In June of 2020, community members of Nashville, Tennessee in the United States organized a nonviolent encampment in the city’s Legislative Plaza. For two months citizens occupied the plaza in an attempt to force policymakers to address issues of racial discrimination.
Problems and Purpose
Frustrated by the lack of response to protests against police brutality in the wake of the murder of George Floyd, members of the Nashville community led a 62-day occupation of Legislative Plaza in order to persuade Tennessee Governor Bill Lee and other lawmakers to meet with activists to discuss racial justice in the state [1]. The People’s Plaza participants were demanding the resignation of Metropolitan Nashville Police Department (MNPD) Chief Steve Anderson, a defunding of MNPD, and the removal of confederate monuments around the city [3].
Background History and Context
In March of 2020, the city of Nashville, Tennessee was hit with a devastating tornado that destroyed many neighborhoods in the Davidson County area. As the city was trying to recover, lockdowns to prevent the spread of COVID-19 began to occur around the country and communities working together to rebuild their neighborhoods were forced into isolation. While in isolation throughout the spring and well into the summer of 2020, people around the world were hearing news of horrible crimes committed against Black men and women in the United States. Names like Ahmaud Arbery and Breonna Taylor were heavy on the minds of individuals as they were stuck at home, and on May 25, 2020, another name of a Black man brutally killed by police officers was added to the list: George Floyd. Like many throughout the U.S., Nashvillians took to the streets to protest racial injustice. More specifically, community leaders like now State Representative Justin Jones were attending protests and rallies that were gaining very little traction with political leaders in the state. These protests and rallies were met with increased police violence and eventually they were intentionally undermined by an 8pm curfew instituted by then Nashville Mayor, John Cooper. Frustrated by this act and the lack of response from politicians, Jones along with other organizers decided to stage an occupation of the state’s Legislative Plaza mirroring the autonomous zones that were popping up around the country in response to the reinvigoration of the Black Lives Matter Movement [10]. The last time the Plaza had been occupied in this manner was during Occupy Nashville, an affiliate of the Occupy Wall Street3 movement [2].
Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities
Justin Jones, the de facto leader of the People’s Plaza occupation, became involved in the movement at the encouragement of elders in the Black community like Reverend Venita Lewis2. Jones had been chosen by Rev. Lewis because of his demonstrated commitment to organizing around racial justice, large following he had amassed from his attempt at a U.S. Congressional seat and work they had done together on other organizing efforts [3]. Rev. Lewis is a leader within the Nashville chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) who organized many of the initial rallies at Tennessee’s Legislative Plaza after the murder of George Floyd. Although individuals like Jones Jones and Rev. Lewis were chosen to play leadership roles because of their influence and expertise, the movement was truly driven by encampment residents that became involved in solidarity with the larger mission of promoting racial justice in the state of Tennessee. These individuals sustained the movement with their presence and applied pressure on policymakers. Additionally, Nashville residents who were unable to dedicate their time to being physically present at the Plaza became involved in other ways by donating funds and providing supplies to aid the encampment in completing their mission[3].
Participants in the People’s Plaza movement engaged in a communal living, mutual aid society with the intention of supporting each others’ mission to stay at the Plaza for as long as it took for their demands to be met [3]. As a result the environment that was created was one of reciprocal respect, inclusivity, and transparent decision making processes. A result of this highly inclusive decision-making process was the creation of innovative solutions, like selling merchandise to raise money and awareness for the occupation’s cause.
Participant Recruitment and Selection
The People’s Plaza movement was open to all; however, special efforts were made to recruit prominent organizers like Justin Jones because of their previous contributions to the racial justice movement in the city. These key figures were recruited through invitation by official organizers of the movement. Other participants in the People’s Plaza occupation learned about or were recruited to participate either through various media sources such as the movement’s Instagram [8]5, local newspapers or by being at the initial protest that started the encampment.
Methods and Tools Used
The primary method and tool used in the People’s Plaza was occupation. Occupation is defined by Participedia as “a tactic used by protesters or social movements whereby groups literally occupy a public space or building in protest of a situation and/or in a campaign for political or social change”[2]. Occupation was chosen to gain visibility for the issues of racial injustice in Tennessee because the original protests were not having the desired effect in achieving the movements’ demands. Organizers believed that physically occupying the Plaza space would make their demands harder to ignore and force policymakers to come to the table.
