Faulty Analysis. True, the civil rights, anti-war, and other protests of the 1960s and 1970s may have taken more effort to organize. But they were by no means end points. Those marches were embedded in contexts of many ongoing protest actions that occurred previously, contemporaneously, and subsequently. The size of the March on Washington and others did not say primarily (as the author asserts) "If we can pull this off, imagine what else we can do." Rather,"what else we could do" had been and continued to be demonstrated. Thus, the big protest marches of the past said something more like "Here's another, and a very dramatic manifestation of strength and intensity of our protest."
5
I agree protesting is not enough which is why we need to continue to call, write, show up at Town Hall Meetings etc. etc. The least effective form of protest is clicking an on line petition. Sustained, relentless action is needed. We need to keep the pressure on with multiple acts of resistance and protest, big and small.
Let me suggest another action.
There are many words to describe Trump, perhaps the best one is FOOL. He is a FOOL who craves attention and adulation. We should give him the former on his special day, April 1. On April Fool's Day let's flood the WH with post cards (any graphic designers out there?) wishing our CHIEF FOOL a Happy April Fool's Day. Be sure to note the most foolish thing he's done to date and compliment him for having exceeded by far every other previous President. We should tell him "You are by far the BIGGEST, BEST FOOL who has ever been President"
Let me suggest another action.
There are many words to describe Trump, perhaps the best one is FOOL. He is a FOOL who craves attention and adulation. We should give him the former on his special day, April 1. On April Fool's Day let's flood the WH with post cards (any graphic designers out there?) wishing our CHIEF FOOL a Happy April Fool's Day. Be sure to note the most foolish thing he's done to date and compliment him for having exceeded by far every other previous President. We should tell him "You are by far the BIGGEST, BEST FOOL who has ever been President"
12
I would argue the size of the Womens (and mens) march is quite significant. Women and men were putting Trump on notice we will not be letting go of hard fought gains since the 1960's. Of course the writer of this column wasn't even born then and has little in the way of protest experience to understand the effectiveness of it. My only agreement with this article is we need to march again and again and follow up with our representatives and keep the pressure on.
My suggestion for the next march and protest is for Merrick B Garland to have his constitutionally guaranteed confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. He was selected by President Obama in accordance with the provisions in the Constitution of the United States. No where in the Constitution, does it indicate the Senate has any ability to delay the process.
My suggestion for the next march and protest is for Merrick B Garland to have his constitutionally guaranteed confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. He was selected by President Obama in accordance with the provisions in the Constitution of the United States. No where in the Constitution, does it indicate the Senate has any ability to delay the process.
7
The Tea Party protests certainly provide a useful example, but while they might have started out as a grassroots movement, they were quickly taken over by big money interests (Americans for Prosperity [of the super-rich]). I doubt we want that.
What should we do next? Is it useful to primary blue dog Democrats from the left? For seats held by Republicans, that is not an option, and it is those seats we must try to capture. The Tea Party protests actually built on a decades-long propaganda assault from the right wing media, Fox "News", hate radio and fake "news" tabloids. The people captured by the right wing media campaign no longer trust even the most conservative mainstream media, such as CNN.
I fear it is too late, but efforts must be made to restore the truth.
What should we do next? Is it useful to primary blue dog Democrats from the left? For seats held by Republicans, that is not an option, and it is those seats we must try to capture. The Tea Party protests actually built on a decades-long propaganda assault from the right wing media, Fox "News", hate radio and fake "news" tabloids. The people captured by the right wing media campaign no longer trust even the most conservative mainstream media, such as CNN.
I fear it is too late, but efforts must be made to restore the truth.
12
All the attendees from my blue dot city in a sea of red are still active, we are being active with phone calls, more marches, meetings, aiding and supporting those among us who want to run. We plan to continue. We are mostly women cutting across all identities.
7
It is very often most important to tell people what they do not want to hear. This article does that, bravo.
A few thousand student demonstrators at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968 actually moved this country one step closer to stopping a war. It was not the size, it was the televised police riot, that got people's attention. Half a million at Woodstock were useless compared to four at Kent State. Like in Vietnam or Egypt, one self-immolation of a monk or shopkeeper is worth decades of whining and kumbaya and selfies & likes, such is how the human mind works.
A few thousand student demonstrators at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968 actually moved this country one step closer to stopping a war. It was not the size, it was the televised police riot, that got people's attention. Half a million at Woodstock were useless compared to four at Kent State. Like in Vietnam or Egypt, one self-immolation of a monk or shopkeeper is worth decades of whining and kumbaya and selfies & likes, such is how the human mind works.
3
On the other hand, maybe it means more in an era when we could all choose to watch it our phones or televisions. Those of us who made the effort to go out and march had the effect of starting something and we know it was just a first step. And we provide clear photos that no one can deny of the mix of citizens appalled at the new administration's focus on misogyny, homophobia and racism and greed is good mentality.
10
So what does it say when more people show up for the Chicago Cubs parade than for this?
http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/chicago-cubs-parade-total-numbers-5-m...
http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/chicago-cubs-parade-total-numbers-5-m...
4
The "president" seems to disagree about the importance of crowd size. Yet I agree that resistance is futile if it isn't focused. It is essential to have a simple goal upon which everyone can agree – much harder among Democrats than among Republicans. One of the reasons for Trump's "victory" was that he gave people a simple list of what he was going to do. "Build the wall!" Drain the swamp!" even "Lock her up!" became rallying cries that were easy to understand and repeat. Conversely, Mrs. Clinton's positive proposals, stayed in more complex language were sidelined, and deflected by an unending barrage of "emails," "pay for play," and more "emails." Whereas the Democrats campaign was put on the defensive, and became more about what's wrong with Trump than about what she wanted to accomplish. Right now, people in a state of shock are putting aside (for the most part) their separate agendas and marching together. If this energy can be sustained with one or two positive goals that are easy to enumerate the resistance could succeed. However, if we are seduced by divisiveness, as promulgated by Bannon's strategies, we may be doomed to passionate and increasingly violent confrontations, and we are doomed. This is not the first time repressive ideologies have risen to overwhelm us, but there may not be any good guys left in the world to rescue us. It's in our hands, we must unite.
5
I dunno. This article seems like a bunch of blah, blah, blah. I traveled from the west coast to be there in DC and I was fundamentally changed by it. Partially due to the size. Courage in numbers so to speak.
My favorite thing yet written about the march comes from Jia Tolentino: "The crowds on Saturday were so enormous, so radiant with love and dissent, that this larger coming together seemed possible."
Time will tell for sure.
My favorite thing yet written about the march comes from Jia Tolentino: "The crowds on Saturday were so enormous, so radiant with love and dissent, that this larger coming together seemed possible."
Time will tell for sure.
9
While it gives us hope to see 3.5 million people out in the streets protesting against President Trump, we should think about whether this would cause the change we are looking for. As the author rightly points out, anti-war protests in 2003 was ignored and dismissed as a 'focus group', we face being brushed - off again in 2017, by an administration that has shown apathy to people's concerns. If the protesters in 2003 'failed to transform into an electoral force capable of defeating President Bush in 2004', we have now arrived at a crucial juncture in the way American democracy functions. It is perhaps the best time now to rethink the way the electoral college works. Isn't it high time we completely did away with the electoral college and let the candidate winning the popular vote become the POTUS? Otherwise, I am afraid we face a repeat of this debacle in 2020.
3
Of course the size of the Women's March matters! The Deplorable in Chief wouldn't be making such a big deal about it if size didn't matter,
13
It is my hope that Congress realized that women will stand up for their rights. In two years we can vote for women's rights when we elect a new Congress.
7
For every protestor, there are fifty like me (too old and likely to faint, or unable to get off work) behind the scenes.
I protested the Vietnam ad Iraq wars. They came together much more quickly than you report. What was different about Vietnam protest, was that it was SUSTAINED over years. But then, as now, Republicans (and others) ignored or demonized us.
Solidarity! Let's keep it up! AND VOTE in 2018.
I protested the Vietnam ad Iraq wars. They came together much more quickly than you report. What was different about Vietnam protest, was that it was SUSTAINED over years. But then, as now, Republicans (and others) ignored or demonized us.
Solidarity! Let's keep it up! AND VOTE in 2018.
12
In my research I have found that social protest is about occupying the public space and forcing the powerful the corridors of power to pay attention. It is dominating the elite discourse. For this to happen protest must garner attention and coverage from elite/mainstream news media. The mainstream coverage forces the power elites to take notice. The 2003 protest against the war was ignored (by ignored I mean did pay not adequate attention to the substantive issues) by the powerful media, including this newspaper. Whereas, to some extent the elite media in the early days paid some attention to Occupy, but then it quickly de-legitimized it. Now the recent women's march was again largely ignored by the media, as Trump and his statements dominated the media. It was compelling show by Roberts and Klibnoff in The Race Beat. IAlso see:
http://www.cyberorient.net/article.do?articleId=7766
http://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/claiming-the-public-space/278196
Also see
http://www.cyberorient.net/article.do?articleId=7766
http://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/claiming-the-public-space/278196
Also see
1
Protests aren’t reliable indicators of much because people who approve of existing policies don’t show up at protests. For example, the Dakota Access Pipeline protestors aren’t representative of Native America. For every Native American protesting the pipeline, thousands of Native Americans are accepting oil and gas leases and drawing oil and gas royalties. The pipeline protestors aren’t even representative of North Dakota’s tribal people. North Dakota’s Fort Berthold Reservation has more than 1,700 oil and gas leases. Since drilling began in the Bakken Formation a few year ago, these leases have generated more than $80 million in Indian Bureau bonus payments to the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara, the tribes the Sioux pushed off their land in the mid-1700s. Today, they are known as the Three Affiliated Tribes. Unsatisfied with lease and royalty revenue, the three tribes recently formed their own oil and gas production company named Missouri River Resources. It began drilling wells in 2015 and is now producing 1,000 barrels per day. It recently brought up leases on 3,000 acres alongside the Missouri River.
1
Zeynep Tufekci must not be paying attention to say that today's marchers must consider the march a first step. That's happening. That's all I can see online--recommendations for next steps. And I am taking those steps. And so is everyone I know.
3
To add to our demands, keeping a "local" focus on job creation is important, too. Why do red states always look towards Washington to create jobs? In my area, we had one city who courted both tech startups and small manufacturing companies, and another city who courted big retail instead. These decisions were made by local politicians and city planners. So guess which community now has the higher paying jobs and offers their young graduates more lucrative opportunities? Which city has property values increasing and crime diminishing? Which city is led by conservatives and which one has progressive leadership? Sorry Republican readers, not the retail one. Economic prosperity starts at the local level and surprise, surprise, the Republicans are not the big job creators--they are the destroyers. They take fast money, leave communities in debt, and don't give back or plan for the future. The red states vote in local Republicans who cast blame on a Democratic Washington while sitting back and doing nothing themselves to build a strong economy for all residents. And ignorantly, those red state folks keep electing them and looking to Washington for a savior.
2
This piece merely champions the obvious: No one I know who participated in the marches (I went to the one in Chicago) thinks a single day of protest will get the job done.
And we are organized, and an agenda has been laid. See www.womensmarch.com/100 for actions we're taking now.
Yes, we have to stay active and organized. And yes, we know that.
And we are organized, and an agenda has been laid. See www.womensmarch.com/100 for actions we're taking now.
Yes, we have to stay active and organized. And yes, we know that.
2
Are you serious? There are A LOT of participants who were involved one way or another now following up with serious grassroots organizing. The spectical of millions of marchers have ignited the enthusiasm and conviction of many more participants in the resist movement. Sometimes things are exactly like they appear.
6
Protests still matter and the numbers that show up matter, whether we live in the digital age or not. In fact, the far larger number of people who showed up to protest last Saturday (in D.C. and around the world) versus the far smaller number of people who showed up at Trump's coronation - the latter of which had plenty of advance hoopla, planning time, institutional backing and media coverage - is especially meaningful. Ask Mubarak whether protests matter. Ask the former leaders of Tunisia. Protests do not usually turn the tide - immediately & in and of themselves. But they are a beginning and a fair measure (not unlike the popular vote margin- for a very unpopular candidate no less) of public support or the lack thereof. Why do you think the Trump administration is so concerned about the numbers? It is not all about Trump's ridiculous ego. Governments, even autocratic governments, that ignore the will of the people do so at their peril and eventually will get their comeuppance.
3
For openers, SIZE does matter, else why would Trump be so obsessed with his physical shortcomings?
Instead of paying attention to the issues, reasons and the large numbers of people who did not vote for him, he whines that photos of his inauguration were taken too early to really count.
He instructs his staff to lie, to make false claims, to stir up the 13 percent of people who voted for him in the primaries, to claim a false mandate while intelligent, thoughtful people in congress [and yes, there are a paltry few] stand by and do nothing to stop him.
His character flaws are so many it will be difficult to determine which one is the cause of his tragic end. Were not Pence worse, it cannot happen soon enough.
Instead of paying attention to the issues, reasons and the large numbers of people who did not vote for him, he whines that photos of his inauguration were taken too early to really count.
He instructs his staff to lie, to make false claims, to stir up the 13 percent of people who voted for him in the primaries, to claim a false mandate while intelligent, thoughtful people in congress [and yes, there are a paltry few] stand by and do nothing to stop him.
His character flaws are so many it will be difficult to determine which one is the cause of his tragic end. Were not Pence worse, it cannot happen soon enough.
5
If the American people are serious about opposing our government’s foreign policies and our congressional representative refuse to listen to our voices, the only real option left is for Americans to organize and stage a national general strike.
This is how people in Hungary, East Germany, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, and Romania. overthrew a despotic regime with their “Velvet Revolutions” in 1989. Nobody goes to work until our government acts in our interests and welfare.
This is how people in Hungary, East Germany, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, and Romania. overthrew a despotic regime with their “Velvet Revolutions” in 1989. Nobody goes to work until our government acts in our interests and welfare.
3
Enraged = engaged. The numbers do matter. And please remember that the 3.5 million protesters actually looked up from their smart phones and computers, and drove their cars, sat on buses, flew across the country, or simply walked to their local sister protest. They didn't just "like" it on Facebook. They actually showed up for something that matters very much to them and the rest of the country. I am one white male who looks forward to this country's women tossing this fool out of office, along with the cranks who enable him.
10
I guess to the President size does matter, whether is a protest crowd, hands, or whatever.
3
I escort at clinic which provides pregnancy terminations. We have seen an immediate effect from the march with new young women and men coming forward and volunteering to escort. My daughter and I participated in the march in Washington in the late 1980's to preserve women's reproductive rights. It made a difference. Marches can become a movement, and yes it will take a sustained effort. The people I know who participated in the march in various cities have already started networking.
Even given social media, the marches were amazing in the number of people who participated, and the number of people around the globe who participated, some at personal risk. We are indeed, stronger together. We cannot lose hope. It took more than one march to end the war in Vietnam, but eventually the people in Washington had to listen. The same is true for Roe vs Wade. It was a lengthy sustained effort to gain the right for women to have reproductive choices. The marches we saw last Saturday were the beginning, not the end.
Even given social media, the marches were amazing in the number of people who participated, and the number of people around the globe who participated, some at personal risk. We are indeed, stronger together. We cannot lose hope. It took more than one march to end the war in Vietnam, but eventually the people in Washington had to listen. The same is true for Roe vs Wade. It was a lengthy sustained effort to gain the right for women to have reproductive choices. The marches we saw last Saturday were the beginning, not the end.
9
Marching is easy (and as you say, now easier than ever), but change is hard. As many have pointed out, it takes time, and while time may be necessary, it is far from sufficient. This is the big barrier that is now being faced: beyond the relatively easy acts of protest (which are barely more than a mild kind of tantrum), what actions are needed to actually force change? I see the only hope as targeting the midterm elections to tip the scales in Congress. Forget about the Presidency for now, and concentrate on getting Republicans out of Congress, as soon as possible. There is barely enough time to start getting electable candidates on the path, and meanwhile we have to be relentless gadflies against every Republican Representative and Senator, on issues that matter to the people in their districts.
4
Maybe crowd size is devalued in the so-called digital age, as your research suggests. Nonetheless, the Women's March and Sister Marches deeply inspired me and many, many other women and men to participate in or continue their effective activism. The general idea of these marches was to inspire and activate Progressive change. Doubtful anyone thinks marching alone can solve this ideological takeover of government. And I wouldn't cite a George Bush or any of the current takeover artists' reaction to validate a theory of Progressive demonstration impact--this is just another way of retweeting celeb information when history will show how little value it had. Here in Colorado, the week before inauguration, our gerrymandered 6th district congressman literally sneaked out the back door of his own town hall meeting with police help because 200 people showed up instead of the usual, compliant 4 persons per "audience". Please check out activist websites, some new, some longstanding, now re-energized, all reflecting impressive intelligence and emotional maturity heretofore swamped by the loud, not-all-that-representative Tea Party. CO Rep. Sen. Cory Gardner is very difficult to reach, and some complain here they can't even leave messages at some of his offices. Thanks though for the additional reminder to get active on top of marching.
