I defend your right to protest. I question your slogans

Recently, while driving through Scott’s Corner in Pound Ridge, I encountered a political protest. Among the signs were “Drop Prices, Not Bombs” and “Democracy or Data Centers.”

I regularly encounter some of the same protesters carrying similar signs as I drive through Bedford.

As someone who came to America as a political refugee from the Soviet Union, I don’t take the right to protest lightly. I grew up in a country where political disagreement wasn’t simply discouraged. It could have serious consequences.

So I have no objection to people exercising their constitutional rights. Quite the opposite.

But free speech works both ways. People have the right to protest, and I have the right to question what they’re saying.

And what I found myself questioning wasn’t simply the politics. It was the substance.

What exactly does “Drop Prices, Not Bombs” mean? Which prices? Which bombs? What policy decisions are being proposed, and which elected officials are responsible for making them?

And what is the connection between democracy and data centers? Are we debating electricity demand, infrastructure investment, zoning, environmental impact or something else? Those are all legitimate subjects. But how does putting democracy on one side and data centers on the other advance the conversation?

Perhaps these slogans work well at a national political rally. But we live in a small community. We see one another at the grocery store, at school events, in restaurants and on the sidelines of our children’s games.

That should matter.

I’m not suggesting that neighbors must agree politically. I certainly don’t expect everyone to agree with me. In fact, I enjoy a good argument, particularly one that challenges my assumptions.

But disagreement should lead to conversation, not simply the recycling of slogans that divide people into opposing camps.

And if affordability is the issue, let’s actually talk about affordability.

New York has serious structural challenges that predate the current administration in Washington.

The state’s small-business growth has lagged the national average over the past two decades. Manufacturing has faced long-term pressures. Housing remains extraordinarily expensive, and businesses must navigate high operating costs, taxes and regulatory requirements.

Some of these problems are national. Interest rates affect housing affordability and the cost of financing investment. Federal tax policy matters. So do trade policy and broader economic conditions.

But much of what makes New York expensive is determined much closer to home.

State taxes and regulations, local zoning, permitting delays, restrictions on housing supply and the cost of energy all affect the ability of businesses to invest, hire and grow.

If we want more affordable housing, why aren’t we talking about making it easier to build?

If we want lower electricity costs, why aren’t we having a serious discussion about generation capacity, transmission infrastructure, grid investment and the role of nuclear power?

If we want more jobs, shouldn’t we be asking what would encourage businesses to expand in New York rather than elsewhere?

And if we want government to deliver more, shouldn’t we also ask whether we’re getting value for the considerable taxes we already pay?

New York depends heavily on its highest earners and on the financial sector concentrated in New York City to generate tax revenue. Those same finance professionals are often convenient political villains, yet their contributions help fund the services the state provides.

There is an economic reality here that deserves more attention.

We cannot demand more spending without discussing how to generate the economic activity and tax revenue necessary to support it.

Nor can we solve every problem by blaming Washington.

Some decisions belong to the federal government. Others belong to Albany, Westchester County or our town governments. If we genuinely want change, we should understand who has the authority to deliver it.

I would find signs saying “Cut Permit Delays, Cut Housing Costs,” “Build the Grid. Power the Economy,” or “Make It Easier to Build, Invest and Hire” considerably more interesting.

At least then we could have a conversation about the merits of those proposals.

And if the protest is about foreign policy, let’s have that conversation separately.

We can debate military intervention, terrorism, nuclear proliferation, women’s rights and the consequences of American involvement abroad. Those are serious questions with enormous human consequences.

But combining them with New York’s cost-of-living challenges doesn’t make either discussion more meaningful.

The same applies to democracy.

I believe deeply in democratic institutions, the rule of law and the principle that government power should not be used to punish political opponents. Those principles should apply regardless of which party holds office.

But democracy is not strengthened merely by putting the word on a sign.

It is strengthened when citizens understand the issues, question their elected representatives, hold government accountable and remain willing to listen to people with whom they disagree.

That last part seems increasingly difficult.

We have become very good at signaling which side we’re on and considerably less interested in understanding why someone else might see things differently.

I recognize that organizing a protest takes time and effort. I don’t intend to organize a counterprotest. Between working, raising a family and paying New York taxes, my schedule is already quite full.

But I would welcome a serious community conversation about the issues behind those signs.

What would make housing more affordable in Pound Ridge and the surrounding towns? How do we lower energy costs while maintaining a reliable grid? What policies would encourage investment and job creation? What should our state and local governments do differently?

Those are conversations worth having.

We don’t have to agree on the answers.

But we should at least agree that the questions deserve more than slogans.

After all, when the election is over and the signs come down, we’ll still be neighbors.

Irina Zavina-Tare is a resident of Pound Ridge.