What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation
Process
The People’s Plaza movement was designed to yield formal recommendations for how to address racial injustice in the state of Tennessee. These recommendations were reflected in the movement's three primary demands: the resignation of Metropolitan Nashville Police Department (MNPD) Chief Steve Anderson, the defunding of MNPD, and the removal of Confederate monuments around the city [3]. Plaza occupants were engaged in thick participation4 methods including a General Assembly decision making process where all members of the encampment contributed to identifying the objectives of the movement and coming up with ideas for how to reach each objective [4]. Participants in the encampment were encouraged to reach consensus among one another regarding decisions through the implementation of the General Assembly, which helped support the ability of the activists to continue with their occupation for an extended period of time. Within the General Assembly, all thoughts and opinions of encampment participants were taken into account to foster an inclusive decision-making process. Final decisions were made through a majority-rules voting process to maintain the integrity of the General Assembly system and to ensure that all participants were meaningfully involved [3].
Participants in the People’s Plaza movement engaged in a communal living, mutual aid society with the intention of supporting each others’ mission to stay at the Plaza for as long as it took for their demands to be met [3]. As a result the environment that was created was one of reciprocal respect, inclusivity, and transparent decision making processes. Although the encampment itself operated in a way that encouraged consensus-building and allowed participants to freely express their opinions, interactions between the encampment and authority figures in the state were not as inclusive. In theory, the participants would have liked to reach consensus with government officials regarding their specific demands; however, the dismissive behavior exhibited by policymakers made it impossible. Additionally, participant opinions were clearly not taken into account in any serious manner while the occupation took place. In fact, unfair policing tactics like confiscation of property and unlawful arrests actively suppressed the thoughts and opinions of participants [3].
Interaction
Broadly speaking, the issues discussed by the People’s Plaza movement were related to racial injustice and police brutality in the state of Tennessee. More specifically, participants in the occupation discussed how to have their demands regarding the resignation of the MNPD police chief, the defunding of the MNPD, and the removal of confederate monuments met by elected officials. Participants were given the opportunity to have their voices heard through the use of a General Assembly within the governance of the occupation itself; however, elected officials refused to meet with the occupants about their demands. This refusal made it impossible for participants' opinions and voices to be heard in a way that actually influenced state policies.
To combat policymakers’ refusal to engage meaningfully on topics regarding racial injustice, the People’s Plaza movement employed the technique of occupation. Within the occupation itself, diverse voices were heard with some participants taking on more of a leadership role without necessarily dominating the discourse. While the use of the occupation method increased the visibility of the movement, it also heightened tensions between participants, local law enforcement, and government officials making the quality of discourse and participation between the movement and key stakeholders strained and ineffective.
Participation
Occupation, or the inhabiting of a physical space, was used in the People’s Plaza movement as a tactic to increase visibility of the racial justice movement that took place in Nashville during the summer of 2020 [2]. Participants occupied the Tennessee Legislative Plaza in front of the State Capitol in an effort to remind policymakers of their demands and ensure that they would not be ignored. In practice, participation in this occupation was broken down into three categories: organizers, supporters, and funders. Organizers served as on-the-ground leaders, facilitating communication within the encampment itself and attempting to facilitate communication with elected officials. Supporters included both encampment residents who showed their support through their physical presence in the occupied space and local Nashville residents who contributed by donating money or supplies. In this way, local Nashville residents also acted as the primary funders of the movement.
Occupation was chosen as the primary tool for the People’s Plaza movement in reaction to a discriminatory curfew that was instituted with the intention of deterring protests in support of the BLM movement [3]. It was employed throughout the duration of the process. Unfortunately, the occupation method did not serve its expected function, as only one of the encampment’s demands were met, despite the fulfillment of their demands being the primary purpose of the occupation movement.
Communication, or the failure of the movement was communicated, to the larger Nashville community through social media5 and local news sources [6][8] The movement had its own Instagram page, where organizers initially announced that they would no longer be occupying the Legislative Plaza because of a new state law that made camping on state owned property a felony [9].
Government officials played the principal role in deciding what recommendations were communicated because they were the driving force for implementation of the state law that required the encampment to end. These recommendations were communicated not only to encampment participants, but also their supporters and other Tennesseans.
Influence, Outcomes, and Effects
Unfortunately, the People’s Plaza movement did not have its intended results as all the demands outlined by the organizers of the movement were not met. One demand, the removal of the bust of Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest from the state capitol was met; however, the larger goal of addressing racial injustice was not achieved [3]. In addition, the occupation resulted in stricter state laws about occupation of state property as a protest tactic in Tennessee.