4
Maybe Democrats and progressives need to take a page from the current Republican playbook. Instead of ridiculing Republican lawmakers for their hypocrisy as they fall in line with Trump, maybe we just need to fall in line with each other over one or two giant issues even if the group stance doesn't represent one's own to the actual letter. Fold a little, give a little. Sometimes liberals, especially those on the far left, are too afraid of "selling out" to the more centrist folks. Exhibit A - Bernie primary voters who couldn't bring themselves to vote for Hillary (because she was - gasp - a politician!) when Bernie lost the nomination. I say, fall in line. Figure out what stance we can all live with, and unite. By the way, where IS Bernie now?
2
Here's an example from one marcher in the Women's March. Since the March, I have called my 2 senators 2 times each, my first times ever doing that, and I'm 70. I've also joined up with a local group of Indivisible. There are parts of the Trump agenda that I seriously care about, and I will make my legislators hear me. And our crowd will vote in 2018. We're not going away.
9
I participated in the march in DC against the war in Iraq in January 2003, over the King holiday weekend. It was huge, though the February one was even larger.
In January, the ships had already started to head to the Persian Gulf about 10 days earlier in preparation for the invasion, and we had a faint hope they could turn around. For those who marched in February 2003, there was even less hope of a change in policy and it would have had to have been primarily a large objection to register against the government.
What I did note in the January march, which was my first ever, at age 49, was that I ran into people who said that they were there representing 20 people of a similar view at home.
And that's what I want to emphasize--that many who attended the Women's March in DC or any of the Sister marches or any of the marches abroad were there for others as well as for themselves.
As to action, Michael Moore said to stay in touch with Congress on a daily basis and I have been doing that. Their numbers are in my phone address book. I think marches are a legitimate way to unite people in a cause. It felt so good to go to a Sister rally in Baltimore! So many different groups were joining together. I honestly felt more hopeful when I got home than I have in months. Other actions will be necessary in the future, but I keep my sneakers and pussy hat close to the door, just in case.
In January, the ships had already started to head to the Persian Gulf about 10 days earlier in preparation for the invasion, and we had a faint hope they could turn around. For those who marched in February 2003, there was even less hope of a change in policy and it would have had to have been primarily a large objection to register against the government.
What I did note in the January march, which was my first ever, at age 49, was that I ran into people who said that they were there representing 20 people of a similar view at home.
And that's what I want to emphasize--that many who attended the Women's March in DC or any of the Sister marches or any of the marches abroad were there for others as well as for themselves.
As to action, Michael Moore said to stay in touch with Congress on a daily basis and I have been doing that. Their numbers are in my phone address book. I think marches are a legitimate way to unite people in a cause. It felt so good to go to a Sister rally in Baltimore! So many different groups were joining together. I honestly felt more hopeful when I got home than I have in months. Other actions will be necessary in the future, but I keep my sneakers and pussy hat close to the door, just in case.
8
I'm betting if it was a march for insecure balding men with small hands, size would matter
1
Sorry, but no. In the age of social media, many have bemoaned the fact that signing an online petition or posting to facebook or tweeting or re-tweeting constitutes "action," making it that much harder and less likely that millions will hit the streets. This was an amazing show of force.
5
Why do all the "thinkers" want to debunk the Marches? Or minimize their impact? Obviously they're not enough in and of themselves but the Marches were rallying points intended to get people together, boost their spirits and begin an organized resistance. Apparently some liberals would rather stay home and throw up their hands. We are in desperate times!
2
Ms. Tufeki, as someone who's been an environmental movement organizer for 25 years, I say you've missed the point. The importance of the marches was not the organizers bragging "see what I can do," but the fact that millions of individuals were motivated to not just sign petitions or make phone calls, but to take a day or day out of their lives to take action in visible physical form. It's not valid to compare this to the turnouts achieved after months of effort by organizers in the past. This was not an achievement of an organiztion or organizations but essentially spontaneous action by individual citizens.
3
The current power center in Washington DC is a house of cards built on lies. Massive waves of protest in DC are needed. The upcoming March for Science should really be a March for Truth to broaden, but better target the message. Marches in cities across the U.S. help with local organization and embolden citizens, but have no immediate effect on the DC power center. When we marched on DC against the Vietnam War, Nixon was worried. He knew that governments fall when the streets are filled with endless waves of protesters demanding a new government. The current administration and Reps in Congress now center policy on an extreme right wing ideology opposed by a substantial majority of citizens. Yes, the local organization is critical, but we the people need to force the policymakers to immediately stop using lying as a tactic to push through their policies because, frankly, organizations like the NYT and NPR struggle to call a pack of lies a pack of lies. A march of 2 million people located in DC would be tough to ignore.
3
The points made in the article are interesting, but the number of people in a march has never been a sure sign of strength, no matter the age in which the march occurs. How many battles, indeed, how many wars have been lost when strategies and tactics are based on that fallacious argument. And not to put a too fine emphasis on the present argument, I remain curious how folks assume the ideas at issue here, that the multitude may not reflect strength and/or meaning on numbers alone, have never been thought of or tried in the past. Primordial, digital, industrial, none of them really matter when assessing a matter that belongs primarily to logic.
1
This has been underpinning my frustration since 2011. The mega difference between OWS and the Tea Party was the focused financial support from the Koch Brothers and a crystal clear agenda. We on the progressive side have been operating in siloed spheres for far too long. I continue to hear the term "Intersectionality" used to describe the need to "cross-pollinate" cohesion that leads to a more robust and unified front. The problem, in my opinion, is "identity politics" versus what I refer to as "Paradigm Change." Do we need to elevate the issues that are and have been eroding for women and African American's for far too long? Yes, but I offer that 2017 is not 1968. We had a collapse of the economy engineered by pandemic fraud built in the wake of collapsing the productive economy for decades. Everyone and everything has become expendable for the entrenched revolving door of power that has by definition acted criminally and therefore is illegitimate. Yes, we must protest and build critical mass, but if we don't collectively wrap our heads around what happened and how we're the amateur hour compared to professional assassins.
It not only has to be large but continuous otherwise it will fade out.
Example of successful protests...
1-Abolishing slavery.
2-Women's rights.
3-Labor rights.
4-1960 Civil Rights
5-Anti Vietnam War protests......etc. etc. etc.
Example of successful protests...
1-Abolishing slavery.
2-Women's rights.
3-Labor rights.
4-1960 Civil Rights
5-Anti Vietnam War protests......etc. etc. etc.
3
anytime you can get that many people out it means something, they spent a lot of time and effort, it shows dedication
3
The thing about protesting against Trump is that it actually gets under his skin. He is all about appearances and image--pretty much to the exclusion of everything else. It's Friday and the man is still obsessing over his inauguration numbers, still trying desperately to boost them, because he thinks the overwhelming turnout for the Women's March made him look weak. So, yes, definitely join Daily Action, contact your Senators/Representatives, work on political campaigns, but also KEEP MARCHING!
3
Where I now live, I sometimes see one or two people protesting the treatment of Falun Gong by the Chinese government. It's a worthy cause but largely unknown.
On the streets last weekend, tens of thousands of women and men marched in solidarity with Americans in opposition to the new fascism. Photographs were taken and exchanged over the internet. Phone calls were made to old friends. News was shared. People in many places could see that they were not alone. As in the election, the majority showed that they did not want Trump as President.
Of course size matters.
On the streets last weekend, tens of thousands of women and men marched in solidarity with Americans in opposition to the new fascism. Photographs were taken and exchanged over the internet. Phone calls were made to old friends. News was shared. People in many places could see that they were not alone. As in the election, the majority showed that they did not want Trump as President.
Of course size matters.
17
At age 73-plus, I marched on Saturday, January 21. For the first time in my life I marched. I, like myriad others, am "extending the march" with consistent phone calls to my senators and representative; emails, postcards, and letters to Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell; with meetings with a local "justice team" to plan a way forward to counteract what's happening; by regularly sharing information with friends and acquaintances about ongoing activities/issues as well as alerting them about what Trump and his administration are doing and saying each day; etc., etc. I will be visiting the offices of my representatives, both Republicans and Democrats. This will be part of my daily routine for the next period of time until Trump is out of office. These efforts are extensions of the Women's March. Never in my 73 years have I witnessed an attack on our country like the one I see today. We've had presidents that I considered weak and with whom I disagreed. But in my view we've never before had a president who was mentally ill. Now we do. I am compelled to take a stand against most of what the current administration is doing, for the sake of my children, their children, and the future of our country. My personal impact may be a small one. It may fail. But I'm compelled. This is partly a result of the Women's March. So say what you will about it, it has provided us with a spring-board for ongoing efforts toward justice, fairness, honesty, and a better country.
3
What was billed as a March in Washington and sister cities was in actuality a world March. The numbers were a shock to everyone. That shock woke people up and lit a fire under them. An article which dismissing the profound effect of numbers to shock with that shock leading to a huge growth in awareness, as this one seems to, just makes no sense to me. Yes there is work which must still be done but this March was work. Work that mattered. Don't dismiss this, please!
2
In my opinion a protests size does not matter because it can take one person with no help at all to change a persons mind, but if you want to be noticed or want to be known then yes, the size then matters.
2
The Saturday marches were just the first step. If one is paying attention, marches and protests have continued all week. Crowds calling, writing and protesting AT their congressmen's offices and meeting places (Philadelphia yesterday) are occurring. Federal offices given a gag order are speaking out anyway. Even a White House staffer went public with tweets about the chaos occurring therein with Trump's staff. This is only the first week, and this is just the beginning. This mentally ill man will see constant, unrelenting push back against the evil he is trying to unleash, until he is removed from office.
3
The unity is what is and was contagious. No need to exchange numbers...social media was used like it was in Egypt and other places... Fortunately, we do have a Constitution so our movement will continue. I'm glad that you're a part of it.
Nice piece from a fellow Tarheel! My hope is that the communication channels that make it easier to organize a large protest now will also facilitate continuing political action.
I am shocked! The tv station C-Span is covering the March for Life and I do not recall it ever happening before. This is absolutely wonderful and pro lifers are finally being seen and heard and taken seriously. It is long overdue and we are not to to be taken for granted. I am ecstatic at the coverage and hopefully many babies' lives will start to be saved. The crowds are overwhelming and continue to grow. This is so positive and encouraging. Thank God.
2
At first I was annoyed at all the people including op-ed contributors piling on to question and criticize the efficacy of the Women's Marches. As if how millions of people chose to spend a day - Jan 21 -- was somehow something they needed to wag their finger and chide us on. As if they knew better what we should be doing on Jan 21.
And then I realized the fact that so many people and pundits feel the need to criticize and question was in fact proof that we had gotten under their skin. They noticed... and now with the exception of a few they rush in to try to assure everyone it was meaningless. We who were there know that the marches had meaning; that they are just the start; that we have more to do, and many are already doing it.
So go ahead NYT, take up more column inches on articles about what people wore to the march and the poor dads in NJ forced to take care of their kids for the day. Go ahead David Brooks and fall flat on your behind bloviating how the march didn't matter; go ahead Frank Bruni worrying about the profanities and pink hats. And now this meandering article.
To all those wagging fingers from the sidelines, I consider that a badge of honor. Bring it on. We know what we're doing. We got this.
And then I realized the fact that so many people and pundits feel the need to criticize and question was in fact proof that we had gotten under their skin. They noticed... and now with the exception of a few they rush in to try to assure everyone it was meaningless. We who were there know that the marches had meaning; that they are just the start; that we have more to do, and many are already doing it.
So go ahead NYT, take up more column inches on articles about what people wore to the march and the poor dads in NJ forced to take care of their kids for the day. Go ahead David Brooks and fall flat on your behind bloviating how the march didn't matter; go ahead Frank Bruni worrying about the profanities and pink hats. And now this meandering article.
To all those wagging fingers from the sidelines, I consider that a badge of honor. Bring it on. We know what we're doing. We got this.
4
Marching in the street results at best in a few seconds on tv.
To be a chilling challenge to society however protesters need a network able to damage the every day routines for the third party, the ordinary citizen. Strikes in various sectors is the usual tool. Living in Paris I have - and on innumerable occasions - witnessed the dangers in so disturbing ordinary people. Hard cheese you bet.
To be a chilling challenge to society however protesters need a network able to damage the every day routines for the third party, the ordinary citizen. Strikes in various sectors is the usual tool. Living in Paris I have - and on innumerable occasions - witnessed the dangers in so disturbing ordinary people. Hard cheese you bet.
1
This article is disingenuous, and I will use some digital marketing jargon I have picked up in the past few years to explain why. When you have a piece of content posted online -- a social media post, a blog post on your website, a banner ad paid to be displayed on a different site -- you are trying to optimize the number of "conversion actions" you can have. A conversion can be as simple as a click, or it can be going from ad to full-blown purchase.
An in-person visit is one of the most difficult conversion actions to elicit. The internet is all about instant gratification, posting memes and angry status updates rather than taking action. While a march is a simpler action in some ways than volunteering with a local organization, it is also a hard sell to get lots of people to come together at one place and time when they could be cozying up at home.
So, yes, having 3.5 million protesters actually show up is a pretty big deal. It shouldn't be the only metric used to measure success, but the optics of people overflowing the streets achieve one of the results the organizers intended. Saying "oh, it's so easy these days" is mere hand waving and frankly distracting to the power of a message a protest sends.
I do however wholeheartedly agree with the author's conclusion here: "More than ever before, the significance of a protest depends on what happens afterward." There is still much work to be done.
An in-person visit is one of the most difficult conversion actions to elicit. The internet is all about instant gratification, posting memes and angry status updates rather than taking action. While a march is a simpler action in some ways than volunteering with a local organization, it is also a hard sell to get lots of people to come together at one place and time when they could be cozying up at home.
So, yes, having 3.5 million protesters actually show up is a pretty big deal. It shouldn't be the only metric used to measure success, but the optics of people overflowing the streets achieve one of the results the organizers intended. Saying "oh, it's so easy these days" is mere hand waving and frankly distracting to the power of a message a protest sends.
I do however wholeheartedly agree with the author's conclusion here: "More than ever before, the significance of a protest depends on what happens afterward." There is still much work to be done.
4
Please be scientific in your analysis. It takes more than one march - look at civil rights, the Vietnam war protests. If you don't speak up gather you don't get any attention. Facebook and Instagram (the new Facebook) make communications much easier - the size of the crowds were amazing given the short time to organize. It is significant that fewer people showed up for the inauguration of Trump than that for Obama. That was a statement! Just as was the Women's March. Yes - we need to speak out - what do you plan to do?
2
I am surprised at the number of people who apparently read only the top of the article, never getting to the key point - what happens with the energy of the protest afterward is what determines the success of the protest. Otherwise, it's merely organized petulance, a tantrum writ large.
From a supporter of the March - One of the more appalling things to me was the exclusion of the pro-life folks. Can you imagine how much less effective the Civil Rights protest would have been if MLK et al had said "Black people only." The Viet Nam protests became effective once mothers and fathers joined their college children on the lines.
To be effective the energy must be translated into actionable points that can attract agreement, even from the doctrinally impure - like the WWC people who held their noses and voted for Trump with grave misgivings. I, for one, hope this happens. Because it would be a shame to lose any chance of effecting change from this. Anger alone is not going to get it done.
From a supporter of the March - One of the more appalling things to me was the exclusion of the pro-life folks. Can you imagine how much less effective the Civil Rights protest would have been if MLK et al had said "Black people only." The Viet Nam protests became effective once mothers and fathers joined their college children on the lines.
To be effective the energy must be translated into actionable points that can attract agreement, even from the doctrinally impure - like the WWC people who held their noses and voted for Trump with grave misgivings. I, for one, hope this happens. Because it would be a shame to lose any chance of effecting change from this. Anger alone is not going to get it done.
1
The Republican party wins because professionals can make a good living at it.
Volunteers and marchers are no match for people who do it every day for pay.
Volunteers and marchers are no match for people who do it every day for pay.
Yes, of course, crowd size matters. The media constantly tries to minimize public actions, particularly women's actions, as they have done with the Women's March on Washington and the 673 Sister Marches around the world.
The "official" count of registered and counted participants this morning is
4,956,422 women and men who are opposed to everything The Con Don plans to do to destroy America. Try to discount it if you like but those who were afraid to march, were unable to march or who simply would never march and/or protest are VERY thankful to those of us who did. How do I know? Because they told me so in personal e-mails.
Personally, as one who marched in Seattle, I believe even the "official" numbers are very low because so many people spontaneously participated without registering and joined the march beyond where the counting took place. I believe the crowd in Seattle, estimated at 125,000, was about 225,000 actual walkers (no room to "march") and that figure doesn't include those lining the sidewalks and watching out of office and residential buildings who supported the march.
Do NOT underestimate the anger of average citizens at the takeover of OUR governments by the LIES-hate-anger-fear-war mongers that make up the
Top 1% Global Financial Elite Robber Baron/Radical Religion Boys Party and who instruct The Con Don. This is just the start.
