No Kings Rallies March On
Sounding a barbaric yawp over the streets of the world.
Reporting for NYT, (“A Challenge for ‘No Kings’ Protests, the Third Time Around” in the online edition, “Will Primal Scream of ‘No Kings’ Echo in Voting Booths?” on today’s front page), Jeremy W. Peters explores the challenges of a leaderless prtest movement.
Deflated by their electoral losses and demoralized by President Trump’s return to power, millions of his most ardent opponents turned out at two nationwide protests last year and found an outlet for their discontent.
They hit the pavement again on Saturday for the third “No Kings” demonstrations, a boisterous show of force that filled television screens, social media feeds, and cities and towns in all 50 states.
[…]
Organizers hoped Saturday’s protests would turn out to be the largest yet. But as the marchers tried to fulfill that promise, it remained an open question whether another big turnout would be enough to influence the course of the nation’s politics. Can the protests harness that energy and turn it into victories in the November midterm elections? How can they avoid a primal scream that fades into a whimper?
The phrase “No Kings” is a nod to the anti-authoritarian, democratic principles the country was founded on — which the protesters say Mr. Trump has ignored.
Otherwise, organizers said, “No Kings” protests intentionally lack a single, specific demand, reflecting the diffuse nature of the anti-Trump effort. The signs protesters carried on Saturday highlighted a wide range of issues, including immigration patrols (“ICE Needs to Melt”), democracy, diversity and the war against Iran. “We Can’t Afford the War or the Gas,” read one sign in Atlanta.
Nor has a high-profile leader or public face emerged, in the way that Tom Hayden did during the 1960s antiwar protests or Jerry Falwell in the 1980s for Christian evangelicals. Luminaries of today’s left like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez act as champions of progressive causes rather than only as foils to Mr. Trump.
Organizers say the idea is to attract as many opponents of the administration as possible — especially the disaffected.
[…]
Protesters held events in thousands of locations from Alaska to Florida, in liberal big cities and Republican strongholds, in addition to cities overseas. And beyond urging the faithful to turn out in big numbers and remain nonviolent, organizers were hands-off about what they expected from attendees.
[…]
Videos of the peaceful demonstrations, whether taking up several city blocks or a small-town street corner, are meant to rev up the politically weary, organizers said. So are the whimsical costumes and homemade placards, with cheeky sayings like “Make Orwell Fiction Again.”
But skeptics of such events say that during Mr. Trump’s first term, progressives mistakenly thought that mass protests were a sign of the movement’s widespread popular support, without mastering the harder work of organizing.
“These large-scale protest events make people feel like they’re not alone — it’s like collective therapy,” said Dana R. Fisher, a professor at American University who studies civic engagement.
She has surveyed “No Kings” participants in her research and supports their work. But, she added, collective catharsis and hitting what she called “a magical number” of participants is not enough to sustain an effective political movement. “What we really need to do is the work of defending democracy in our communities,” she said. “It’s not about inflatable costumes. It’s not about clever signs.”
[…]
Mr. Trump’s approval rating has fallen to 36 percent as of March 23, from 45 percent around the time he took office last year, according to Reuters/Ipsos.
That kind of drop should help activists, but the “No Kings” rallies have forced progressives to assess whether their messaging is simple and direct enough to reach most voters.
Ms. Fisher of American University and a team of researchers surveyed participants at more than 300 “No Kings” events last summer and found them to be predominantly female, college educated and middle-aged. Close to 90 percent were white, the surveys found.
They were also deeply engaged politically, with more than two-thirds saying they had participated in a political boycott in the last year.
The organized opposition to Mr. Trump has had little difficulty summoning the nation’s outrage at opportune moments. Quantifying the impact of those protests is much harder.
Lara Putnam, a history professor at the University of Pittsburgh who studies political protest movements, said the recent level of activity inside the Trump opposition has been striking. In Pennsylvania, for instance, she said that she had found 80 different “No Kings” events across the state last October. That compared with 27 events on the day of the Women’s March in 2017, a mass demonstration against President Trump during his first term.
