of immigration enforcement. Instead, it is a campaign of organized brutality against the people of Minnesota by our own federal government. Last week, that campaign claimed the life of Renee Nicole Good. We’ve all watched the video. We all have seen what happened. And yet, instead of conducting an impartial investigation so we can hold accountable the officer responsible for Renee’s death, the Trump administration is devoting the full power of the federal government to finding an excuse to attack the victim and her family. Just yesterday, six federal prosecutors – including the longtime career prosecutor leading the charge to investigate and eliminate fraud in our state’s programs – quit their jobs rather than go along with this assault on the United States Constitution.
But as bad as it’s been, Donald Trump intends for it to get worse. This week, he went online to promise that, quote, “the day of retribution and reckoning is coming.” That is a direct threat against the people of this state, who dared to vote against him three times, and who continue to stand up for freedom with courage and empathy and profound grace. All across Minnesota, people are stepping up to help neighbors who are being unjustly, and unlawfully, targeted. They’re distributing care packages and walking kids to school and raising their voices in peaceful protest even though doing so has made many of our fellow Minnesotans targets for violent retribution.
Folks, I know this is scary. And I know it’s absurd that we all have to be defending law and order, justice, and humanity while also caring for our families and doing our jobs.
So, tonight, let me say, once again, to Donald Trump and Kristi Noem: End this occupation. You’ve done enough.
Let me say four critical things to the people of Minnesota – four things I need you to hear as you watch the news and look out for your neighbors.
First: Donald Trump wants chaos. He wants confusion. And, yes, he wants more violence on our streets. We cannot give him what he wants. We can – we must – protest: loudly, urgently, but also peacefully. Indeed, as hard as we will fight in the courts and at the ballot box, we cannot, and will not, let violence prevail.
You’re angry. I’m angry. Angry might not be strong enough of a word. But we must remain peaceful.
Second: You are not powerless. You are not helpless. And you are not alone. All across Minnesota, people are learning about opportunities not just to resist, but to help people who are in danger. Thousands upon thousands of Minnesotans are going to be relying on mutual aid in the days and weeks to come, and they need our support. Tonight, I want to share another way you can help: Witness. Help us establish a record of exactly what’s happening in our communities. You have an absolute right to peacefully film ICE agents as they conduct their activities. So carry your phone with you at all times. And if you see ICE in your neighborhood, take out that phone and hit record. Help us create a database of the atrocities against Minnesotans – not just to establish a record for posterity, but to bank evidence for future prosecution.
That’s the third thing I want to tell you tonight: We will not have to live like this forever. Accountability is coming, at the voting booth and in court. We will reclaim our communities from Donald Trump. We will re-establish a sense of safety for our neighbors. We will bring an end to this moment of chaos and confusion. We will find a way to move forward – together. And we will not be alone. Every day, we are working with business leaders, faith leaders, legal experts, and elected officials from all across the country. They have seen what Donald Trump is trying to do to our state. They know their states could be next.
And that brings me to the fourth thing I want to tell you tonight. Minnesota, I’m so proud of the way we’ve risen to meet this unbearable moment. But I’m not surprised. Because this – this is who we are. Minnesotans believe in the rule of law. And Minnesotans believe in the dignity of all people. We’re a place where there’s room for everybody, no matter who you are or who you love or where you came from. A place where we feed our kids, take care of our neighbors, and look out for those in the shadows of life. We’re an island of decency in a country being driven towards cruelty. We will remain an island of decency, of justice, of community, of peace. And, tonight, I come before you simply to ask: Do not let anyone take that away from us.
Thank you. Protect each other And God bless the people of Minnesota.
Some have praised this statement as a necessary call for “civility” and respect for law and order at a moment of disorder that promises great danger. Many on the left have denounced the statement as a reactionary call for “civility” at a moment of disorder and crisis that presents opportunities for more robust “resistance” to ICE and for “antifascism” more generally.
Debate about such matters is healthy—but only if it generates greater understanding among those who stand, together, against Trump’s fascism. This means greater appreciation among some centrists for the justified outrange, and passionate opposition, that many protesters are acting out on the streets of Minneapolis. But it also involves much greater seriousness among some on the........