The "official" count of registered and counted participants this morning is
4,956,422 women and men who are opposed to everything The Con Don plans to do to destroy America. Try to discount it if you like but those who were afraid to march, were unable to march or who simply would never march and/or protest are VERY thankful to those of us who did. How do I know? Because they told me so in personal e-mails.
Personally, as one who marched in Seattle, I believe even the "official" numbers are very low because so many people spontaneously participated without registering and joined the march beyond where the counting took place. I believe the crowd in Seattle, estimated at 125,000, was about 225,000 actual walkers (no room to "march") and that figure doesn't include those lining the sidewalks and watching out of office and residential buildings who supported the march.
Do NOT underestimate the anger of average citizens at the takeover of OUR governments by the LIES-hate-anger-fear-war mongers that make up the
Top 1% Global Financial Elite Robber Baron/Radical Religion Boys Party and who instruct The Con Don. This is just the start.
22
Here is the updated "official" count, which I believe is still very low.
https://www.womensmarch.com/sisters/
https://www.womensmarch.com/sisters/
Don't underestimate Trump's rage and self-righteousness.
Well, I beg to differ. Your research doesn't apply here. All around me people are organizing groups and events, calling congressmen/women, sending emails, visiting offices, and on and on. If you can't recognize THIS MOVEMENT, you just aren't paying attention!
2
Why are we STILL wasting Digital-Ink on Donald-Trump-Crowd-Madness? It is in the new DSM just released January 21, 2017.
Peaceful disobedience matters and it has to be widespread across and organized and showcased in red states and rural belt highlighting how extremist Republicans and a president who is suffering from delusions of grandeur and paranoia is destroying this democracy. Our ego maniacal president and his right wing nut leaders - Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell have together immensely damaged fabric of this nation, just within a week at the helms of power
2
In support of Tufekci, I note that pro-life protests / marches tend to be smaller than pro-choice/abortion rights ones - I think that we will see this again today, compared to last week's march - but the pro-lifers have maintained their overall strength across the nation.
1
we are living in dangerous times since ascendency of ego maniacal president who lies and his sycophants unashamedly spin out fake news and call it "alternate facts".
Their achievements:
1. A billionaire cabinet picks who are ready to drain this nation's wealth to enrich themselves.
2. A president who is pathological liar who is already enriching himself and his family. No wonder he is hiding his Tax Returns.
3. A president and his handlers are compromised by Russia and they could well be Russian Agents doing the bidding for Putin.
4. A president who rolled back mortgage insurance credit- which many families of modest means rely or realizing their American dream of having a home.
5. Dismantling of ACA which many in red states depend on. A promise by DJT to help the working class broken. Besides, these ill conceived actions by DJT and his sycophants in congress will result in serious job loss.
6. This intellectually bankrupt president has just triggered a trade war with our closest ally and neighbor, which will result loss of jobs here.
7. Soon we will be called a country lead by a tinpot dictator.
8. Now DJT and KKK rep ( Bannon) are trying to muzzle the press and the media n general who speak truth to authority. So long First Amendment !
These are just a few concerns people of average intelligence have, not the morons in the White House and some in the Capitol Hill.
Their achievements:
1. A billionaire cabinet picks who are ready to drain this nation's wealth to enrich themselves.
2. A president who is pathological liar who is already enriching himself and his family. No wonder he is hiding his Tax Returns.
3. A president and his handlers are compromised by Russia and they could well be Russian Agents doing the bidding for Putin.
4. A president who rolled back mortgage insurance credit- which many families of modest means rely or realizing their American dream of having a home.
5. Dismantling of ACA which many in red states depend on. A promise by DJT to help the working class broken. Besides, these ill conceived actions by DJT and his sycophants in congress will result in serious job loss.
6. This intellectually bankrupt president has just triggered a trade war with our closest ally and neighbor, which will result loss of jobs here.
7. Soon we will be called a country lead by a tinpot dictator.
8. Now DJT and KKK rep ( Bannon) are trying to muzzle the press and the media n general who speak truth to authority. So long First Amendment !
These are just a few concerns people of average intelligence have, not the morons in the White House and some in the Capitol Hill.
4
Perhaps today's marches serve a different purpose than those in the past. Rather than the march itself making change, a well-attended march charges up those marching or those sympathetic with the marchers, to GET BUSY. This seems to be the sentiment for many of us involved in last weekend's Anti-Trump March.
"You may disagree with the Tea Party, but they were effective in making sure that their views were heard and amplified.”
The capacity of the press, particularly the NYTs to avoid looking at its self objectively is mind-boggling. For example compare the very uncritical but copious Times coverage of the t-party often by Kate Zernike with the coverage of the occupy movement as represented by Bill Kellerman who couldn't contain himself for the derision overwhelming him.
And here we have more neoliberal, if that, perspective delegitimizing grass roots heartfelt political action. One has to ask oneself what the heck is with the NYTs. And in this case we have Leonhardt writing a column explaining this column. Both on very shaky ground. Smoke signals, jungle drums, carrier pidgins, or digital communication, it is the response to the message that is significant not the means.
The journalist culture at the Times and pretty much across the board whether it be the TV networks, The News Hour, NPR somehow manages to live in a world of its own creation.
The central fact of the t-party is that this paper and the national media gave it near daily front page coverage for a very long time. More that that, it was non-critical to say the least, very much as it delivered forTrump for many months. Compare a year ago with the present. Managing editors at the Times are either very mixed up or playing a seriously flawed game, I think both.
The capacity of the press, particularly the NYTs to avoid looking at its self objectively is mind-boggling. For example compare the very uncritical but copious Times coverage of the t-party often by Kate Zernike with the coverage of the occupy movement as represented by Bill Kellerman who couldn't contain himself for the derision overwhelming him.
And here we have more neoliberal, if that, perspective delegitimizing grass roots heartfelt political action. One has to ask oneself what the heck is with the NYTs. And in this case we have Leonhardt writing a column explaining this column. Both on very shaky ground. Smoke signals, jungle drums, carrier pidgins, or digital communication, it is the response to the message that is significant not the means.
The journalist culture at the Times and pretty much across the board whether it be the TV networks, The News Hour, NPR somehow manages to live in a world of its own creation.
The central fact of the t-party is that this paper and the national media gave it near daily front page coverage for a very long time. More that that, it was non-critical to say the least, very much as it delivered forTrump for many months. Compare a year ago with the present. Managing editors at the Times are either very mixed up or playing a seriously flawed game, I think both.
1
Does a protest's cause matter?
I expect people in other countries wonder why we don't address our own problems.
We march for the right to abortion, the right to birth control pills, for equal rights, rights that have been ours for decades. We march to support the 'right' of illegals to be here illegally.
Do we march to help the people in inner-city Chicago, where 762 people, primarily young men, murdered each other in 2016? Do we march for the 12 people shot in Chicago on Wednesday night, when six people were shot "during a memorial for a victim of gun violence in Chicago. Police were called on Wednesday night to the city's south side after a gang ambushed the vigil. Among the victims was the mother of the 20-year-old dead woman whom mourners had gathered to remember." Quote from BBC.
Do we march for the right to help struggling students, to gather books and help children read? Do we march to provide math tutors to children? Do we march for the right to help new mothers with breast feeding? Do we march for the right to help parents make good food choices, to know that frozen veggies are often more nutritious than 'fresh' that have lost nutrients during their 2-3 day journey to the grocer's? Those women, children, and families are in every city.
I understand: it's human nature. Most of us concentrate on ourselves.
I understand: there's romance about helping the Third World.
But shouldn't we help those who live in our own country? Can't we help our fellow citizens?
I expect people in other countries wonder why we don't address our own problems.
We march for the right to abortion, the right to birth control pills, for equal rights, rights that have been ours for decades. We march to support the 'right' of illegals to be here illegally.
Do we march to help the people in inner-city Chicago, where 762 people, primarily young men, murdered each other in 2016? Do we march for the 12 people shot in Chicago on Wednesday night, when six people were shot "during a memorial for a victim of gun violence in Chicago. Police were called on Wednesday night to the city's south side after a gang ambushed the vigil. Among the victims was the mother of the 20-year-old dead woman whom mourners had gathered to remember." Quote from BBC.
Do we march for the right to help struggling students, to gather books and help children read? Do we march to provide math tutors to children? Do we march for the right to help new mothers with breast feeding? Do we march for the right to help parents make good food choices, to know that frozen veggies are often more nutritious than 'fresh' that have lost nutrients during their 2-3 day journey to the grocer's? Those women, children, and families are in every city.
I understand: it's human nature. Most of us concentrate on ourselves.
I understand: there's romance about helping the Third World.
But shouldn't we help those who live in our own country? Can't we help our fellow citizens?
2
The main weakness (but it could also be a plus, if its noticed) is that today, staying in touch with fellow protestors is so easy thru social media, that it drains the impulses to act from most people. There are numerous studies showing that people feel their social media "actions" satisfy them enough to think they're doing something, that they shy from doing real stuff. "Oh I have dont have time for that, but I will retweet this, or sign this unknown sourced online petition," etc.
This predilection started and became ingrained (mostly in the younger generations, under 45) when corporations began to "brand" their products with social causes. (See Naomi Kleins "No Logo".) Where buying their products let people think they were taking socially positive actions, because a few cents on the dollar were going to some charity.
Now people think forwarding protest petitions, or retweeting celebrities, or social cause du jour or worse - fake news comments (liberal or conservative, or alt-right) is doing something.
While I was shocked, but very pleased by the numbers showing up for last Saturday's marches and were all peaceful, its who and how many show up next month, June, July...next year.
The BIG Q is; if as things now look, the new Admin and Congress harm peoples economic lives, screw their health-care up, figure ways to censor the press, sic their attack dogs on the least of us, etc...will people be too preoccupied to get out there, be too afraid, or it will rouse many more?
This predilection started and became ingrained (mostly in the younger generations, under 45) when corporations began to "brand" their products with social causes. (See Naomi Kleins "No Logo".) Where buying their products let people think they were taking socially positive actions, because a few cents on the dollar were going to some charity.
Now people think forwarding protest petitions, or retweeting celebrities, or social cause du jour or worse - fake news comments (liberal or conservative, or alt-right) is doing something.
While I was shocked, but very pleased by the numbers showing up for last Saturday's marches and were all peaceful, its who and how many show up next month, June, July...next year.
The BIG Q is; if as things now look, the new Admin and Congress harm peoples economic lives, screw their health-care up, figure ways to censor the press, sic their attack dogs on the least of us, etc...will people be too preoccupied to get out there, be too afraid, or it will rouse many more?
1
Of course size matters. Just ask Trump
4
Thank you for your insights. Very thought provoking.
Despite it being considerably easier to spread news about an upcoming march or protest via the Internet, it doesn't mean people are necessarily motivated to show up.
I have many friends in the Boston area, who might have attended, but who stayed home due to fear of crowds.
I have many friends in the Boston area, who might have attended, but who stayed home due to fear of crowds.
1
The marchers do not know what they are talking about or marching for. No one said their healthcare will be taken away as they are trying to save the Obamacare mess. As for abortion it will go back to the states. I do not care one way or the other but many people are religious and have a right to their opinion. They do not want their tax dollars going to abortions; so the these radical socialistic democrats pay for abortions. They are liberals and like to pay taxes.
Yes, liberals pay taxes, and conservatives spend them.
4
Size matters to Trump (inauguration crowds, hands, penis, etc.). So the numbers at the protest are driving him crazy (a short drive at best). So yes, it's important to keep our unhinged leader deranged.
4
When David Brock called a bunch of influential Democrats skipped the march. A house divided cannot stand.
1
Jesus started out with himself and twelve acolytes as the only protesters on the periphery of the Roman Empire. There are now 2.3 billion Christians.
Muhammad began with his family and some of his tribe in the middle of the desert. There are 1.6 billion Muslims.
Buddha began his path alone. There 488 million Buddhists.
Moses began with twelve tribes. There are 16 million Jews.
Joseph Smith began with his brother and few family and friends. There are 16 million Mormons.
Size and longevity matter in the persistence of any protest movement.
Muhammad began with his family and some of his tribe in the middle of the desert. There are 1.6 billion Muslims.
Buddha began his path alone. There 488 million Buddhists.
Moses began with twelve tribes. There are 16 million Jews.
Joseph Smith began with his brother and few family and friends. There are 16 million Mormons.
Size and longevity matter in the persistence of any protest movement.
6
Could we hear more from the writer on the mechanics of successful policy opposition? I can agree that the Women's March and related anti-inaugural protests are the beginning. But if the writer has social science observations on what doesn't work, she owes us to explain her findings on what does.
Promoting decent Americans for office was what we did in the recent election. Gerrymandering, media bias and misinformation and a simplistic appeal to atavistic emotions and the power of utterly false promises by the Orange Duck did not keep us safe.
I do not wish to malign the messenger, but you owe us a follow-on column on your view of the path forward.
Promoting decent Americans for office was what we did in the recent election. Gerrymandering, media bias and misinformation and a simplistic appeal to atavistic emotions and the power of utterly false promises by the Orange Duck did not keep us safe.
I do not wish to malign the messenger, but you owe us a follow-on column on your view of the path forward.
2
If you're anything like me, you are still getting email appeals from the Democratic Party for contributions to combat the Trump agenda. My feeling now is that, with that money, an ad firm must immediately be hired and prime time and streaming media ads must start as soon as possible. Although it may be too late for a blockbuster Super Bowl ad, that is the form that the ads should take. Ad placement should not preach to the converted, i.e., "Transparent" - No; "Celebrity Apprentice" - Yes.
If the Dems would promise to do that, I would give more money. Otherwise, the best I can do in protest is march, write, vote as I hope you and others will do.
If the Dems would promise to do that, I would give more money. Otherwise, the best I can do in protest is march, write, vote as I hope you and others will do.
2
Digital devices cannot feel emotions. In a crowd a human can feel the emotions from another human. This is why protests have changed people's lives. The numbers matter to all since this means those who did not attend will start to question their support for King Trump and his Court (Congress). It must continue to focus strategies on King Trump's court. Sooner or later, he will cross his Presidential limits, and the Court will need to act. The world waited for Americans to see the light, and the Women's March illustrated to them we are prepared to ensure it does not go out.
2
Thank you for an incredibly prescient article. Using the Tea Party as a strategy model is a superb idea. The initial binding force for that movement and the continued driver seems to be a combination of fear and anger in a group that sees their vision of the world in danger of extinction. Those of us with a much different vision may already feel those same emotions. Perhaps they will be our motivating force as well. Thank you for a thoughtful article in disturbing times. Please keep writing. What you are doing is so much a part of the binding together that we need so very much.
1
I suppose it hasn't occurred to the author of this simplistic piece that her very own opinion that the size of a protest doesn't matter can and will be folded in to the tyrannous approach of the people who are being protested against and used to guarantee exactly the disappointing results she predicts. With an attitude like that I don't understand why she wastes her time marching. Does it even make any sense to participate in something you have already decided doesn't matter due to its relative "ease" of organizing? And does she really believe that that is WHY some protests seem "not to matter"--the people in power think, "Oh, they didn't have to work as hard to organize this as they did decades ago, who cares what they think?" There are so many other possible explanations for the refusal to change that I couldn't begin to fit them all into this space. Most of them have to do with the problem that was being protested and will continue to be protested: we are dealing with a level of open willingness to oppress unseen in this culture for many years. It possesses the energy of hatred and the will to harm others out of paranoia. Where is the evidence that paranoid people convinced that "the other" is the source of all their woes concern themselves about how "easy" it was to organize a massive protest? This writer confuses her own rather bland interest in historical change due to the electronic era with the emotional realities of the rise of a new kind of bigotry.
2
It's most definitely not about size alone. It is the demonstrative actions and then the resulting coverage by media outlets, including social. If it makes a splash online, it happened, therefore in today's world it is validated.
Likes, videos, comments, articles, blogs, photos, shares is where it is all at.
How many views it has proves its effectiveness. So it could be one person or one million. The cyber stage or platform is a very large one.
Likes, videos, comments, articles, blogs, photos, shares is where it is all at.
How many views it has proves its effectiveness. So it could be one person or one million. The cyber stage or platform is a very large one.
1
So the author went to a big "Occupy" protest and nothing changed in the next few weeks. Therefore the protest wasn't effective. As a reminder, it took 10 years from the publication of "Silent Spring" (1962) to the enactment of FIFRA, the first law regulating pesticides (1972). Yet no one denies that the book was the primary cause. Change takes time. In the case of "Occupy" their efforts made "the 1%" part of the lexicon, and triggered an ongoing discussion of income inequality.
22
It's surprising that the author didn't reference one of the largest protests in Washington: The March For Life. This is an annual event and consistently draws huge crowds, many in excess of 500,000 people, To draw these size crowds, in a liberal city like D.C., is an exercise in commitment To the cause. In addition there are hundreds of similar marches throughout the country. It also serves as a focal point for a strong, on-going Pro-Life movement. If you want to see what a sustained grass-roots, direct-action movement looks like, here's your example.
