President of the Police Association Chris Cahill describes the mood within police as he says the protest could go on for months. Video / Mark Mitchell / George Heard
OPINION:
The only answers to the anti-mandate protests are more questions, and the only certainty is anger.
It seems everybody has a view on what the response should be to the protest in Wellington, but God knows I'd hate to be having to make the actual decisions.
When Trevor Mallardturned on the sprinklers and used music as a weapon I knew it was unwise but, if I'm honest, I would have done the same thing. If those people were at my place of work, I wouldn't have been able to help myself.
Protesters on day 13 of the anti-mandate protest and occupation at Parliament in Wellington. Photo / Mark Mitchell
I also felt that police should have taken a stronger stance around the cars blocking the roads at the earliest chance. It was legitimate to intervene forcefully because that was a step too far from the get-go. But would I have regretted it, in the same way I would have regretted turning the sprinklers and music on?
The consequence of the sprinklers and music was to bind the protesters together. And clashes with police if they had attempted to move cars (if they even had the resources to do so) would have led to a quickly escalating situation.
Some violence would have been inevitable; it's only the level that's unknown. If stronger police action had sparked serious violent interactions (or even a riot), for example, the current public conversation would be entirely different.
It is quite plausible that the solution would have caused greater issues than the problem in front of us now. Those currently protesting would have had a serious grievance to grasp onto, therefore setting the stage for another more aggrieved protest on the same spot or somewhere different.
Still, employing a non-aggressive approach has hardly left us in an ideal situation. The protest is growing, and public frustration and anger is, too.
Police Commissioner Andrew Coster made an error in threatening to remove the vehicles, and then backing down. That emboldened the protesters, while undermining public confidence in the police approach.
Still, I'd far rather Commissioner Coster change his mind than forge ahead if he suddenly saw the situation differently. I give Coster the benefit of the doubt here because I hold him in high regard and respect his views on policing, but others have been less generous.
And, without question, whatever occurs from here, the protest will be a referendum on his leadership.
I wish him luck, few situations typify a rock and a hard place like this one. Even the political battle lines have led to unlikely allies. Legendary activist Tame Iti says the protest is driven by a "Donald Trump mentality" and there needs to be "some kind of action" to bring the protest to an end.
Protesters on day 13 of the anti-mandate protest and occupation at Parliament in Wellington. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Right of centre commentator Matthew Hooton is on the same side, as he calls for police to do more.
On the protesters' side we find even more unusual bedfellows, with respected kuia Dame Tariana Turia saying she supports the protest and that the Government is "bullying" the protesters. She stands alongside Kelvyn Alp, a far right political aspirant, who sees the protest as a staging post for a violent revolution.
While both sides are a mix of left and right wing politics, there is one near universal divide and that is between those who are on the side of science and rationality and those who are not.
In September of last year I wrote two of these columns about the "contagion of crazy". I said that the spread of online disinformation would have far ranging consequences. It wasn't a novel idea, plenty had argued the same – but this protest is an example of it.
I will get a flurry of correspondence today from the protesters and their supporters, as I have other times I've written on this subject, and many will be strikingly hostile, and all will likely include one or a variety of claims such as: the vaccine is killing more people than the virus; that the vaccine will eventually kill everybody who has taken it; that the virus is a hoax or a guise being used by the Government to control people (often including references to a cabal lead by Bill Gates); and that the media are part of a grand conspiracy withholding the truth.
All of which are laughably, and demonstrably, false.
Do all of the protesters uphold such beliefs? Nope. But those beliefs (or similar ones) are without question a driving force behind the movement. (You don't have to believe me, just check out the signs in the protest.) And this is why the protest is going nowhere in a hurry. If people sincerely believe those things are true, then the correct response is to fight.
We must find ways of combating misinformation and educate people on how to spot ideas and data that are clearly nonsense. Opinions on public policy matters should be as free and as varied as the minds that construct them, but facts are facts. So it's not about teaching people what to think, it's about providing the intellectual tools to distinguish high-quality information from garbage. This is something we must tackle in order to maintain a functioning democracy.
In the meantime, there is the problem of the protest in Wellington to address. Terrible weather failed to solve it. Perhaps illness and infighting will play a role, but for now Commissioner Coster and his team are looking to deescalate things by negotiation. In principle, that's the best approach, but negotiation requires rational actors on the side of the protesters; and there is scant little evidence that exists.
And that, without question, is the crux of the problem.
• Dr Jarrod Gilbert is a sociologist at the University of Canterbury and the director of Independent Research Solutions.
