Protests have become a common method of expressing discontent and raising awareness about various issues around the world. However, when protests disrupt the daily lives of innocent people and impede their ability to go about their business, it raises questions about the appropriateness of the protest location. Such was the case when activists sympathetic to the Palestinian cause blocked the access roads of John F. Kennedy Airport in New York and Los Angeles International Airport in Los Angeles on December 27, 2023.
The main problem with these protests is that airports are critical transportation hubs that require smooth and uninterrupted operations. Access roads are essential for the efficient movement of passengers, airport staff, and goods. When these roads are blocked, it leads to massive traffic jams and inconvenience for those trying to reach the airport or catch their flights.
At both airports, protesters parked vehicles on the access roads, locked arms, waved flags, and held banners demanding an end to the war between Hamas and Israel and expanded rights for Palestinian people. The protests caused traffic to come to a standstill for approximately 20 minutes on the Van Wyck Expressway in New York. In Los Angeles, 35 people were arrested for rioting, and another person was arrested for committing battery on a police officer.
While the protests were mostly peaceful, they were also disruptive and unlawful. Innocent people who were simply trying to travel were greatly inconvenienced. It is unlikely that the majority of these travelers sympathized with the cause of the activists. In fact, such disruptions often lead to increased animosity towards the people advocating for their cause.
It is important to note that activists have every right to peacefully protest and express their beliefs. However, there are numerous other more appropriate places to be heard than blocking access roads at airports. Needlessly inconveniencing people typically does not solve problems or issues. Instead, it creates more problems and issues, and fosters resentment towards those attempting to advance their cause.
Airports are not just places of travel; they are critical infrastructure that facilitates commerce, tourism, and the movement of people. Disrupting their operations can have far-reaching consequences. Travelers who miss their flights due to protests may incur financial losses, miss important events or meetings, and experience significant stress and frustration.
The activists could have chosen alternative venues to voice their concerns. Peaceful protests in public squares, government buildings, or even in front of relevant embassies can attract attention and generate discussions without causing unnecessary inconvenience to innocent people. This approach would likely garner more support and understanding from the general public.
In conclusion, while activists have the right to protest, blocking access roads at airports is not an appropriate method to voice their concerns. Such actions disrupt the lives of innocent people who are simply trying to go about their daily activities or travel. The negative consequences of these disruptions often outweigh any positive attention gained. Finding alternative venues for peaceful protests can ensure that the message is heard without causing unnecessary inconvenience or hostility.