2
Agree with below DCS review, its a "group think" mindset across various demographics which must be articulated and cogent to further "multiply" out the critical importance of NOW. Thus, with the next phase in local strategy sessions (like the Tea Party did!) and tracking algorithemicaly (data points) on where our movements' inflection points are, to strategically harness the weak and strong spots of influence in our cities/suburbs. If not, then its just mass media coverage, across mobile and laptops, and talked about without FOCUS , while the time is NOW to escalate to the next pivotal level of our new candidates... for mid-term elections, etc.
I am surprised that most of the top comments do not agree with this opinion. What is done in the future will be more important than any demonstration.
In the world of alternative facts, no. Yes, protest. BUT, vote like your life depends upon it, because it does.
2
Right, there were massive anti-war Vietnam protests as Well, Nixon paid no mind. Really need grass roots organization, need to get out and vote, especially in the South.
1
The visible fact that THAT many people went to THAT much trouble to demonstrate their opinions, all over the world, on every continent, tell a lot about this rapidly growing movement. In a couple of weeks, I'm going to my first political organization meeting, at the age of 68. I'm deadly serious about it, and so are 10's of millions of other Americans. Aggressive Progressives. Justice Democrats. NEVER trump.
2
Respectfully I disagree with the this writer. When has social change ever come easily with a single protest? And, frankly to suggest the March on Washington in 1963 was an end point rather than a start or a continual battle for civil rights underscores a movement that has spanned generations. First you must fight for your rights and then you must fight to keep them. I think this writer misses the point of protests because it is a feat to organize regardless of digital tools that speed up the process. Now, just like any other time, a protest is just one part of a much larger movement. Changing policy is one thing but changing culture is much more complicated. It's naive to assume one act will change the culture or policy of a nation but drawing attention to issues like war or corporate tax evasion are the start of larger ripples.
2
This idea, although possibly correct on paper, is absurd! How can marches, nowadays, have less of an effect on politicians simply because they take less sweat to organize? I would think the absolute opposite. The amount of people that take part in the marches is closer than ever before to representing the actual number that supports the cause.
1
Yes, the size of the protest matters in that millions marched rather than thousands or hundreds to visually register their support for continuing to uphold civil rights, women's rights, religious rights - all rights under attack by the new administration. The silent majority has spoken in large numbers and has brought many people to focus on these issues.
Will this movement cause change? If the large majority of marchers felt as I did that "something needs to change" about the basic way Americans treat each other, then the marches are a call to action. Many people are inspired because they feel in their hearts that normalizing the kind if hate in the Republican message cannot be allowed. Do we respect and watch out for others or do we allow the kind of self-centered and hateful behavior that permeates the current White House?
Many are inspired and are realizing that Democracy is not a spectator sport. No more allowing this scenario to happen again, no more complacency about allowing our elected officials "do the right thing". We must be constantly vigilant, otherwise we are back in the 1950s with no civil rights, no women's rights and it's okay to discriminate against anyone who is not a white male.
I hope marches continue on a regular basis to remind everyone that the momentum must continue.
Will this movement cause change? If the large majority of marchers felt as I did that "something needs to change" about the basic way Americans treat each other, then the marches are a call to action. Many people are inspired because they feel in their hearts that normalizing the kind if hate in the Republican message cannot be allowed. Do we respect and watch out for others or do we allow the kind of self-centered and hateful behavior that permeates the current White House?
Many are inspired and are realizing that Democracy is not a spectator sport. No more allowing this scenario to happen again, no more complacency about allowing our elected officials "do the right thing". We must be constantly vigilant, otherwise we are back in the 1950s with no civil rights, no women's rights and it's okay to discriminate against anyone who is not a white male.
I hope marches continue on a regular basis to remind everyone that the momentum must continue.
1
People who are angry about this article seem to have missed the point. She's not a naysayer, dismissing the march or its message. She's simply saying the size of the crowd doesn't necessarily have any influence on the movement's impact, or even the actual strength of the movement itself. Change happens when we agitate for it, not when we just show up for it (whether at a march or online). How can anyone disagree with that?
23
I disagree with it. It shows a percentage of the supporters who are willing to put their bodies where their mouths are. I say a percentage because some of us, including myself, were too ailing to walk, but were there in spirit. And the size of the protest IS important. I love that the Women's march had three times the turnout of the inauguration. It says something to our congressmen, even if Trump iis a denialist about it.
But we DO need to write our congresspeople, and keep writing. If they try to overturn Roe vs Wade, they will see the largest march in history! I'd even rent a wheelchair for that!
But we DO need to write our congresspeople, and keep writing. If they try to overturn Roe vs Wade, they will see the largest march in history! I'd even rent a wheelchair for that!
2
I agree with you that a march often just makes people feel better. That was glaringly obvious to me in 2003. The Jan. 21 demonstrations, however, united people who previously had not worked together, and we did that remarkably fast, even for 2017.
The March on Washington (MOW) in 1963 was first planned for 1941 and again in '48, when the threat of marches forced Presidents Roosevelt and Truman to issue significant anti-discrimination orders. That is not to belittle the 1963 march, because it was massive then compared to what leaders planned in 1941, but it was based on the direct-action phase of the Civil Rights movement, which had been building since the mid-1950s.
The Jan. 21 demonstrations were the first time for many people, both men and women, ever to be politically active--including the founder, Gwen Combs, of Arkansas's new movement: non-partisan Be the Change Alliance (BTCA). BTCA brought together environmentalists and activists for equality from middle-class, middle-aged cisgen white people to LGTBQ advocates and Black Lives Matter activists for the march. The union was imperfect and stressed at times, but ultimately 6-7000 people gathered in Little Rock, unified, and created means for people to keep working via an action expo. State and Congressional bills to turn demonstrators into felons if their activism spills on to highways proves to me exactly how scared the GOP is of this new non-partisan organization--and how effective our unified movement already is.
The March on Washington (MOW) in 1963 was first planned for 1941 and again in '48, when the threat of marches forced Presidents Roosevelt and Truman to issue significant anti-discrimination orders. That is not to belittle the 1963 march, because it was massive then compared to what leaders planned in 1941, but it was based on the direct-action phase of the Civil Rights movement, which had been building since the mid-1950s.
The Jan. 21 demonstrations were the first time for many people, both men and women, ever to be politically active--including the founder, Gwen Combs, of Arkansas's new movement: non-partisan Be the Change Alliance (BTCA). BTCA brought together environmentalists and activists for equality from middle-class, middle-aged cisgen white people to LGTBQ advocates and Black Lives Matter activists for the march. The union was imperfect and stressed at times, but ultimately 6-7000 people gathered in Little Rock, unified, and created means for people to keep working via an action expo. State and Congressional bills to turn demonstrators into felons if their activism spills on to highways proves to me exactly how scared the GOP is of this new non-partisan organization--and how effective our unified movement already is.
Certainly, a protest’s size matters … but approx. 3.5 million in a world rapidly approaching 8 BILLION people is small-change. And what they’re protesting ABOUT counts, as well.
As an outsized example, the Confederacy mounted an ARMED protest over 150 years ago of over nine million people in an overall U.S. population of less than 32 million. Now, THAT’s a protest! What’s more, the South was protesting only two existential issues, the convictions that slavery is wrong and that the Union was undissolvable; while the recent Women’s March was protesting every identity-specific kvetch under the sun -- women’s reproductive rights, racial justice, LGBTQ justice, publically-funded free cradle-to-grave education for all, “equal pay for equal work”, environmental action … endless progressive partridges in pear trees. How many out of that 3.5 million were focused on more than ONE primary issue? Five?
As it happens, I’m as socially progressive as many in this forum, and I support most of those causes; but come to me with a global protest cohort of 35 million or 350 million, and I’ll try to forget that it’s not TRUMP who keeps women down but MOST notably the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims.
As an outsized example, the Confederacy mounted an ARMED protest over 150 years ago of over nine million people in an overall U.S. population of less than 32 million. Now, THAT’s a protest! What’s more, the South was protesting only two existential issues, the convictions that slavery is wrong and that the Union was undissolvable; while the recent Women’s March was protesting every identity-specific kvetch under the sun -- women’s reproductive rights, racial justice, LGBTQ justice, publically-funded free cradle-to-grave education for all, “equal pay for equal work”, environmental action … endless progressive partridges in pear trees. How many out of that 3.5 million were focused on more than ONE primary issue? Five?
As it happens, I’m as socially progressive as many in this forum, and I support most of those causes; but come to me with a global protest cohort of 35 million or 350 million, and I’ll try to forget that it’s not TRUMP who keeps women down but MOST notably the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims.
2
Richard,
Now you did it.
Now you did it.
1
Jimbo:
?
?
Does a Protest's Size Matter?
Only to those who are intimidated by the goals of the protest.
Only to those who are passionately committed to the goals of the protest.
Only to those looking for an indicator of the popular support for the goals of the protest.
Only to those who are intimidated by the goals of the protest.
Only to those who are passionately committed to the goals of the protest.
Only to those looking for an indicator of the popular support for the goals of the protest.
1
I do agree, but partially, with what the author writes here. In the recent past, we have seen certain benefits of the protests in India. Like in 2013, the country saw some laws coming up for crime against women. People came in large numbers in anger in context of the of rape incident that happened in Delhi in December 2012. Also, the Anti-corruption protest of 2011 which was lead by Anna Hazaare and Arvind Kejriwal brought certain changes in the mindset of the common people as a whole and changed the way political parties perform. But I do agree on the point that there have been many examples of protests and gatherings which brought nothing substantial from the whole experience. And I think, its the time for people to realize that the physical public sphere is as important as virtual public sphere because the former holds the authority to make things done in reality.
1
If you want to get to work, support Trump and the Republicans. Gerttingg more jobs for everybody is their goal.
OH! Maybe I misunderstand. Do you mean work, as in a real job that
does real useful things, like building cars or oil pippelines? That's what I mean.
Or "get to work" mean "work to make America Communist"?
OH! Maybe I misunderstand. Do you mean work, as in a real job that
does real useful things, like building cars or oil pippelines? That's what I mean.
Or "get to work" mean "work to make America Communist"?
1
While Professor Tufekci makes some valid points on how protest are easier to organize now than at the height of the Civil Right movement and I do agree with the point of how the protest have to manifest into support of like-minded candidates to further their respective agenda I do not agree with how the size of protest do not matter.
In this particular case it is quite apparent since the Women’s march drew more people than the inauguration this infuriated President Trump and sent him on temper tantrum which showed how weak and thin-skinned he really is while making a laughing stock of his administration for sprouting phrases like “alternative facts”. The protest drew world-wide attention and drowned out inauguration as the top story for the week, making it seem as it was distant memory. Additionally the size of the protest inspired people who felt alone in their beliefs and those who want to form a resistance to the President’s policies and actions. Simply put the size of the protest was awe-inspiring.
In this particular case it is quite apparent since the Women’s march drew more people than the inauguration this infuriated President Trump and sent him on temper tantrum which showed how weak and thin-skinned he really is while making a laughing stock of his administration for sprouting phrases like “alternative facts”. The protest drew world-wide attention and drowned out inauguration as the top story for the week, making it seem as it was distant memory. Additionally the size of the protest inspired people who felt alone in their beliefs and those who want to form a resistance to the President’s policies and actions. Simply put the size of the protest was awe-inspiring.
2
When tens of thousands of people leave their warm, comfortable homes and take planes, trains and automobiles, and march and stand for hours, it means something.
TRUMP MUST GO, he is the most unhinged unqualified president in the history of presidents
TRUMP MUST GO, he is the most unhinged unqualified president in the history of presidents
7
Even if Ms. Tufekci is 100% correct (though I don't believe she is), this time size does matter. Just ask Trump.
6
Detroit Women are done talking about it. We are getting it done: http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2017/01/26/postcards-marc...
4
The Tea Party analogy is a tad spurious until a Koch Brothers-type funding and organizing patron shows up to orchestrate the effort.
I was there at the D.C. march. I participated in and overheard conversations that amounted to "Today is great, what do we do tomorrow?" If anyone follows any kind of social media, it is very clear that energy is on overdrive. I am sick of efforts on both the right and the left to minimize and deflate what really is happening. It's a form of mansplaining (à la David Brooks) that is delegitimizing. We need to think about movement and action without a leader or a center but in multiple nodes that add up to resistance.
40
I completely agree with your main point that in order to have the greatest affect those of us who participated should do all we can to further organize for political action.
I'm not sure how the marches were organized in other cities but I know here in Seattle there were many organizations present who were set up around the staging area, and those who participated were encouraged to arrive early to learn more about those organizations and sign up to work with the ones we felt matched our beliefs. It seemed to me to be a good way to mix demonstrating with further political action.
With respect to your headline, the demonstrations themselves are a form of free speech, and speech matters to those who hear it, so I'd argue that the size of the protest mattered individually to each person who saw it on the news or learned about it in some other way, rather than perhaps in the way it might matter to one opinion writer's perception of how it compared to protests in the past in one way or another.
Overall good article though, and I hope your point about tying the energy of the marches to further political action is well taken.
I'm not sure how the marches were organized in other cities but I know here in Seattle there were many organizations present who were set up around the staging area, and those who participated were encouraged to arrive early to learn more about those organizations and sign up to work with the ones we felt matched our beliefs. It seemed to me to be a good way to mix demonstrating with further political action.
With respect to your headline, the demonstrations themselves are a form of free speech, and speech matters to those who hear it, so I'd argue that the size of the protest mattered individually to each person who saw it on the news or learned about it in some other way, rather than perhaps in the way it might matter to one opinion writer's perception of how it compared to protests in the past in one way or another.
Overall good article though, and I hope your point about tying the energy of the marches to further political action is well taken.
2
I think the author is over-extrapolating from her own experience. I did not support the Iraq war but never took the streets to protest it; I was sympathetic to the Occupy movement but the most I ever did about it was to drop by Zuccotti Park while I was home visiting New York City to check out the encampment. For the Women's March, by contrast, I hosted six people from out of town and marched with seven other people who had never before taken part in a political rally.
5
It was not "easy" to get to the march. Most women who went to the march gave time and money they don't have in abundance. I know more people who are calling their state politicians and those who didn't march, want to the next time.
We know we've succeeded, because of the week-long and counting, insecure response by so-called tough guys ( both who have also been accused of domestic violence): Trump and Bannon.
We know we've succeeded, because of the week-long and counting, insecure response by so-called tough guys ( both who have also been accused of domestic violence): Trump and Bannon.
5
It depends. Mass protests overthrew the governments in Ukraine, Egypt and Tunisia but have less impact in other cases.
3
It also helps if you have some billionaires like the Koch brothers ready with not only money but a handful of PACs and various front groups all ready for electoral purchases.
5
We should be celebrating what this march represents for our nation--that there are large groups of people who share important concerns and who are ALREADY at work on them. We should be further examining the issues that the march raised. Instead, we are critiquing the march?
I am a woman in her 60s who's experienced a lifetime of having my voice discounted in every venue from my family to the workplace. For me this march was a remarkably inspirational gathering because it GAVE VOICE to women in a way that I have NEVER witnessed.
Although the march was inspired by offenses to women, it also embraced a broad range of important social issues. The vast diversity of the marchers in race, gender, age, and physical ability was another of its remarkable strengths.
So, it is more than a little disheartening to read yet another piece on how these 3.5 million voices just don't matter that much UNLESS...
I appreciate that you're trying to make a nuanced argument about the role of technology in relation to protest gatherings since that is clearly what you study. Sadly, whatever you intended to convey, the PERCEPTION of your message also matters, and it floats among a sea of others that has effectively diminished the march.
I am a woman in her 60s who's experienced a lifetime of having my voice discounted in every venue from my family to the workplace. For me this march was a remarkably inspirational gathering because it GAVE VOICE to women in a way that I have NEVER witnessed.
Although the march was inspired by offenses to women, it also embraced a broad range of important social issues. The vast diversity of the marchers in race, gender, age, and physical ability was another of its remarkable strengths.
So, it is more than a little disheartening to read yet another piece on how these 3.5 million voices just don't matter that much UNLESS...
I appreciate that you're trying to make a nuanced argument about the role of technology in relation to protest gatherings since that is clearly what you study. Sadly, whatever you intended to convey, the PERCEPTION of your message also matters, and it floats among a sea of others that has effectively diminished the march.
3
Or an inauguration, for that matter.
1
The women's march didn't matter at all. At heart it was a bunch of middle to upper class white women led by over the hill celebrities whose main issue was -- they didn't like the outcome of the election. By Sat Jan 21, 2017 Trump had been president for about 24 hours and could have done nothing that would have had any impact on any of the marchers. They simply wanted to upset the democratic process and the peaceful transfer of power. Their only legitimate recourse is to work harder for the 2018 elections.
1
trump and his people are trying
to make truth and honor irrelevant
we mustn't allow it...
to make truth and honor irrelevant
we mustn't allow it...