Because of social media, “it is much easier to get people in the same place,” Ms. Putnam said. “But it doesn’t necessarily make the other pieces needed for building a political movement.”
As regular readers know, I’m a longtime skeptic of protest movements. They can certainly be effective, with the Civil Rights and anti-Vietnam War protests as modern exemplars. Even the Tea Party movement generated real results, as noted in Peters’ piece. But most — Occupy Wall Street, the first-term anti-Trump Resistance, and seemingly this one — simply lack focus. The participants have some modestly overlapping — often quite legitimate — grievances, but don’t have a common programmatic goal.
But I’ve also come to be less dismissive of “collective catharsis,” “collective therapy,” or however else one might characterize millions of people with no other recourse venting their displeasure with the current state of affairs.
Sure, a significant number of the participants are the usual suspects, for whom protesting is something of a hobby. Others are simply mad that their preferred candidate lost the election. But there’s also genuine fear and outrage over a whole host of actual policy actions taken by this President, quite often in contravention of basic Constitutional norms. And, as outrages mount, the specific ones animating those assembled have shifted.
Renee Good had not been murdered when the first protest took place. We had not started a war with Iran solely on a presidential whim when the previous iteration took place.
Given that Trump was elected to a four-year term in November 2024, he’s likely to be in office until noon on January 20, 2029. Given that his party has slim control of both the House and the Senate — and that they’ve shown incredible deference to him — there’s very little folks can do to vent their outrage and fear.
Sure, they can work to elect Democrats to the House and Senate in November. But that’s months away even now and interminably long when the first* of these protests took place last President’s Day. And, of course, many of the protestors live in states and districts that are solidly red, making that task next to impossible in their locality. (Or, for that matter, live in states and districts that are deep blue, making the outcome assured locally.) And that’s to say nothing of those affected by these policies who live in other countries.
Four years is a long time to live in fear and anger. Spending a Saturday communing with hundreds or thousands of others who are frustrated is, if nothing else, a coping mechanism.
*Peters seems not to be counting the “No Kings On Presidents’ Day” rally for whatever reason. NPR does the same. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Odd take by Peters. It’s not just progressives protesting Trumpism. And after his first term Trump was booted from office.
At any rate, not sure why skeptics of No Kings are so vocal about it. It’s a nominally free county: ergo, like-minded people can gather if they want, for no reason at all or just to commiserate, if they choose. They don’t need to justify that to anyone.
Skeptics can instead do what I did yesterday: housekeeping, gardening, gym/cardio, and laundry.
I don’t see why we should cheer Iranians protesting their Islamofascist government but sneer at Americans protesting our Christofascist government.
These protests are a way to hold on to normalcy, sanity, in the midst of the Trump Cult’s efforts to erase reality and replace it with lies and fantasies. When the world has gone crazy it can be reassuring to realize that not everyone has lost their fucking minds. We cannot allow corruption, lies, hate speech and government violence to be seen as the norm going forward. It’s a powerful reminder to MAGA that no, assholes, you have not won because we have not surrendered.
And it is an intimidation tactic as well: we are here, there are a lot of us, and we fucking hate what you MAGAts are doing to our country, and we will take you down.
I’d also argue that the anti-ICE protests have been effective to a significant degree – we are not seeing the kinds of overt thuggishness we watched in Minneapolis. ICE has been warned, whether they would admit it or not, that they cannot just storm into an American city and start murdering people.
Imagine if there were no mass protests of Trump. I’m sure the NYT would run articles saying how it shows 1. Trump won the argument, 2. Dems are in disarray, 3. kids these days.
If there are protests, NYT says it shows how Dems are in disarray and unable to project unity. If there are no protest, NYT would say it shows how Dems are in disarray and unable to inspire even their own base.
The unstated editorial line is, I think, to keep the Dem base in line and mold the party into something center-left-but-no-further.
@DK:
Speculation and nothing more, I think JJ lives in a world where he interacts with, works with, likes at least some people who are MAGA, and because they are in uniform or wearing suit and tie he can see them as ‘wrong’ but not as ‘evil.’
