The violent events in Charlottesville in 2017 underscore the consequences of not having a well-developed plan in place before tensions surrounding public symbols escalate. The lack of a clear process, coordinated communication, and public safety preparation contributed to a volatile environment. Charlottesville serves as a cautionary tale. Its absence of early planning, despite visible signs of mounting tension, underscores how foresight and coordination can shape safer and more constructive public responses.

In 2016 and into 2017, Charlottesville, Virginia, experienced division surrounding the future of confederate monuments of Robert E. Lee and Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson and their eponymous parks. Some residents saw them as symbols of hate, while others viewed them as symbols of heritage. In February 2017, the Charlottesville City Council passed a vote to remove the statues. Just a few weeks later, in March 2017, two opposition groups sued the Charlottesville City Council, seeking a temporary injunction against removal of the statues and renaming of the parks until a case on Virginia state law could be heard in front of the court.^[1]  The tensions in Charlottesville continued to grow in the coming months – with a protest and counter-protest taking place on May 13, 2017.

The city, reaffirming its decision to remove the statue of Robert E. Lee, announced on June 5, 2017, that Robert E. Lee Park would be renamed Emancipation Park. With tensions continuing to grow, a protest against the city’s actions began to take shape for August 12, 2017, called “Unite the Right.” While the protesters requested city approval for the August 12 gathering, an illegal gathering took place the night before.

On August 11, 2017, the Charlottesville police chief reported that local and state law enforcement were preparing for the protest with the National Guard. A journalist inquired about rumors of an illegal gathering said to occur later that night. The police responded that they heard the same rumors but did not have much information. That evening, more than 200 people participated in an unauthorized march near the University of Virginia. The group, which was primarily composed of white men, wielded tiki torches as they chanted phrases such as “You will not replace us!” “Jews will not replace us!” “White Lives Matter!” “The South Will Rise Again!” and “Blood and Soil!”^[2]  The phrase “You will not replace us” is reported to “reflect the white supremacist world view that … the white race is doomed to extinction by an alleged ‘rising tide of color’ purportedly controlled and manipulated by Jews,” and the phrase “Blood and Soil” is a Nazi slogan used to emphasize an “eliminationist” agenda.^[3]

As the march continued, it turned violent. When the march arrived at the Rotunda on the University of Virginia’s campus, the group encountered about 30 counter-protesters, who had locked arms around a statue of Thomas Jefferson. The white nationalists encircled the smaller group of counter-protesters, mostly UVA students, at the statue’s base. The marchers began swinging and throwing their lit tiki torches at the counter-protestors and bystanders, including the UVA Dean of Students.^[4] People in both groups reported injuries from mace, which was reportedly deployed by a member of the torch-wielding protest group.^[5] Despite the violent turn the protest took, the city-commissioned after-action report said that University and Virginia State Police were not prepared to de-escalate tensions before they reached a boiling point.^[6] Minutes later, Virginia State Police intervened at the request of University police, causing participants to scatter.^[7]

The next morning around 8:30 a.m., August 12, 2017, the official Unite the Right rally began – attended by people from at least 35 states. Fairly quickly, a group of “anti-fascist” counter-protesters appeared. They chanted “No hate, no fear, white supremacists aren’t welcome here.”

Between 10:15 and 10:30 a.m., violence  again broke out between the protesters and counter-protesters. A group from the Unite the Right rally, some with hands taped like boxers, punched, kicked, and choked those who attempted to block their path. The police, who were stationed around the protest site, did not immediately intervene.^[8] Another group from the Unite the Right rally came prepared for battle with shields and clubs. They pushed their way into the counter-protest, while others jabbed flagpoles at the counter-protestors.^[9] Still others used the interaction to throw rocks, soda cans filled with concrete, water bottles filled with urine, and tear gas and smoke grenades at the counter-protesters.^[10] Some of the counter-protesters fought back. No one was arrested, police did not intervene, and the conflict continued to escalate. At 11 a.m., a group from the Unite the Right rally targeted a man in a parking garage next to the police station nearby the protest. The group of four beat him, causing significant spinal injuries and a head wound requiring eight staples.^[11] Bystanders rushed to a nearby police station to seek help, but the after-action report said that law enforcement declined to intervene in the attack.^[12]

At 11:35 a.m., the gathering was officially declared an unlawful assembly by law enforcement. At 11:52 a.m., the Governor declared a state of emergency. Despite this, the police were unprepared to intervene, according to the after-action report, and the standoff continued.^[13] The violence continued to escalate and reached its peak at 1:42 p.m. when a man rammed his car at roughly 25 miles per hour into a crowd of counter-protesters. Bodies were seen flying from the impact. Thirty-five people were injured in total, twenty people were rushed to the hospital, five were in critical condition, and one was killed in the attack.

The after-action report commissioned by the city criticized some aspects of the city’s response to these events. The report noted that several contemporaneous protests in California, Oregon, and Kentucky indicated that violence would likely occur in Charlottesville – and yet the Charlottesville police and political leadership were caught underprepared.^[14] The report said, “People are willing to die for symbols. And as we saw in Charlottesville, they’re willing to kill for them too.”^[15]

The lawsuit attempting to block the removal and renaming of the monuments and parks in Charlottesville was unsuccessful. The statues of Confederate generals Lee and Jackson were viewed as an “act of myth-making” where history was distorted to maintain a visible symbol of racial hierarchy, according to commentators.^[16] Removing the statues was a course-correct, demonstrating Charlottesville’s commitment to creating a new shared history. The statue of Lee was melted down into bronze cubes to be used for a future art installation. Swords Into Plowshares is a Charlottesville nonprofit inspired by Isaiah 2:4, “which celebrates turning tools of violence into ones of peace and community-building.”^[17] The group hopes to inform “the national conversation around toppled Confederate statues by modeling a community-engaged process of creative transformation – one that turns historic trauma into an artistic expression of democratic values and inclusive aspirations.”^[18] Lee Park was renamed Market Street Park in 2018. Jackson Park was renamed Court Square Park and LEXART, a California-based nonprofit, purchased the statue of Jackson for $50,000, where it is used in an exhibit titled “MONUMENTS.”

How could things have gone differently in Charlottesville? What lessons might have prevented the tragic death, injuries, and beating? And how might other communities prepare for similar conflicts in the future? One finding that emerged from Charlottesville’s after-action report was the inability of interagency law enforcement to respond and coordinate quickly during critical incidents.^[19] The report also noted that police and elected officials should also be cognizant of how their actions or nonactions appear to the public. Lack of action in the face of imminent danger is at odds with the public’s understanding of the responsibility of police to protect the public.^[20]