6
It's true that a public demonstration has to be part of an ongoing campaign - Ms Tufekci is absolutely right about that, and I wouldn't argue with her.
But I'd point out that this has always been true - I don't think there was ever a big demonstration that led directly to a change in policy. In the important civil rights and anti war movements, the big demonstrations were always just one part of the campaign - there was always educational and political work, and often carefully planned civil disobedience - those parts were always the real heart of the campaigns, just like they have to be now.
But what I really wanted to say was, I'm not at all sure about what she says about the behavior of gazelles - that the point of leaping up in the air like that is to demonstrate their athleticism, showing the lions that it wouldn't be worth chasing them. I think probably they are jumping up to take a look around - or more likely just in the sheer exuberance of being so incredibly physically fit. So, if they are a metaphor for us at all, it is that along with our political work, we should still do some things just for fun.
But I'd point out that this has always been true - I don't think there was ever a big demonstration that led directly to a change in policy. In the important civil rights and anti war movements, the big demonstrations were always just one part of the campaign - there was always educational and political work, and often carefully planned civil disobedience - those parts were always the real heart of the campaigns, just like they have to be now.
But what I really wanted to say was, I'm not at all sure about what she says about the behavior of gazelles - that the point of leaping up in the air like that is to demonstrate their athleticism, showing the lions that it wouldn't be worth chasing them. I think probably they are jumping up to take a look around - or more likely just in the sheer exuberance of being so incredibly physically fit. So, if they are a metaphor for us at all, it is that along with our political work, we should still do some things just for fun.
3
Here is why I think it mattered. I was part of the Seattle march. I only saw one protestor with a Trump sign and also one young man dressed up like an anarchist sitting on a roof. Both had a look on their faces I can only describe as bewilderment. I think the massive sea of miles of marchers did make an impression.
5
Maybe it's not how many people were in one particular place that matters. Maybe what counts is how many protested all over Planet Earth. I live in the U.S. but have relatives in Geneva, Switzerland, and San Miguel de Allende, Mexico. There were several hundreds of people marching in those faraway cities as per their photos and emails to me. I also have Facebook friends in Australia and several European countries. They marched too. I saw the photos. The fact that people march in protest in all corners of the globe is what amazes me and inspires me - as well as convinces me that the world is much more united than we think in its opposition to the cruelty and stupidity of Donald Trump.
7
What a silly column. Who does the size of a demonstration matter to is the question. If it didn't matter to Trump and his minister of propaganda Bannon they wouldn't bother to make up lies about it like the lie that we were all "paid" or try to claim the photographs were inaccurate. The demonstrations mattered to the people who participated in them and I believe they mattered to the many more people who will march next time having seen this march, and over time the demonstrations will grow. It happened in the 60's and 70's over the War and Civil Rights, something you seem to have forgotten about, and Trump will not suddenly become sane. The movement will come together over one or two basic issues, in my mind Civil Rights is a big one that includes women and people of color and immigrants and people who lose their jobs because of the trade war with Mexico that appears looming on the horizon. It will take time and more provocations, and those are sure and certain to come.
4
If turnout were an accurate indicator of general support, Bernie Sanders would have just been sworn in as President, succeeding two-term President Ron Paul.
3
Numbers do indeed matter - election results are the primary evidence of this.
Focus matters more, perhaps. I would consider the "Occupy" movement, though numerically significant - an utter failure. Absolutely nothing was accomplished - especially getting some sort of point across to America. What were they protesting? Capitalism? People making money on the stock market? Banks selling sweetheart loans that victimize customers?
I have no clue what they were protesting. They were just angry and out there talking about it and mostly, the rest of us, including liberals - just went on with life figuring this would inevitably quiet down, as it did.
The Woman's march - though significant in terms of numbers could suffer the same fate and I beg our women - ORGANIZE. Focus.
Protesting a fairly elected president you find abhorrent may lower your blood pressure, but it's not going to change a thing.
Pick an issue. Pick two issues. But for heaven's sake - don't pick 100 issues. Don't protest injustice - there is always injustice, even when you're happy with the status quo.
Protest the assault on Roe v. Wade. Protest for equal wages. Protest to keep open Planned Parenthood. Get all your numbers behind one or two arrows and strike hard.
In the words of the new movement. Resist. But resist coherently. One step at a time. You can't get it all at once, but step by step, never go back.
You will change the world.
Focus matters more, perhaps. I would consider the "Occupy" movement, though numerically significant - an utter failure. Absolutely nothing was accomplished - especially getting some sort of point across to America. What were they protesting? Capitalism? People making money on the stock market? Banks selling sweetheart loans that victimize customers?
I have no clue what they were protesting. They were just angry and out there talking about it and mostly, the rest of us, including liberals - just went on with life figuring this would inevitably quiet down, as it did.
The Woman's march - though significant in terms of numbers could suffer the same fate and I beg our women - ORGANIZE. Focus.
Protesting a fairly elected president you find abhorrent may lower your blood pressure, but it's not going to change a thing.
Pick an issue. Pick two issues. But for heaven's sake - don't pick 100 issues. Don't protest injustice - there is always injustice, even when you're happy with the status quo.
Protest the assault on Roe v. Wade. Protest for equal wages. Protest to keep open Planned Parenthood. Get all your numbers behind one or two arrows and strike hard.
In the words of the new movement. Resist. But resist coherently. One step at a time. You can't get it all at once, but step by step, never go back.
You will change the world.
21
- the name was "Women's March", but so many men participated
- the women did not protest for their rights only, they protested against an unduly elected person who is bent on destroying democracy
- men are, or should be, as interested as women in opposing the opprobrious "program" of this person
- the women did not protest for their rights only, they protested against an unduly elected person who is bent on destroying democracy
- men are, or should be, as interested as women in opposing the opprobrious "program" of this person
2
I think the Occupy movement did force the issue of income inequality into national conversation.
1
I was at the Boston Women's March. The estimate was 125,000. Speakers included US Senators Warren and Markey, and Mayor Marty Walsh. I went with a female relative who never went to any protest rally and march before. My daughter with small children would have gone but it would be too much for the younger members of the family. We saw all ages, all types of people represented, many different styles of the pink hat – mostly hand made. Some needed assistance walking. Respectful, polite, and very friendly. As for security, cell phones seemed to be blocked. Police, EMT, and others were on the perimeter of Boston Common or outside. The signs and chants reminded me of protest marches of the Vietnam period.
3
Yes, the size of a protest matters. There is nothing worse than thinking you are alone and a protest gives you the confidence to speak up knowing you are a part of a larger group.
4
I'm not sure I follow the point about the "disappointing" results of the anti-war and Occupy protests. Perhaps they didn't achieve the desired result quickly but there is no question that these protests symbolized a popular opinion that did impact policy. Bush was re-elected but his war was doomed to failure and he and the Republicans were swept out of power in 2008. The Occupy protests led to the rise of Elizabeth Warren and the extreme anti-bank regulatory reaction of the Dodd-Frank era. I just don't see those protests as irrelevant. They were part of the political movements that achieved these results, much like the Tea Party protests were. I agree that a political movement needs more than just protest but but I completely disagree that protest is ineffective.
4
Unfortunately I think you are right. This illegitimate president and the cowards who control Congress will dismiss protests as they dismiss everything else they don't wish to exist. I participated in the anti-Vietnam war movement and realized later that the feel-goodness of those protests essentially did nothing to put a stop to the outrage of what we had gotten ourselves into. We were labelled anti-American and then presidents quite clearly didn't deviate from their course of sending more troops until finally they were worn out. Trump is now in the Oval Office. And he cares nothing for what the women protested last Saturday. Nothing! It is very, very sad.
1
Protesters are not saying “If we can pull this off, imagine what else we can do.” They're saying "We're here. This is important." They're also saying we have work to do. Time to stop yammering and get it done.
4
The success of the '60's in part was due to the organizing that preceded marches, but, even more, to the focus on winnable issues. Columbia's battles in 1968 reflected New York Civil Rights - with Columbia's imposition on a Harlem Park for a new gym - coinciding with anti-war, anti-draft responses to Vietnam. Both were won, eventually, even though there were lots - in fact too many in some areas - of compromises. The Occupy movement reflected anger, but did not target specific enough points to build a real movement.
Although social media helps "organize," the real task of leadership is to listen to those who they mobilize. Today's demonstrations ought to teach the marchers to vote. The enduring victory of the 1960's was to lower the voting age to 18, and yet none of the marches address that victory and mobilize those voters. In Cambridge and greater Boston, for a startling example, it takes about 3500 voters to get a City Councilor or Alderman elected. In these cities there are hundreds of thousands of students, yet none focus on actually making a visible change through their marches. Too bad.
Although social media helps "organize," the real task of leadership is to listen to those who they mobilize. Today's demonstrations ought to teach the marchers to vote. The enduring victory of the 1960's was to lower the voting age to 18, and yet none of the marches address that victory and mobilize those voters. In Cambridge and greater Boston, for a startling example, it takes about 3500 voters to get a City Councilor or Alderman elected. In these cities there are hundreds of thousands of students, yet none focus on actually making a visible change through their marches. Too bad.
Occupy was more like a convention of movements coming together to share and network. It was the Left practicing how to work together, and showing it could be done.
Protest size may not be determinative of results, but it is an indication of potential. Hard to compare US protests to Arab Spring as we don't have armed govt. forces taking us out in the streets, yet. And a little early to throw a wet towel on this opposition. I hope this article does more to inspire folks to follow thru than discourage further massive participation.
4
Re: "...we don't have armed govt. forces taking us out in the streets, yet."
There are risks. Remember Kent State.
There are risks. Remember Kent State.
1
our boots trouped through the rain
through the mud and we sang
fighting through the pain
proverbial sayings displaying
but can we contemplate them
unify and integrate them
or are we only wishing
that the power is within
that we can change conditions
overcoming norms and traditions
they can't bury are rights deep enough in
they didn't realize that they were seeds
and now our boots are germinating
as we trouped through the
through the mud and we sang
fighting through the pain
proverbial sayings displaying
but can we contemplate them
unify and integrate them
or are we only wishing
that the power is within
that we can change conditions
overcoming norms and traditions
they can't bury are rights deep enough in
they didn't realize that they were seeds
and now our boots are germinating
as we trouped through the
I do agree that organizing politically can be much more challenging for liberals/democrats. The republican electorate and base is much more homogenous that the democratic side (though number wise smaller). The author here brought the occupy wall st protests for example. Compare that protest more recently to the bruising battle between Bernie and Hillary for the nomination. Bernie undoubtedly represented the "Occupy" movement while Hillary represented more specifically most minority communities (she destroyed Bernie with the black vote). While white liberals remain very energized by the call against Wall St, and more specifically income inequality, while many black people were more focused on the black lives matter cause (sometimes rightly so) and gave Hillary the nomination. While the vast diversity of the liberal/democratic coalition (gays, blacks, immigrants, feminists, white people who are economic liberals, pro marijuana legalization) is a strength, it also creates many hurdles in creating a coalition as strong and focused as the all white and mostly Christian Tea Party movement.
Clearly, the size of the protest made a big difference. It brought additional evidence of Trump's obsession with numbers, and the comparison with the meager attendance at his inauguration the day before. And it will be even more evident when they compare today's march numbers with last week.
However, as with the antiwar protests of the 1960s, this cannot be an isolated event. We need to keep the pressure on, especially in red states.
However, as with the antiwar protests of the 1960s, this cannot be an isolated event. We need to keep the pressure on, especially in red states.
4
As a veteran of many protest movements, this article echoed some of my own thoughts. First of all, I thought that the number of the people who turned out was tremendous, their energy was great and clearly they reflect the emotions of far more people who were not able to make it to Washington. But, and I mean this with no disrespect, without a focus on gaining political power and keeping it, nothing is going to change.
The leaders of the Democratic Party, the only realistic vehicle for gaining this power, are in denial. They cling to Hillary Clinton's popular vote victory as if it actually meant something, meanwhile they control absolutely nothing on a national level. We have to replace them.
After the defeat of John Kerry, activists overuled the party elders and installed Howard Dean as party chair. Dean's 50 State Strategy won the Democrats control of the House, Senate and Presidency. It's going to be much harder this time. Democrats are united on nothing but their fear and loathing of Donald Trump. The 2016 primaries lay open a divide between economic populists (who also support civil rights) or Clinton style 3rd way liberals (the majority of the party leaders) who emphasize social issues but who favor of free trade, open immigration and even willing to compromise on things like Social Security and Medicare.
We can come together, there are many things we agree on, but it's not going to be easy. There's a lot of bad blood out there right now.
The leaders of the Democratic Party, the only realistic vehicle for gaining this power, are in denial. They cling to Hillary Clinton's popular vote victory as if it actually meant something, meanwhile they control absolutely nothing on a national level. We have to replace them.
After the defeat of John Kerry, activists overuled the party elders and installed Howard Dean as party chair. Dean's 50 State Strategy won the Democrats control of the House, Senate and Presidency. It's going to be much harder this time. Democrats are united on nothing but their fear and loathing of Donald Trump. The 2016 primaries lay open a divide between economic populists (who also support civil rights) or Clinton style 3rd way liberals (the majority of the party leaders) who emphasize social issues but who favor of free trade, open immigration and even willing to compromise on things like Social Security and Medicare.
We can come together, there are many things we agree on, but it's not going to be easy. There's a lot of bad blood out there right now.
19
Yes Howard Dean's 50 state strategy was very effective. So the Democrats abandoned it, and went back to compromise for compromise sake.
Is it really an accident that the Democrats keep rejecting successful strategies and repeating bad ones over and over? Is it possible to be that inept?
Is it really an accident that the Democrats keep rejecting successful strategies and repeating bad ones over and over? Is it possible to be that inept?
protests matter. broad changes were made do to the occupy movement. twitter is an arena of bullying. digital protest doesn't work as well. this comes off as another misogynist comnentar on the womans march.
1
You miss the potential point altogether. Comparing your participation in a single protest of limited size in the past is hardly compararable to either the size or what is contemplated for continued engagement with administration and alt-right in general on their agenda. It is more comparable to the All Lives Matter movement, though even that is in severe need of better organization. If properly organized and continued, the size and fervent protest of participants will not end. And it is in no way similar to clicks on a computer. Those in DC, and those traveling from a distance to regional protest, had to make personal arrangements for travel, overnight stays, time and substantial crowds to make their positions known.
2
it appears that 'size' does matter to a certain president, especially when 'mine' is bigger than yours and everyone watching knows... Of course more folks notice when a certain president runs home to mommy in a tantrum over a 'perceived' slight...
2
The challenge of the Women’s March is, beyond making Trump out to be the Devil Incarnate, there was no singular focus or set of SMART goals for it. When individual protesters were asked why they were there or what their demands were, the responses were as varied as the population. Furthermore, in a nation where women are far more empowered, equal and blessed than most in the world, gaining much more support for the March’s many demands may be difficult.
Why can't people wrap their minds around the idea that we can cooperate to fight for justice in many ways? The Tea Party wasn't just one message, but when the global corporate mass media is on your side, they don't worry about that. Its only when you have messages that will hurt global billionaire's bottom line, that suddenly they demand that you limit your power to one slogan, and divide yourselves into a million separate interest groups.
Nobody says the Republican Party has to divide up into financial Libertarians and social control parties.
The idea is to unify the different movements to help each other. That means multiple messages. Most of the Common wisdom spewed by TV pundits is nonsense as Trump just proved. It is designed to keep the People divide and weak. Read between the lines.
Nobody says the Republican Party has to divide up into financial Libertarians and social control parties.
The idea is to unify the different movements to help each other. That means multiple messages. Most of the Common wisdom spewed by TV pundits is nonsense as Trump just proved. It is designed to keep the People divide and weak. Read between the lines.
I think the world-wide size is very significant, but I don't think anyone can dispute how much "easier" it is in this social media era.
The flip side is that, to get public notice, a lot of gatherings have to get larger and noisier. And I think a lot of people get swept up in that surge, and start breaking windows and setting fires. Peaceful sitting is just so boring.
I see the same effect ~ over exposure, over justification, numbing results ~ in what had made guns so widespread and accepted, nd people getting numb about the vat majority are designed to do ~ kill humans.
The flip side is that, to get public notice, a lot of gatherings have to get larger and noisier. And I think a lot of people get swept up in that surge, and start breaking windows and setting fires. Peaceful sitting is just so boring.
I see the same effect ~ over exposure, over justification, numbing results ~ in what had made guns so widespread and accepted, nd people getting numb about the vat majority are designed to do ~ kill humans.