Hannah Arendt on the banality of evil: “The sad truth is that most evil is done by people who never make up their minds to be good or evil.” Evil isn’t just SS officers in spiffy Hugo Boss uniforms or mustache-twirling villains, it’s ordinary, boring people ignoring evil, refusing to see it, shrugging it off. A MAGA Army colonel, chest all covered with ribbons, backslapping and buying drinks and seeming to all outward appearances to be normal is, nevertheless, a servant of evil, just as surely as the professional Prussian officer in 1940 served evil.
That has to be uncomfortable for people who are required to be part of a hierarchy much of which is MAGA.
@Michael Reynolds: I wasn’t critiquing Dr. Joyner, but I have noticed some folks arguing No Kings is pointless and useless at the same time they can’t stop talking about No Kings. That is a contradiction.
I’m not big on No Kings, I didn’t attend. But I didn’t say or post anything negative, I just went about my day. The protestors weren’t blocking streets or highways, no disruption to daily life, so it was easy for me to be unbothered about it.
Tens of thousands of anti-abortionists descended on Washington in January for their annual March for Life. There weren’t a bevy of skeptical liberal media think pieces in response. It was very easy for pro-choicers to ignore.
No Kings, on the other hand, seems to live rent-free in the heads of many critics. They seem suspiciously triggered. That is proof positive of the effectiveness of No Kings, at engaging conversation, if nothing else.
@Michael Reynolds:
But how can I continue to see myself as a disinterested, savvy analyst if I don’t look down on the people who are emotionally invested in the polity that they are a part of?*
Relatedly, one thing I liked about One Battle After Another, is that positive change is indeed the result of one (small) battle after another.
Small acts do add up. In reality, it’s never the sole hero who causes meaningful change all by himself.
* Reminds me of the retort to the question “Why do you care so much about the environment?” -> “I got to live there.”
In fact, it’s weird not to care.
@DK:
I hate crowds. I will not chant or woo. I attended here in Vegas, stayed for half an hour and walked over to Circa, came out $12 ahead on slots, thought about dinner and decided I could do better at home. My little sister went in Seattle. My wife was in St. Paul, and she got both Bernie and The Boss.
Pretty good turnout for Vegas which is not a wildly political town except on union issues. The police turnout was even better. At least 20 Metro and sheriff black and whites, and more in reserve a few streets over. All-in-all message discipline wasn’t bad, something I noticed in the previous demo. I’d say 80-85 percent or more of signs were on-point. For Democrats that’s pretty tight. The demo was on both sides of Las Vegas Blvd. which, a few miles south, becomes The Strip. The sides were ‘sun’ and ‘shade’ and the speakers urged us to stay hydrated – very Las Vegas.
[Parallel universe]
NYT headline: No Kings Protests continue their razor sharp focus on {single issue}.
OTB headline: No Kings rallies continue in their small-tent exclusionary silliness.
MR nailed it with his use of “sneer” — the condescension is palpable in this post.
My partner is involved in these communities and spoke at one of the protests. We debate all the time about the wisdom of different tactics, what their goals are, who is the intended audience, how this is often in tension, etc.
Sure, there are annoying people involved. Welcome to groups of humans.
They give a fuck though. And many of them work their asses off — in the space between — to live their values.
Is there anything you would march for? Have marched for? Would the outcomes have to be fully specified and 100% guaranteed ahead of time for you to march?
@DK:
In October, the Trump cronies responded with mockery (the feces flyover, for example) and they were mocked in return. This weekend, the administration is uncharacteristically subdued.
In a battle against bullies, I count that as progress.
@Tim D.:
Good insight there.
I can’t help but contrast this with how the Tea Party was reported. It seemed like any two dozen Tea Partiers could get more local coverage than a few hundred at Women’s March or No Kings protests. There was the occasional hint at racism, but mostly the coverage seemed to be about how we needed to understand their legitimate complaints.
