On Thursday, Nov. 17th, protesters occupied the North Avenue bridge in Milwaukee, chanting “we are the 99 percent,” coinciding with the “Occupy” protests that have spread across the nation. The site was chosen because it – like many other bridges and infrastructures around the country – needs fixing and could be a source of employment for the jobless.

As reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Milwaukee Police Chief Edward Flynn raised several objections. He noted that, if angry about the economy, the protesters should go to Wall Street, and likened protesting to “street theater.” He belittled the protests by stating that “arrest is not a tool to further political agendas.” Some countered Flynn by saying the goal was to bring more attention to the economic issues facing our state, not to be arrested.

I can understand Flynn’s approach. I know a lot of people who went to the protests against Gov. Scott Walker’s union bill simply because they like hearing their own voice. I know many who never cared about politics until it was the “cool” thing to do. Give a narcissist a soap box, and they’ll surely take it.

But is that a reason to discredit all protesting? I mean, don’t we, as a country, want civic involvement? Does it really matter how it starts? Some of my friends joined the protests just because they think their opinion is the most important, but now they genuinely care, and keep themselves updated on the latest political developments of the state. Isn’t this what we want?

I’ve talked to Democrats and Republicans about the anti-Walker protests. While some think they are positive, and others, negative, the one thing both sides agree on is that the protests, much like the one that took place in Milwaukee, will have the positive effect of getting more citizens involved in the political process. The politics that have taken over our state in the past year is, without a doubt, good for citizen participation.

I’ve heard of public school teachers voting for Walker simply because they didn’t like the way things were at the time and wanted change, so why not vote for someone new? Now they realize they indirectly voted to have their salaries cut, or even to lose their jobs. Ignorant votes like this are an important lesson to all citizens of every state: each and every one of you should know why you’re voting for the candidate you are. Democrats, why did you vote for President Obama in the last election? Did you know his platform? Republicans, why did you vote for Walker? We all ought to ask these sorts of questions every time we enter a voting booth.

So despite all of Flynn’s railing against the protests, he must acknowledge that there are good side effects of protesting. Yes, there might have been attendees whose sole reason for being there was to get attention. But we aren’t all born into politics; at some point in our lives, we are exposed to it. I know that during my first political experiences I wasn’t an ideal example of an educated citizen, but I had to start somewhere. The important thing is that those first experiences, despite being done because they were the “cool” things to do, were catalysts for my curiosity. It made me seek knowledge and insight on the political process. We all have to learn to walk before we can run.

There will always be slander against uses of the First Amendment. There will always be those like Chief Flynn, who believe that protests and other free speech exercise are simply “theatrics.” But it’s hard to deny there are myriad positive effects. First and foremost, it exposes citizens to the political process and instills learning. So while you may not agree with those who have been protesting in the state over the past year, you should at least recognize that those protests will help give birth to a generation of politically aware citizens.

Reginald Young ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in legal studies and Scandinavian studies.