Despite the passage of this law, civic engagement in the form of protests and rallies at the state house has been reinvigorated in Nashville. Even though occupation of this space is now prohibited by state law there has been an observable increase in citizens’ willingness to demand change directly from lawmakers by entering the space. For example, a large rally was held at the state capitol demanding stricter gun control laws in the wake of the Covenant School shooting, and many organizations continued to return to the capitol to advocate for this specific cause during the legislative session [7].7 Additionally, the occupation launched the political careers for leaders of the movement like Justin Jones, who now serves as a state representative.
Analysis and Lessons Learned
Overall, the People’s Plaza movement was an influential initiative that significantly altered the activist community in Nashville. According to participant Justin Jones’ reflection of the protest in his book The People’s Plaza, the movement’s internal commitment to upholding ideas of reciprocal respect, inclusivity, and transparent decision-making processes allowed the occupation to last for as long as it did [3]. Unfortunately, those same ideas were not upheld by the elected officials to whom participants appealed to in order to have their demands met. As a result, the method of occupation increased tensions between participants and policymakers, making the ability to reach consensus or compromise on the outlined demands impossible.
Due to the passage of a state law that made occupation of state-owned property a felony there is little opportunity for the successes or shortcomings of this particular method to be expanded upon or fixed. In the future, organizers will likely avoid the use of this tactic to achieve their goals in order to avoid alienating key stakeholders that they must appeal to. While participants were initially dissatisfied with the movement’s inability to have its demands met, the community created as a result of the occupation is something that organizers remain extremely proud of [3]. It is hard to discern if the method of occupation could have achieved different outcomes given the political landscape of Tennessee. Organizers will likely have to adhere to more conventional methods of civic engagement in order to work with elected officials on future policy changes.
See Also
Gakhal, J., & Parry, L. J. (2020). Occupation. Participedia. https://participedia.net/method/occupation
References
[1] Ekulona, K. (2023). Reflecting on the People's Plaza protests, three years later. WPLN News. https://wpln.org/post/episodes/reflecting-on-the-peoples-plaza-protests-three-years-later
[2] Gakhal, J., & Parry, L. J. (2020). Occupation. Participedia. https://participedia.net/method/occupation
[3] Jones, J. (2022). The People's Plaza: Sixty-two Days of Nonviolent Resistance. Vanderbilt University Press.
[4] Nabatchi, T., & Leighninger, M. (2015). Public participation for 21st century democracy. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass. Print ISBN: 978-1-118-68840-3 ; E-book ISBN: 978-1-118-68859-5
[5] Piñeros, D. (2020). A Look Back at the People's Plaza Protest. The Nashville Scene. https://www.nashvillescene.com/news/pithinthewind/a-look-back-at-the-peoples-plaza-pr otest/article_c0506939-e591-50bf-9eb4-514e9455688b.html
[6] Ramirez, A. (2020). Activists to End Plaza Occupation, Plan for New Phase of Protest. The Nashville Scene.
https://www.nashvillescene.com/news/pithinthewind/activists-to-end-plaza-occupation-pl an-for-new-phase-of-protest/article_aede3332-00de-5b54-9a58-0bf6ad280ee5.html
[7] Suliman, A., & Jeong, A. (2023). Who are the 'Tennessee Three'? Here's what to know. The Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2023/04/07/tennessee-three-jones-pearson-johns on-expelled/
[8] The People's Plaza. (2020). peoplesplazatn [Instagram account]. peoplesplazatn. https://www.instagram.com/peoplesplazatn/
[9] Tennessee General Assembly. (2020). Senate Bill No. 5: An act to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Titles 8, 38, 39, and 40, relative to criminal law (Public Chapter No. 3, 2nd Extraordinary Sess.). State of Tennessee. https://publications.tnsosfiles.com/acts/111/2nd%20Extraordinary%20Session/pc0003EOS.pdf
[10] Kass, H., & Dunlap, A. (2025). Rioting as legitimate abolitionist practice: Counterinsurgency versus radical place-making in the George Floyd rebellion. Dialogues in Human Geography, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/20438206251316036
Notes
The first version of this case entry was written by Tarryn Harris, a Master of Public Service candidate at the University of Arkansas Clinton School of Public Service, and then edited. The views expressed in the entry are those of the authors, editors, or cited sources, and are not necessarily those of the University of Arkansas Clinton School of Public Service.