I just ordered a “No King’s” tee shirt for protest wear. Maybe I should have looked for a tricorne hat. Maybe that was the trick for the TP getting better coverage. Or maybe it was publicists at the Koch fueled Americans for Prosperity (sic). But yes, a significant contributor is the reflexive centrism of NYT et al. The Right may have racists and fascists and misogynists, but the lefties are the real extremists, they might raise my taxes.
@Michael Reynolds:
Yes. The signs at my local No Kings were pretty much on point, despite almost all being hand-made, and many pretty creative. I think my favorite, though, was in Balloon Juice,
. Which also addresses the criticism that the movement isn’t focused on a specific issue. How do you pick one? Or, looked at differently, Trump is at the center of all the issues, so we are focused on the issue of Trump. Trump has actually forced me to change my mind, JD might not be worse.
@DK: @Michael Reynolds: @drj: @Mimai: Honestly, I see this post as a pushback to Peters’ take. Do I think the protests are likely to have any effect on public policy in the short term? No. But I don’t know that anything will accomplish that given a supine Congress. Catharsis and a mass signaling of outrage is all that’s reasonably available until November.
I personally loved going to the No Kings rally at the State Capital in St. Paul. It felt like VE/VJ Day (really V-ICE day) where people could see and cheer the work that the local community had done to push back against totalitarianism.
The thing that really made my heart sing was Walz saying to our Somali neighbors (paraphrasing here) that their great grandchildren will still be here in Minnesota after Trump is in the dustbin of history.
The other reasons it makes a difference is this list in a Bluesky thread from a social movement scholar:
https://bsky.app/profile/drlisacorrigan.bsky.social/post/3mi7bycvn7c2g
Not all of the 14 items will speak to everyone but I found several that I hadn’t even realized were part of my experience (demonstrating size of a movement which transforms into less individualized fear, social cohesion even among folks who have different reasons for being there).
Summed up in this quote:
And I think the people of Minnesota and the Twin Cities proved how the skills and lessons learned from protesting transformed into effective action…and that it is something more than just a coping mechanism.
@Michael Reynolds:
A lot of the self-proclaimed leftists are also sneering at the protests, calling it “controlled opposition” and a relief valve,” rather than actually going and talking to people and trying to build community that could help their own causes.
Probably for the best, given how annoying they can be, and how intent they are at being irrelevant.
Maybe they could hang out with the sneering center right, and sneer together. Argue over the right way to sneer, perhaps.
@Gustopher:
They’re the ‘too cool for school,’ crowd. It’s like people who will turn against a band if they see them getting any mainstream traction. Progressives worry me because I suspect they never quite grasp the need to achieve real world power, a pursuit which may require them to compromise their ideals. Of course mainstream liberals worry me because I think sometimes they’re a bit quick to abandon principles. It’s a balancing act – you can’t be so defensive of your ideals that you fail to accomplish anything, but you also can’t forget what you’re fighting for. I worry a lot.
As has been noted in various places, Peters interviewed a “skeptic” for this piece – the chair of the College Republicans at a local university, a man who couldn’t even figure out what was being protested. Peters is unable to produce neutral skeptical parties even for his thinkpiece on skeptics, because almost literally everybody is at least fine with this.
The mission statement seems to be to get a lot of people together, make some noise, and get borderline folks involved in anticipation of actual political opposition.
To that end it’s incredibly successful.
@Gustopher: Can you point to the people “sneering” from the Left? I’m pretty embedded in progressive spaces and have heard absolutely nothing like this. I’ve heard people use that language, but only to point out that protests are not the ultimate political outcome. (I have seen dismissive comments about the folks who use the 3% fairytale number like the regime will fall apart if we hit 12M protestors or something.) Smacks of inventing the leftwing boogyman, which is just amplifying the disservice of the conservative assholes who pimped the Tea Party.
Hold on a minute!
Suggestion that the mass rallies against Trump have been ineffective, totally ignores the facts on the ground. The massive womens’ rallies at the start of Trump’s 1st term in 2017, helped power the return of the house to the Democrats by the midterms, AND brought greater involvement by women in local and region politics.