1
What is different this time is the protest are a response to Trump's behavior. Why does this matter? Because if Trump could learn and change, the protests would go away. Instead, he constantly fuels the fire that motivates these people. A true 'People First' protest, combining the goals of the Occupy movement and the recent protests will, at a minimum, distract and annoy our fake POTUS, and more likely, result in a change in the 2018 voting. (Assuming of course that he continues his incredibly short sided self-congratulatory nonsense, for which there is no expectation)
An interested NFL point but I would challenge some of the anecdotes that pass for evidence. Perhaps today protests are easier to create yet take longer to become political change. The protests against the Iraq war were insufficient to defeat Bush in 2014 but created to hunger for change that enabled Obama's rise. Similarly, the Occupy movement laid much of the political cover for Trump. Occupy' pessimistic, wild claims of rigging by the 1% are exactly what Trump rode to victory. I suspect the anger galvanized by the women's movement and the Resistance broadly will create a political force that ushers in a period of real openness and equality after Trump. This movement, galvanized as it now is, will likely be very lasting as older demographics and rural poverty cause Trump's base to dissipate at a relatively rapid rate.
1
Lol, now we're blaming Occupy for Trump. Trump stole Occupy's message, from Bernie, because it is based in truth, and it resonates. Unfortunately, instead of borrowing Occupy's message, through Bernie, Democrats stayed with the corporate "center" message, and lost.
The Tea Party protests were substantially funded by wealthy conservative individuals and organizations. Most Tea Partiers did not realize this. Where will the Resist movement get this kind of money?
Money is what you use instead of a movement. When you have tens of millions of people working together, you don't need that much money.
1
Size matters only when someone, like Mr. Trump, decides that it matters. That's been clear since the Republican debates of last year. Unfortunately, Mr. Trump is offended by any suggestion that anything associated with him is not the biggest and best.
2
The Tea Party was funded by the Kochs. It was a pretend grassroots organization. It's not something to emulate.
I think the Women's March gave us Hope. And its aftermath, at the White House, showed us how much We the People can irritate an insecure man.
Small protests had a big impact on the presidential bid of Walker. They mocked him and followed him everywhere.
Mock the "resident" - Amp up your criticism. Alert the press when you protest. Comment here. Call your representatives.
Support the Free Press!
I think the Women's March gave us Hope. And its aftermath, at the White House, showed us how much We the People can irritate an insecure man.
Small protests had a big impact on the presidential bid of Walker. They mocked him and followed him everywhere.
Mock the "resident" - Amp up your criticism. Alert the press when you protest. Comment here. Call your representatives.
Support the Free Press!
1
Rosa Parks did not simply sit down in the white part of that Montgomery bus. She and others had planned for months, including training in civil disobedience at the Highlander School. She was chosen by the NAACP (she was its local secretary) for the role: married, employed, respectable. And after her arrest, the boycott began.
3
Size of the protest isn't as important as proximity. A group of people outside lawmakers doors will make a bigger impact than thousands in the streets.
One march is not going to change policy directly so your reporting of the failures of the anti-war march and Occupy are wrong. The ascent of Bernie Sanders was a direct result of Occupy and the populist ideas of both are still percolating. I just signed up to learn how to run for office (something I had no interest in just a week ago) and discovered that a record-number of women in Pennsylvania are doing the same . The Women's March may have failed to inspire you but I was inspired to take action, as were hundreds of thousands of others. It will always be a fraction of marchers who continue their activism, but with the millions of people who came out last Saturday, I'm optimistic that the impact will be significant.
3
Technology does play a part in getting a large crowd together but Glenn Beck spent a year on his TV show pushing his Restoring Honor rally in 2010. Got about 100,000 while the Jon Stewart/Stephen Colbert Rally to Restore Sanity/and or Fear gathered 250,000 with only 3 months of publicity. Don't be discouraged. Keep marching!
3
The article was correct in many respects. Firstly, the Tea Party is an excellent template, since they challenged and defeated some Republicans in primary battles who didn't support their agenda. What type of political action which this March lead to? For example, will this march develop its own specific agenda or is it basically anti-Trump? The TRump vague proposal to have a tax pay for the a Wall with Mexico is a good example.If you oppose the Wall do you emphasize your opposition to the Wall or do you also try to attract people who simply do not want to pay a tax for the wall, even though they are in favor of tighter immigration controls? What is the March's economic message and can it appeal to working class and poor people. Lets face it there is a racial and economic divide within this March. Some observers estimated that 53% of white women voted for Trump, while 94% of African American women voted for Clinton. The Tea Party more political cohesion.
If you want to learn from the Tea Party, learn that the establishment "center" is hated, and the American People respect those that fight for their beliefs, not those that compromise.
It is morbidly fascinating - and deeply disquieting - that Donald Trump is STILL upset and whining about the comparative size of his coronation - uh, I mean - inauguration in comparison to President Obama's. It has now come to light that DT contacted the head of the National Park Service to chastise him for publishing factual, but unflattering comparison photos.
Petulant six-year-olds are embarrassed by this display of pique and frustration.
This person is UNHINGED.
NOT my president.
Petulant six-year-olds are embarrassed by this display of pique and frustration.
This person is UNHINGED.
NOT my president.
13
The whole US establishment is unhinged. A more pathetic collection of suckers failing to do diligence cannot be found any any first world nation.
2
I think Trump is idiotic. But I don't think a non-partisan government employee should be posting comparison photos of inaugurations on a government website (seems the only purpose is partisan).
1
The sizes of crowds certainly matter to Trump. So much so that they're a major distraction from his job. You know, that presidency thing.
2
Many commenters have noted the commitment of the marchers. What impressed me were the handmade signs. So many. Simply to make something that big is an effort. To paint and decorate them more so. Then to express some clever sentiment, very impressive.
The emotion and numbers were there. Trump and the GOP have already responded with more restrictive policies against women's health. We will see.
The emotion and numbers were there. Trump and the GOP have already responded with more restrictive policies against women's health. We will see.
6
Size matters. The percentage of people continuing the fight, when equal to a smaller group, puts a lot of shoes on the ground. That will make a bigger difference. Define/ refine the cause ladies, and MAKE IT HAPPEN.
2
Perhaps future historians will look back on this period as the beginning of an epoch in which females predominate in all spheres of leadership.
1
The Tea Party became an astroturf movement funded by the Koch brothers. If left to its own devices, it too would have died an early death. However, your point is taken. The heavy lifting has yet to be done.
2
Thank you for mentioning that the Koch Bros. funded the Tea Party. That part of the story is rarely, if eve, mentioned. It is an important part of the Tea Party success.
I am certain of one thing: Donald Trump, who is pre-occupied with his legitimacy, took note that the womens march in DC dwarfed his inaugural crowd. Along with all the other marches around the nation.
5
I don't think you get it, and with all due respect, this article feels like filling up writing/reading space just because the NYT can. The Saturday protests were different from the rest you refer to. They had one single message: "Get this dictator off the shelf. He has to go. He is not fit to serve." Whatever the origins of individuals or groups in that crowd, there was one single ideological tentacle and that was that the modus operandi of the man in the White House is not fit for American Democracy. One can spin hundreds of narratives about the 'failure' of the march and (yawn) how it's just like any other march, but to do so is to spin gold for the catastrophic, chaotic state of current 'leadership' in the US, which is a threat at home and in the world, including to our closest allies. Since the election there has been an unprecedented surge of grass roots information on taking action in response to the new administration. We - the marchers -aren't talking about a wish-list of alternative policies. We are talking about saving our Democratic System; And clearly, there is a deficit of people with good ideas. Get with it. Challenge your own studies. Think outside the box.
6
It is a common but unfortunate mistake to assert that Occupy had no concrete results. But the issues and slogans that emerged about the 99% were important foundations for de Blasio winning as mayor of NYC and for Bernie being a viable rather than a fringe presidential candidate. The minimum wage increase movement also started there.
It's true that the Tea Party movement got results faster. But that's because once their candidates won local and state primaries, the PACs who always back Republican candidates added substantial resources to help fuel that activist fire. Occupy inspired candidates don't want plutocrats to finance their campaigns (and wouldn't get that support anyway) but they always have to run against that tide of conservative funding.
It's true that the Tea Party movement got results faster. But that's because once their candidates won local and state primaries, the PACs who always back Republican candidates added substantial resources to help fuel that activist fire. Occupy inspired candidates don't want plutocrats to finance their campaigns (and wouldn't get that support anyway) but they always have to run against that tide of conservative funding.
7
The blase' attitude displayed by Ms. Tufecki is the exact opposite of the passion and purpose displayed by the women marchers. The sheer size reached in D.C. as well as other major and minor cities was a shock to everyone. It does matter that people left the comfort of their homes to protest a Government willfully blind to the destruction of American values, norms, and traditions in favor of someone displaying dictatorial tendencies.
As we Americans are assaulted daily with ridiculous headlines clamping down on free speech (EPA etc...), dishonoring Mexico and other countries, instigating sham investigations (millions of illegals voting) while at the same time letting major incursions by the Russians go unaddressed, the sentiment will only keep growing.
This protest points the finger at the new President because never before have we had someone so unfit to lead our nation. The pipeline of indignities continues to grow. Where are the men in positions of power that can clamp down on the crazy train? Nowhere that I can see, they are too busy currying favor. It is the women that will need to rescue this nation from the folly that lies before us. They have laid a marker down by the millions. Contrary to what the author thinks, this protest is just gearing up.
As we Americans are assaulted daily with ridiculous headlines clamping down on free speech (EPA etc...), dishonoring Mexico and other countries, instigating sham investigations (millions of illegals voting) while at the same time letting major incursions by the Russians go unaddressed, the sentiment will only keep growing.
This protest points the finger at the new President because never before have we had someone so unfit to lead our nation. The pipeline of indignities continues to grow. Where are the men in positions of power that can clamp down on the crazy train? Nowhere that I can see, they are too busy currying favor. It is the women that will need to rescue this nation from the folly that lies before us. They have laid a marker down by the millions. Contrary to what the author thinks, this protest is just gearing up.
6
Kind of a downer article. I think the biggest flaw with the protest was that there was really no platform. What was it? Abortion rights? Protesting the election of Trump? So many angry women screaming about women's rights that it felt uncomfortable. Where were the sane, inclusive voices?
4
I think you weren't paying attention.
And why must there be a One and Only theme? Its so Hollywood, and corporate America to be obsessed with themes. It wasn't a holiday parade, no floats and big inflatables - it was a gathering of citizens to show they didn't support the New Admin, or new Congress.
The lack of a theme apparently didn't stop 3 million+ people from showing up. Maybe a narrow theme would have swayed many not to show up, seeing the theme as not theirs...
So explain why its okay for "angry white males" to be...well be angry, and voice it...but its not okay for women to be the same? Why cant women be angry when they believe they are threatened?
I'm astounded by how many women think other females cant, or shouldn't express anger. Why are so many women so scared of expressing their anger?
And why must there be a One and Only theme? Its so Hollywood, and corporate America to be obsessed with themes. It wasn't a holiday parade, no floats and big inflatables - it was a gathering of citizens to show they didn't support the New Admin, or new Congress.
The lack of a theme apparently didn't stop 3 million+ people from showing up. Maybe a narrow theme would have swayed many not to show up, seeing the theme as not theirs...
So explain why its okay for "angry white males" to be...well be angry, and voice it...but its not okay for women to be the same? Why cant women be angry when they believe they are threatened?
I'm astounded by how many women think other females cant, or shouldn't express anger. Why are so many women so scared of expressing their anger?
2
It had little to do with the size of crowd and more neg press from the NYT in a daily bases- take any story and the will put a negative slant to it. It reminds me of the 2 year daily smear of the police after Ferguson- why would the crowds or be news the day after the event except to suggest he's a looser. No mention the fact D.C. Is mostly black and first black president. It's funny the crowd wasn't bigger being they only had to walk a few blocks to the event.
Maybe you should make issue of how long his tie was.
Maybe you should make issue of how long his tie was.
1
How is it a negative slant to report the TRUTH? Is negative slant a new version of "alternative facts" now?
Prof. Tufecki makes several mistakes and several astute observations.
First, being easier to organize a protest doesn't diminish it. I went to college in the era when you researched term papers with books and journals. You built your bibliographies painstakingly from what you found there. You wrote everything out by hand in notebooks or on 3x5 cards. Then you wrote it all out painfully in long hand and then typed it on a typewriter with carbon paper so you'd have a copy.
Now you can do your preliminary research on line, build your bibliography rapidly, find resources all over the globe, use search engines, and take notes electronically. Yes, it's easier, and it's faster. But instead of wasting time writing it out in long hand, typing and re-typing pages, editing can be lightning fast. It doesn't make good writers out of bad writers, but it makes good writers' work easier and better.
Second, it's true that the 2003 and 2011 protests petered out because they lacked sustainability. But in both cases, while people felt morally justified, most of the protesters didn't feel PERSONALLY threatened and could go back to their comfortable lives.
Third, though the OWS and BLM movements seemed to have failed, they "tilled the soil".
Fourth, the threat to the women (and men) last Saturday is real, personal and intimate.
Fifth, the Tea Party model for a small group's outsize influence WORKED and it's long past time to stop playing nice with the nasty boys and girls of the GOP.
First, being easier to organize a protest doesn't diminish it. I went to college in the era when you researched term papers with books and journals. You built your bibliographies painstakingly from what you found there. You wrote everything out by hand in notebooks or on 3x5 cards. Then you wrote it all out painfully in long hand and then typed it on a typewriter with carbon paper so you'd have a copy.
Now you can do your preliminary research on line, build your bibliography rapidly, find resources all over the globe, use search engines, and take notes electronically. Yes, it's easier, and it's faster. But instead of wasting time writing it out in long hand, typing and re-typing pages, editing can be lightning fast. It doesn't make good writers out of bad writers, but it makes good writers' work easier and better.
Second, it's true that the 2003 and 2011 protests petered out because they lacked sustainability. But in both cases, while people felt morally justified, most of the protesters didn't feel PERSONALLY threatened and could go back to their comfortable lives.
Third, though the OWS and BLM movements seemed to have failed, they "tilled the soil".
Fourth, the threat to the women (and men) last Saturday is real, personal and intimate.
Fifth, the Tea Party model for a small group's outsize influence WORKED and it's long past time to stop playing nice with the nasty boys and girls of the GOP.
17
Ms. Tufeki,
Here is where you are wrong about numbers in the Women's March, and how that translates into willingness to continue protest actions and remain active in our resistance: This was an intergenerational crowd, and older Americans don't behave like Millenials. This was not "Occupy" but a cross section of all Americans including conservatives and Republican women--I know because I am 59, and I was there, and conservative women that I know were there. If these older women and men were willing to get off their butts and travel--we came from Central NY, this means something. This crowd was truly a cross section and we went to say we are watching, we will resist, and we care about decency our traditional values and our fellow Americans.
Here is where you are wrong about numbers in the Women's March, and how that translates into willingness to continue protest actions and remain active in our resistance: This was an intergenerational crowd, and older Americans don't behave like Millenials. This was not "Occupy" but a cross section of all Americans including conservatives and Republican women--I know because I am 59, and I was there, and conservative women that I know were there. If these older women and men were willing to get off their butts and travel--we came from Central NY, this means something. This crowd was truly a cross section and we went to say we are watching, we will resist, and we care about decency our traditional values and our fellow Americans.
100
Why was it necessary to say this was not Occupy. Occupy was also cross generational. I know because I was there. and in DC. Global corporate mass media, including MSNBC, insulted Occupy, and made fun of it, and the Democrats, who wanted us to just shut up and vote for them, did to.
If you believe them, you are being fooled.
Occupy changed the conversation about what is possible in the world, and as long as the only possible solution to every problem (as pushed by Republicans, "centrist" Democrats, and Mass Media) is tax cuts and budget cuts and deregulation and war, than that is what you will get, no matter who you vote for.
For all the votes they got, all the Tea Party managed to do was shut down the government a few times.
Occupy defined the 1% for what it is, a force of destruction and fraud that is impoverishing millions and causing global warming. Mass News did not talk about raising the minimum wage or stopping pipelines or the riches of the Walton Family, or the Trans Pacific Partnership, which their shareholders were negotiating in secret until Occupy forced them to.
And it defined the 99% for what we are, the other 7 billion people on the planet that have the power to fix things if we just work together for justice.
I went to Occupy Wall Street thinking it would last a few hours. It lit a spark in a dry forest that sent a message around the world. It created and joined networks from around the world that are still making change for the good.
If you believe them, you are being fooled.
Occupy changed the conversation about what is possible in the world, and as long as the only possible solution to every problem (as pushed by Republicans, "centrist" Democrats, and Mass Media) is tax cuts and budget cuts and deregulation and war, than that is what you will get, no matter who you vote for.
For all the votes they got, all the Tea Party managed to do was shut down the government a few times.
Occupy defined the 1% for what it is, a force of destruction and fraud that is impoverishing millions and causing global warming. Mass News did not talk about raising the minimum wage or stopping pipelines or the riches of the Walton Family, or the Trans Pacific Partnership, which their shareholders were negotiating in secret until Occupy forced them to.
And it defined the 99% for what we are, the other 7 billion people on the planet that have the power to fix things if we just work together for justice.
I went to Occupy Wall Street thinking it would last a few hours. It lit a spark in a dry forest that sent a message around the world. It created and joined networks from around the world that are still making change for the good.
