The Politics of Permits

The local media has finally gotten around to looking at the endless series of obstacles the city is placing in the way of protests scheduled for the GOP convention. But none of the articles have questioned the idea that permits should be needed at all. Bloomberg is on record as stating that in order to protest you need a permit, a statement we consider to be an affront to the U.S. Constitution.

What good will permits be anyway? The Million Youth March riot was started because their permit expired at 4 p.m.; at 4:01 the police moved in. When the cut-off for the RNC protest arrives and 500,000 protestors are told to go home but can't move because they're in pens, will the police get busy with the cuffs?

From artist and activist Robert Lederman comes the idea of a dispersed protest. Rather than converging in one spot—and thus playing into the city's hands—protestors should be on every street, on every corner, carrying signs. It's also important to know that—right now, at least—groups of 20 people or less do not require a permit.

The only way to then stop such a dispersed protest would be to declare martial law. And that would say more about the city and its GOP guests than any protest.