The first two No Kings rallies last year boosted the positive outcomes overwhelmingly for Dems in both scheduled and special elections. The numbers are there for review. Any claim otherwise suggests a deficient reading of the facts, inherent negativity, or an agenda other than honest discussion.
These rallies move people off the couch, away from their media, and out into highly visible public space. Juices get flowing. People get connected to others and are motivated to vote, campaign, donate, talk, persuade. Personal involvement becomes elevated in advance of the main event — the elections. It works the same for MAGA. This is human nature that these naysayers are arguing against.
I attended the women’s marches in 2017, and now all three NK marches. I keep getting rewarded during the subsequent elections. I’m going to keep hitting that lever.
@James Joyner:
More than just that. These people are making a commitment to vote, and to vote blue. I’ve worked on enough campaigns and worked with enough campaign “scripts” to know that getting people to “commit to vote” is a desirable behavioral goal, much like a “behavioral contract” — the nuts-and-bolts of a behavior change plan.
Additionally, the visible public “pageantry” will draw in bystanders, fence sitters, undecideds, while simultaneously garnering free nationwide social buzz, the stuff of cultural impetus these days. Guerrilla marketing 101. And No Kings #3 expanded to something like 3,100 sites, all requiring local organizers. That’s grassroots organizing.
People connect and see the magnitude of support for the same concerns and interests they hold, finding validation and motivation to take their commitment up a notch. Real networking takes place. I’ve seen it and participated.
All this cannot superficially be dismissed as “catharsis” and “mass signalling of outrage” — and all that can be “reasonably anticipated until November.” This is where some of the heavy lifting begins in the ramp up to November — a reception soiree of sorts, kicking off organizing for the main event.
And dismissing any payoff until November is kind of misguided, considering the “democratic political process” involved, and to which the participants are committed. Because if it were expected that some sort of immediate, impactful results should come on the heels of these gatherings, then we aren’t talking about peaceful marches at all. We would be talking about something entirely different. Something the 3percenter crowd is jonesing for. And that is not this group of marchers at all.
Man. Such nay-saying. Such debbie-downer stuff !!! I’m glad, we should all be glad, for the energy, the positivism, the optimism of these 8+ million souls that turned out yesterday. If democracy is to be saved, it will be because people have the obligation and belief that they can do something constructive towards that end.
——-
Some of my favorite slogans from yesterday:
“Smell ya later dictator – After while pedophile”
“So Much Wrong – So little poster”
“Imagine Hating An Immigrant More Than a Pedophile”
“No More HAT-RED”
“Make America Think Again”
All sorts of people– young, old and middle — all ethnicity, faith, gender identity — coming together, sharing their fears, concerns, anger, having some fun doing so, ramping up for the elections. Ain’t that America. It’s the America I’m invested in supporting.
@Gustopher:
Citation for any of that? Because I think you’re talking out your hat.
@Rob1: spend some time on social media, and you’ll find it. A leftist outrage machine kicking up to mimic the right, and get those sweet, sweet clicks. Except, worse than the right wing shitheads, some of these people seem like they believe it. (Maybe that’s better? I can’t tell whether earnestly spouting nonsense is better or worse than cynically spouting nonsense)
There are good leftists, and social democrats and the like, but a whole lot of sour-puss shitheads who are very loud. It would be nice if the decent* ones made a bit more noise.
I definitely need to prune my social media, since what I really want are clueless 22 year old twinks (and twink adjacent people of various genders) lipsyncing songs of my youth while showing off their pretty makeup and pretty outfits. The real tragedy of the Trump administration is that things are so bad some of them decide to speak. Horrors.
—-
*: decent here simply meaning “having not removed themselves from the political process because they’re too busy shoving Marxist manifestos up their ass” or whatever. I don’t even have a problem with Marxists, exactly, if they understand the systems they are trying to overthrow, and get that systemic change is hard and they should also try to work within the systems for the short term.
(Accelerationists should be doused with kerosine — it’s an accelerant, they’ll like it!)
@Gustopher:
Right there you defined the problem of scope of sample.