2
Not too far away, norene, here we had crowds estimated between 8,000 and 10,000. Only 41 miles away, also close to your city of Syracuse, Seneca Falls, a village, (and birthplace of American women's rights, 1848) had another 10,000. These numbers in upstate are not chopped liver.
As you say, truly a cross section, from spouse and I (84 and 76 respectively--and we weren't the only elders by a long shot) to myriad young people and and all cohorts and ethnicities and persuasions one could think of.
We're not forgetting; we resist.
As you say, truly a cross section, from spouse and I (84 and 76 respectively--and we weren't the only elders by a long shot) to myriad young people and and all cohorts and ethnicities and persuasions one could think of.
We're not forgetting; we resist.
1
I see. So if 10,000 people had turned up at the march, it would have had the same impact. Uh-huh.
Many thousands of middle-aged and older women would not have sat on an uncomfortable bus for a long ride had they not been highly motivated. Believe me, long rides aren't as much fun as they used to be.
No one thinks that there's nothing to do once the demonstration is over. Already, women are gearing up to run for political office. Membership and donations to environmental, health, and other focused organizations has spiked sharply. Think that would have happened with an e-mail blitz, Facebook postings, and on-line petitions? There's something about being physically among like-minded people that is enormously satisfying and generates forward momentum.
Keep it up, folks!
Many thousands of middle-aged and older women would not have sat on an uncomfortable bus for a long ride had they not been highly motivated. Believe me, long rides aren't as much fun as they used to be.
No one thinks that there's nothing to do once the demonstration is over. Already, women are gearing up to run for political office. Membership and donations to environmental, health, and other focused organizations has spiked sharply. Think that would have happened with an e-mail blitz, Facebook postings, and on-line petitions? There's something about being physically among like-minded people that is enormously satisfying and generates forward momentum.
Keep it up, folks!
16
Excellent! Plan more creative events that get humans together to fight for justice.
3
It's easy to say there is no impact because there is no concrete solution forward to the desired goal. Getting everyone together is probably most important for the marchers to take a civic action, and to support each other in solidarity.
Bringing people together with a common goal is very important. The people who attended the Women's March last weekend inspired themselves and those watching to keep striving towards the desired goals. It's a recognition that we must stand up for what is right. Relying on our lawmakers solely to take action leads exactly to where we are now.
Bringing people together with a common goal is very important. The people who attended the Women's March last weekend inspired themselves and those watching to keep striving towards the desired goals. It's a recognition that we must stand up for what is right. Relying on our lawmakers solely to take action leads exactly to where we are now.
3
It matters even more in the digital age. When so many could just sit at home and do a digital protest you had millions feel compelled to go march. Says volumes on how the American MAJORITY feels!!
4
and then there was Woodstock.
Sooo...after being shocked by a crowd of thousands in Portsmouth when the organizers expected hundreds, and by seeing many there I had no idea felt my concerns, there is a first organizing meeting tomorrow in my living room for some of us to decide how to move forward. We ARE united in seeing Trump as an existential threat to this country we love.
We know that we need to advocate for the earth, for human rights, for good,fair government and for honest, upright public servants. We know that we fail unless we target particular issues, policies, and government actions. That is what we will begin to tackle tomorrow. It is more than likely that we will split into smaller groups and share the work that way. We will target local issues and officials.
. Many commentators belittled the pink hats as trivial, but remember that they were handmade by thousands of women across the country who then found ways to distribute them. Not a penny changed hands. No male central CEOs. Just women doing what they always do...supporting one another, sharing work and resources.
The March did not need a "central message.". It WAS the message. The Pink Hat movement is just beginning.
We know that we need to advocate for the earth, for human rights, for good,fair government and for honest, upright public servants. We know that we fail unless we target particular issues, policies, and government actions. That is what we will begin to tackle tomorrow. It is more than likely that we will split into smaller groups and share the work that way. We will target local issues and officials.
. Many commentators belittled the pink hats as trivial, but remember that they were handmade by thousands of women across the country who then found ways to distribute them. Not a penny changed hands. No male central CEOs. Just women doing what they always do...supporting one another, sharing work and resources.
The March did not need a "central message.". It WAS the message. The Pink Hat movement is just beginning.
9
I disagree. I think it is very indicative of a movement's strength. Sharing memes, posting Facebook rants, and sending a few scattered emails to reps takes no where near the commitment as marching and going to town hall meetings. We saw this with the Tea Party uprising a few years ago. That later carried over to the ballot box. It is too early to tell if this movement will be sustained but if it is, it will represent a major force come 2018.
2
For all those (non-billionaires) that are worried about the ballot box, you need to find a way to get the poor to vote. Most of the people that vote are old and relatively wealthy. When the millennials get excited about politics inside or outside of the voting booth, support them, especially because they care about the poor, and are pushing policies that would help the poor.
The poor vote in countries that have politicians that address their problems. They don't vote for politicians that want to sacrifice them to the "job creators."
The middle class has to stop kidding ourselves that we are allied with the rich. All of us that work for a living, including small business people, have to join together, to invest in humans, because the owners of machinery only care about machinery and think humans are just high maintenance machines, that should be replaced as soon as possible.
Donald Trump only cares about Donald Trump, and the same goes for Gates, Bloomberg, Soros, Zuckerberg, etc. They measure everything in dollars and don't care about our country or our planet or any of the people in it that are not powerful enough to affect their bank accounts.
If the Democrats can unite the working class to fight for worker (and unemployed worker) rights and programs, then they can blow the Republicans out of the water. That is what Sanders was trying to do, while Clinton said, No you Can't. Sanders would have won.
Stop calling for compromise with the Greater Evil. Fight them to win.
The poor vote in countries that have politicians that address their problems. They don't vote for politicians that want to sacrifice them to the "job creators."
The middle class has to stop kidding ourselves that we are allied with the rich. All of us that work for a living, including small business people, have to join together, to invest in humans, because the owners of machinery only care about machinery and think humans are just high maintenance machines, that should be replaced as soon as possible.
Donald Trump only cares about Donald Trump, and the same goes for Gates, Bloomberg, Soros, Zuckerberg, etc. They measure everything in dollars and don't care about our country or our planet or any of the people in it that are not powerful enough to affect their bank accounts.
If the Democrats can unite the working class to fight for worker (and unemployed worker) rights and programs, then they can blow the Republicans out of the water. That is what Sanders was trying to do, while Clinton said, No you Can't. Sanders would have won.
Stop calling for compromise with the Greater Evil. Fight them to win.
1
Unfortunately, we have a president who is completely and utterly focused on the relative size of everything. From his hands to his wall, size matters to DJT.
In fact, I'm totally surprised that he hasn't start commenting on the size of his twitter followings (others must have illegal twitter-bots that follow them - otherwise, I would have the most number of followers) or the size of his family (I'm the president with the most number of offspring) or the number of his wives (no other president has been married three times).
In fact, I'm totally surprised that he hasn't start commenting on the size of his twitter followings (others must have illegal twitter-bots that follow them - otherwise, I would have the most number of followers) or the size of his family (I'm the president with the most number of offspring) or the number of his wives (no other president has been married three times).
3
I think your initial expectations are the problem. Protests are about potential change, not about change itself. They are as much if not more about proving to the protestors themselves that they have a valid cause as they are about proving to their opponents that there is powerful opposition. If you expected the anti-war protests of 2003 to have had an effect on Bush's invasion, they you were simply naive. Just because FB and the Twitter make organizing a protest easier is not the point. People showed up. That's the point. What those people do going forward is the next point... and the next point... and the next point. Nothing will change in the short term. TRUMP is president. But look how much crowd size gets under his skin. His reactions are exciting for us protestors. We push a button and his head explodes. This is the sort of dynamic that foments more and stronger protests.
FB and the Twitter are just commercial platforms for communication (and identity theft, a.k.a. data mining). Should we downplay the Civil Rights demonstrations because of the USPS and the telephone?
FB and the Twitter are just commercial platforms for communication (and identity theft, a.k.a. data mining). Should we downplay the Civil Rights demonstrations because of the USPS and the telephone?
7
Did Democratic leaders show up at the march? According to Morning Joe this morning, they were all down in Miami schmoozing with rich donors. If there is any hope, that attitude and lack of action on the DNC's leaders must change. I'd like to see all the 'old guard' swept away soon. We need energy and younger people stepping in right now to leadership roles. The top tier of the DNC couldn't be bothered to attend a huge grass roots happening. That does not bode well.
DNC - get your priorities straight and get back to work for the people. If you energized people as Bernie did, you will get the millions of us to donate small money that adds up. But you have to get out front and LEAD.
We need strong resistance to Trump. I so fear that the spineless DNC leaders will not even come close. I saw Keith Ellison being interviewed and never saw a more lackluster performance. I could have done better for god's sake. We ALL need to step up, but that goes double for the DNC.
DNC - get your priorities straight and get back to work for the people. If you energized people as Bernie did, you will get the millions of us to donate small money that adds up. But you have to get out front and LEAD.
We need strong resistance to Trump. I so fear that the spineless DNC leaders will not even come close. I saw Keith Ellison being interviewed and never saw a more lackluster performance. I could have done better for god's sake. We ALL need to step up, but that goes double for the DNC.
8
While Trump was touring swing states in August, Clinton spent the month in the Hamptons, hanging out with the rich and famous. "Centrist" Democrats have no idea how to fight for justice. I am 90% sure they actively dis-empower the people.
There are a handful of Democrats that actually fight for justice. The rest just want to be rich and powerful, and sell us out every day.
The Democrats won't save the world.
Only the People can save the world.
There are a handful of Democrats that actually fight for justice. The rest just want to be rich and powerful, and sell us out every day.
The Democrats won't save the world.
Only the People can save the world.
1
The size of the 'post-protest' will definitely matter. MoveOn.org is reporting 60K calls since the marches inquiring about activism of various types. It is believed that there are 4700 events planned for April 15 to demand that trump release his taxes. 80K individuals from foreign nations have recently donated to Planned Parenthood. Trump will keep providing motivation to the opposition. Remember that we are talking about a man with a personality disorder and horrific insecurities. He will be The Man in the [Gradually Crumbling] High Castle.
4
The size of a march or demonstration matters, but so do the messages of the protesters. This much should be clear. What is less clear, to me at least, is why at certain moments a movement can catch on fire like a debris slide. Take marriage. Not long ago, the defense-of-marriage movement was winning ballot initiatives, but, fairly suddenly, the marriage-equality forces predominated. To a lesser extent, the same sudden transition has occurred in marijuana use. Internationally, the fall of the Soviet Union seemed equally sudden and unexpected.
Until someone smarter than me derives an algorithm for movement inflection points, I suppose the only thing we can conclude is patience and hard work are the best policies for movement participants. Keep making the case. Keep dramatizing the goals and objectives. Or, as was written many years ago, Keep the faith, fight the good fight, and finish the race.
Until someone smarter than me derives an algorithm for movement inflection points, I suppose the only thing we can conclude is patience and hard work are the best policies for movement participants. Keep making the case. Keep dramatizing the goals and objectives. Or, as was written many years ago, Keep the faith, fight the good fight, and finish the race.
34
Yes, people mostly think that history changes slowly, but like earthquakes or evolution, powerful forces build for a long time, then everything shifts.
History is shifting right now. Will you nudge it your way, or let Trump and Paul Ryan define the future?
History is shifting right now. Will you nudge it your way, or let Trump and Paul Ryan define the future?
2
The Author has correctly assessed the fact that no matter the size of a protest gathering the protest size is the manifestation of a movements potential power as there is an even larger job before them. Protests can be a beginning or an inflection point along the line.
What she is mistake about is the 1963 Civil Rights March in DC. The Author explains the huge logistical challenges that had to be overcome to coordinate that march but she defines the march as a culmination as if the March achieved it's objective.
That assumption is an error as history documents very well that the seminal legal changes came years later in 1965 and 1966 with the passage of the Civil Rights act and Voting Rights act which laid the legal foundation for change that has occurred and is still occurring to this very day.
The Author also discounts the impetus added post the Kennedy Assassination
when a Southern President Lyndon Johnson powerfully pushed this much delayed change through Congress.
Today communication can reach millions in an instant and movements can begin with huge crowds.
The Author is pointing out accomplishment of a crowd's goal always comes later and is the result of the constant effort of many individuals.
What she is mistake about is the 1963 Civil Rights March in DC. The Author explains the huge logistical challenges that had to be overcome to coordinate that march but she defines the march as a culmination as if the March achieved it's objective.
That assumption is an error as history documents very well that the seminal legal changes came years later in 1965 and 1966 with the passage of the Civil Rights act and Voting Rights act which laid the legal foundation for change that has occurred and is still occurring to this very day.
The Author also discounts the impetus added post the Kennedy Assassination
when a Southern President Lyndon Johnson powerfully pushed this much delayed change through Congress.
Today communication can reach millions in an instant and movements can begin with huge crowds.
The Author is pointing out accomplishment of a crowd's goal always comes later and is the result of the constant effort of many individuals.
3
Ms Tufekci: I'll do you one better: How long after a protest occurs does it matter?
In today's world, fifteen minutes of fame is now fifteen seconds.
In today's world, fifteen minutes of fame is now fifteen seconds.
3
On November 6, 2018 there will be 33 seats in the U.S. Senate, 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and 14 state governorships up for grabs.
Put your vote where your mouth, heart and head are.
Put your vote where your mouth, heart and head are.
7
And how many state level representatives and senators? They determine district boundaries for the US House!
For the next two years, The House and Senate will be writing legislation that gives away our national wealth to billionaires like Trump. They will not wait until the midterms, like Obama did. They will do it now.
If you wait for the midterms, everything will be already decided. You need to stop them now, not wait until the Democrats lose another election, because Republicans use government spending to make a bubble in the economy, and people don't know its an illusion based on debt, just like Dubbyas economy was.
They will soon try to privatize social security, medicare, medicaid, the schools, toll roads, bridges, etc. They will cut all programs that are don't help them. They will not hesitate. They will not negotiate. They will not compromise. And Chuck Shcumer will be making excuses for why the Democrats have to help them, the whole time.
They will not bow to public opinion, unless that opinion is so wide and so deep that they are afraid to get up in the morning.
If you wait until 2018, you will have already lost. Fight now for a sane future.
If you wait for the midterms, everything will be already decided. You need to stop them now, not wait until the Democrats lose another election, because Republicans use government spending to make a bubble in the economy, and people don't know its an illusion based on debt, just like Dubbyas economy was.
They will soon try to privatize social security, medicare, medicaid, the schools, toll roads, bridges, etc. They will cut all programs that are don't help them. They will not hesitate. They will not negotiate. They will not compromise. And Chuck Shcumer will be making excuses for why the Democrats have to help them, the whole time.
They will not bow to public opinion, unless that opinion is so wide and so deep that they are afraid to get up in the morning.
If you wait until 2018, you will have already lost. Fight now for a sane future.
1
Of course Marches matter, First it shows that your ideas are popular, that you ARE legitimate. Of course its absolutely about organizing and showing the elected that you will work to show up and ask questions and then work hard to get them out of office if unsatisfied.
Democracy works if most people feel included and most people get something. Fine, you can have 3 houses and a nice yacht if I get my kids educated and feel I will be taken care of if sick or injured. This will now be I'll have 3 yachts and you get to pretend you are safer behind a wall.
Democracy works if most people feel included and most people get something. Fine, you can have 3 houses and a nice yacht if I get my kids educated and feel I will be taken care of if sick or injured. This will now be I'll have 3 yachts and you get to pretend you are safer behind a wall.
6
Ah, but it does measure the will of a movement.
4
Does size matter? When the question itself triggers tantrums and blowback, the two people to ask for the definitive answer are Marco Rubio and Donald Trump.
6
"But if those protesters are not exchanging contact information and setting up local strategy meetings, their large numbers are unlikely to translate into the kind of effectiveness the Tea Party supporters had after their protests in 2009."
Ah, but we are. Watch.
Ah, but we are. Watch.
132
How about exchanging information about not trashing the protest environment with the next march(es)? Let everyone bring along a bag to collect their own trash (bottles, tissues, cigarette butts, signs, etc.) and be a model for cleanliness?
Snopes did say that the people at the inauguration on 1/20 and the Women's March on 1/21 were tidier than other inaugurations and marches in recent years:
"Regardless, one might fairly argue that a form of protest involving the dumping of litter on the ground for others to clean up is an unseemly one. However, the National Park Service noted that, overall, the crowds at both events (i.e., the inauguration and the Women's March) were "tidier" than those of previous years:"
http://www.snopes.com/2017/01/22/womens-march-dumped-signs/
Snopes did say that the people at the inauguration on 1/20 and the Women's March on 1/21 were tidier than other inaugurations and marches in recent years:
"Regardless, one might fairly argue that a form of protest involving the dumping of litter on the ground for others to clean up is an unseemly one. However, the National Park Service noted that, overall, the crowds at both events (i.e., the inauguration and the Women's March) were "tidier" than those of previous years:"
http://www.snopes.com/2017/01/22/womens-march-dumped-signs/
1
I've never seen a protest actually work in this padded-cell nation. I don't even believe civilian protests had much to do with the US pulling out of Vietnam. Draftees fragging their officers forced that.
3
Why communicate about anything, then? Why have Op-Eds in the Times? Why bother writing books? Why should we produce talk shows? Compose songs of a political nature? Why don't we just all shut up and bow to the Dear Leader? You know, like in North Korea? Is that better?
4
Draftees fragging their officers, and other forms of protest in the military did that, with help from those camped outside the WhiteHouse.
1
Nice attempt to diminish the Women's march. You can say look at how smaller protests took months to organize. They were "bigger" because of the unseen efforts.What was missed when you were given this assignment is the amazing fact that with little more than a Facebook posting a spontaneous march of incredible magnitude formed. Does the fact that millions marched mean that Trump will start taking his medication or that the Repubs will stop dismanteling the US saftey net, no of course not. One think it did was stop the "party line" the media was pushing of the fragmented left. This march showed a unity of spirit. Trump only won because of the electoral college. Hillary won the popular vote by millions. This shows that the Dems were not on the wrong path. Their policies were not knocked out of the mainstream. I attended this march in DC. It was uplifting and empowering. To have that many people show their resolve. A political event that had the focus that was needed during the election, that the real enemy is Trump and the Repubs now dismateling the ACA, Medicare, Social Security, Dodd-Frank and the CFPB and environmental regulation, etc. Does the number in the march mean that this energy will all transform into action, maybe maybe not. It appears that the media has been dead set against a women's march meaning anything. Also, Occupy Wall street did change the national discourse on the Bush economic collapse. I would think the news would get that.
15
It's really a shame all this energy didn't go into voting against trump and other republicans on November 8th. Far too many people sat at home or never registered to vote, and now we will pay a much steeper price than we bargained for.
6
Lol, Most of these people did vote. Any of the ones that spent hours getting to this protest and back that didn't vote, didn't vote because the Democrats offered them a candidate that supports the global billionaires, and offered nothing but Republican Lite politics to vote for.
When the Democrats hacked their own primary by undermining Bernie's campaign to put an establishment corporate hack against Trump, they basically told everyone who is anti-establishment, "this is not your party."
If you want the poorer half of the country to vote, give them something to vote FOR.
I am glad Clinton lost, despite the horror that we are facing, because under Clinton most of the Left would have sat quietly and watched the same policies be put in place in slow motion, while the Democrats made excuses about why they had to push Republican policies, just like under Bill Clinton, who might as well been a Republican. (And please read Al Gores 2002 speech on Iraq, before you tell me he wouldn't have invaded there too. He quibbles with the messaging, not the war that Hillary also supported.)
Give the People something good to vote for, and stop whining about lesser evils, and third parties.
When the Democrats hacked their own primary by undermining Bernie's campaign to put an establishment corporate hack against Trump, they basically told everyone who is anti-establishment, "this is not your party."
If you want the poorer half of the country to vote, give them something to vote FOR.
I am glad Clinton lost, despite the horror that we are facing, because under Clinton most of the Left would have sat quietly and watched the same policies be put in place in slow motion, while the Democrats made excuses about why they had to push Republican policies, just like under Bill Clinton, who might as well been a Republican. (And please read Al Gores 2002 speech on Iraq, before you tell me he wouldn't have invaded there too. He quibbles with the messaging, not the war that Hillary also supported.)
Give the People something good to vote for, and stop whining about lesser evils, and third parties.
1
someone on the list wrote "only a subway ride" ......well - I got up at 3 in the morning to catch a bus from NYC to DC. I walked 12 miles & stood and marched for hours - reversed the process and walked back into my apartment in NYC at 12 midnight. Thousands did what I did to send a signal to this would be tyrannical administration that we are NOT going away and we are prepared to fight. Question: What if no one marched? What signal would that send?
Jerry W NYC
Jerry W NYC
44
Protests are fine simply because they make people feel good. As long as the protest is legal, and non violent, I am happy Americans have the right to conduct those protests.
The modern day protests occur everyday on social media and they are significant but mostly preach to the choir. Complaining is cool but action appears to be too much trouble.
The modern day protests occur everyday on social media and they are significant but mostly preach to the choir. Complaining is cool but action appears to be too much trouble.
2
If a majority (much less a flash gathering of naive liberals) mattered, gun legislation in the wake of Sandy Hook wouldn't have been quashed by the NRA's thugs in the congress. That lesson and the lesson Republicans are teaching America now is as Tip O'Neil said "All politics is local". A majority isn't necessary if you control the apparatus (States) which determines who can vote (voting rights) and how those votes are counted (gerrymandering). Do that and the Koch brothers, ALEC, and Vladimir Putin can pick the president's advisors and public opinion be damned.
1
There are lotsa women in those darn red states, and even the conservative ones are raising their eyebrows, because they have daughters and they don't care for some of the rhetoric. And we of a liberal bent who were told "incrementalism" is the way to go are not too happy with how things turned out.
Women, my friend, are not "local."
Women, my friend, are not "local."
3
Well, maybe the president can MOVE ON now. Size doesn't matter. It DOESN'T MATTER. Happy, Mr. President?
Dear Ms. Tufekci,
You are right that a march has many functions. It brings like minded people together. It announces an agenda to the public and reinforces the passions of its supporters. And then the real work begins.
But in the case of the Women's March much of that work has already begun. In your home state of North Carolina Moral Monday demonstrations have focused on electoral agendas and specific legislation. Many of their issues overlap with those of the Women's March. You should join them.
The same is true for issues of gender equality, a woman's right to choose, advocates for ending gender violence etc. In fact, almost any issue that I saw expressed on Saturday already has some local organization and base behind it. Hopefully those who participated in the march will join them.
But too often these national marches lead to the mistaken belief that a national organization is needed. It's not, and here you and I probably agree. Don't waste limited resources trying to create a big national umbrella--at least not at this stage. Build locally. Organize outside the Democratic party. They will try to coop this movement and transform it into a fundraising list for the next election.
Most importantly, stay together, even with small neighborhood groups and pick local projects that can get done. In other words, don't morn, organize.
You are right that a march has many functions. It brings like minded people together. It announces an agenda to the public and reinforces the passions of its supporters. And then the real work begins.
But in the case of the Women's March much of that work has already begun. In your home state of North Carolina Moral Monday demonstrations have focused on electoral agendas and specific legislation. Many of their issues overlap with those of the Women's March. You should join them.
The same is true for issues of gender equality, a woman's right to choose, advocates for ending gender violence etc. In fact, almost any issue that I saw expressed on Saturday already has some local organization and base behind it. Hopefully those who participated in the march will join them.
But too often these national marches lead to the mistaken belief that a national organization is needed. It's not, and here you and I probably agree. Don't waste limited resources trying to create a big national umbrella--at least not at this stage. Build locally. Organize outside the Democratic party. They will try to coop this movement and transform it into a fundraising list for the next election.
Most importantly, stay together, even with small neighborhood groups and pick local projects that can get done. In other words, don't morn, organize.
4
The column certainly does a lot of dancing: A little of this and a little of that without any real point of view.
Yes, we don't know what effect the march will have but it is significant if the end result is a push back at the present office holders: Or unforeseen events take place like the President falling on his face or the stock market crashes.
Hope springs eternally so I hope the march has had a great significance and moves the country in the right direction.
Yes, we don't know what effect the march will have but it is significant if the end result is a push back at the present office holders: Or unforeseen events take place like the President falling on his face or the stock market crashes.
Hope springs eternally so I hope the march has had a great significance and moves the country in the right direction.
3
Agree this has to be sustained. The irritant outrageousness of Trump, what he says and does, is doing already will help. The multitudes out there in an age when one can easily or also protest sedentarily is very meaningful if not also infectious. Further mobilization happens when people connect in person, even the memory of that feeling, the positive charges, the solidarity and sharing which can only really be felt in person, face to face. So more marches, I hope will be happening. I wonder though if we will see crackdowns. If we do that could either have a chill or get more people out. We'll see.
2
Why does it seem like the NY Times, along with the rest of the media, is bending over backwards trying to find ways to downplay the enormous turn out on Jan 21st to protest Trump and his intended policies? I am constantly reading condescending pieces about declaring it meaningless, asking where we all were on election day (in the voting booth), asking why the pro-life groups weren't allowed to partner (reports make this sound like pro-life individuals were not allowed to march), and what do we all plan on doing now? Predictably, on the day of the march, when literally millions of women AND men marched world wide, much of the press focus was on Donald Trumps whining about crowd size at his inauguration. Not the march. And this article? Who cares how easy it is to organize? Yes, it helps...but getting on buses in the middle of the night, experiencing discomfort, being in a crowd of 100s of thousands, no access to restrooms, being outside, in some cases, in freezing cold temperatures, takes great effort and passion. The question the NY Times should be asking is how many people also read their Facebook feed but refused or couldn't endure the hardship a march like that might bring...but support the cause? Many millions more, I have no doubt. I do not understand the effort to downplay millions of voices.
16
Global corporate mass media is owned by billionaires. Don't believe me. Look it up. They don't buy money losing newspapers for the profit. They do it to influence public opinion. The Republicans and Bill Clinton made this easy for them, with the Telecommunications Act of 1994. Mass media is by definition what most people watch, and their are certain messages that are encouraged, and other messages that are derided. It is subtle and effective.
This is why "liberal media" gives all respect to extremist Tea Party Republicans, and to "centrist" Democratic Compromisers, but can't run out of bad things to say about anyone on the Left that doesn't preach the need retreat at every opportunity.
There is no conspiracy. It is all accomplished by like minded individuals making like minded decisions, out in the open, where anyone who isn't too lazy can find the evidence, all around us.
This is why "liberal media" gives all respect to extremist Tea Party Republicans, and to "centrist" Democratic Compromisers, but can't run out of bad things to say about anyone on the Left that doesn't preach the need retreat at every opportunity.
There is no conspiracy. It is all accomplished by like minded individuals making like minded decisions, out in the open, where anyone who isn't too lazy can find the evidence, all around us.
1
But we've never had a president like Trump before. Crowds mean everything to him, as we have seen many times, and to see crowds marching against him infuriates him. This could be his downfall as he descends further into an insanity that can't be ignored even by his most ardent backers/enablers, and shortens his time in office.
Keep marching!
Keep marching!
5
Protest's size always matter here and all over the world. But for Trump, it may not matter because so he is talking to his voters. He wants to president of those people who voted for him.
I think the same is true when people write to the senator or congressmen. Before email, if someone took the time to sit down, find pen and paper or type a letter and then address the envelope, put a stamp on it and mail it you could assume that they felt very passionately about an issue. But in todays age we get drafts of letters already written, and addressed to the representative. All that's necessary on our part is to type your name and hit send. Where the rule of thumb in the old days was 1 letter equals 4-5 people with the same strong opinion, it may be the opposite today.
"Consider the Tea Party protests of 2009, which also brought out hundreds of thousands of people in cities throughout the United States, and which also were organized with the help of digital communication." True, and those Tea Party protests were also helped by big money (Koch brothers) that fueled the anger and fear of Tea Party adherents through propaganda, paid organizers, and others. (See the documentary, "The Billionaires' Tea Party: How Corporate America is Faking a Grassroots Revolution," by Australian filmmaker Taki Oldham). As the Left organizes, it's incumbent on us to remain vigilant. I remember how, in the 1990s, women's and LGBT groups split apart over various grievances and differences. A clever provocateur can do a lot of harm, sowing seeds of mistrust among people who must stand together. "Getting to work" needs to include understanding the forces arrayed against attempts to promote a progressive agenda that demands social and environmental justice.
4
Yes. They do hire people to go around to protests accusing people of things to create divisions. Avoid those that protest their own movement.
...they are organizing....
GOP: Ignore the size of the crowd at your own peril........
Let me tell you something: When over 80 of my Facebook friends individually go to protest something, we cannot ignore it. Lest you dismiss me as a liberal hack with liberal friends, let me say this, it's specifically because I am neither that I recognized the significance of it.
My friend who marched did so in 7 cities. The oldest was 80, the youngest 2.
Most don't know each other, though a large crowd did go from my town.
What really amazed me, though, was the variety of the personalities of the people who marched. Women who have never uttered a controversial word in their lives woke up at 4am to don a pink hat and board a train to DC.
We can diminish the important of the march all we want--but come election 2018, don't go crying about the "sleeping giant" no one noticed. If so many people felt so enraged as to go protest, something is happening.
Beyond that, FB has become part of that movement. I can't go down a page without seeing the rage that people feel at the variety of assaults this administration is hoisting upon us: from suppression of the press, to the threat of the Supreme Court, to the language Trump uses around the immigrants/wall, to picking fights with allies, to EPA concerns, to mass departure at State Dept--all heralded on FB by formerly placid peeps.
Also-amazed at the number of calling/mailing parties being organized.
Ignore us at your own peril!
GOP: Ignore the size of the crowd at your own peril........
Let me tell you something: When over 80 of my Facebook friends individually go to protest something, we cannot ignore it. Lest you dismiss me as a liberal hack with liberal friends, let me say this, it's specifically because I am neither that I recognized the significance of it.
My friend who marched did so in 7 cities. The oldest was 80, the youngest 2.
Most don't know each other, though a large crowd did go from my town.
What really amazed me, though, was the variety of the personalities of the people who marched. Women who have never uttered a controversial word in their lives woke up at 4am to don a pink hat and board a train to DC.
We can diminish the important of the march all we want--but come election 2018, don't go crying about the "sleeping giant" no one noticed. If so many people felt so enraged as to go protest, something is happening.
Beyond that, FB has become part of that movement. I can't go down a page without seeing the rage that people feel at the variety of assaults this administration is hoisting upon us: from suppression of the press, to the threat of the Supreme Court, to the language Trump uses around the immigrants/wall, to picking fights with allies, to EPA concerns, to mass departure at State Dept--all heralded on FB by formerly placid peeps.
Also-amazed at the number of calling/mailing parties being organized.
Ignore us at your own peril!
14
Its will sound crazy, but I hope the Republicans overturn Roe V Wade.
If they do, this Woman's March will pale next to the fury unleashed upon them. They will think Armageddon has arrived. They get away with the slow motion attack on women's rights in right wing states. But when they overreach, the Republican Party will be swept aside like snow before a plow.
Women are far more powerful than they realize, and when they feel their power they will be unstoppable.
If they do, this Woman's March will pale next to the fury unleashed upon them. They will think Armageddon has arrived. They get away with the slow motion attack on women's rights in right wing states. But when they overreach, the Republican Party will be swept aside like snow before a plow.
Women are far more powerful than they realize, and when they feel their power they will be unstoppable.
Yes: get to work. Size is, it seems, overrated. Hope without real transformational change is, well, wishful thinking. Faith without works, as someone once said, is dead. America First Energy puts the rest of the world last when it comes to climate change, in keeping with the traditional arrogance and exceptionalism (the rules don't apply to us) of the USA: largest historical emitters of greenhouse gases by far which now, it appears, is intent on turning its back on the rest of the world. No wonder Orwell's 1984 is so popular now: “War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”
3
Righto! Getting people to actually travel in winter and march means nothing, but getting them to turn on their computer means something!
63
The Trump election was a wake-up call that we Democrats didn't have much power in this country even before the election--having let the Koch brothers buy up state legislatures wholesale in 2010 who then got to redistrict themselves and the US House districts in their states through 2022. Overcoming this structural advantage of the Republicans will be extremely difficult, but our minds and hearts are FOCUSED as never before on the need to roll up our sleeves and help our country, which committed suicide on November 8, be reborn once again as a land of liberty and justice for all. The massive marches the day after the inaugural were a sign that we all get it. Ventilating on Facebook or in the pages of the Times is not enough. We have to be engaged publicly in winning over some of the 47% who did not vote with a vision of social and economic justice that will bring them back the polls in 2018 and especially 2020 when we will elect a new President and Congress--and the state legislatures that will draw the districts for the NEXT decade.
And may I say to my fellow New Yorkers: if we cannot wrest control of our own State Senate from the Republican minority kept in power by rogue Democratic Senators from the so-called "Independent Democratic Caucus" led by traitors such as Sen. Jeff Klein of the Bronx and others who ally with the opposition over their fellow Democrats we then have NOTHING to offer the nation. That means compelling our "leader" Gov. Cuomo to SHOW some leadership.
And may I say to my fellow New Yorkers: if we cannot wrest control of our own State Senate from the Republican minority kept in power by rogue Democratic Senators from the so-called "Independent Democratic Caucus" led by traitors such as Sen. Jeff Klein of the Bronx and others who ally with the opposition over their fellow Democrats we then have NOTHING to offer the nation. That means compelling our "leader" Gov. Cuomo to SHOW some leadership.
2
The women's march, and most others behind it, have never proved to make any difference in policy. Not one.
It's simply a "feel good" exercise whereby people can get out their frustration, but little more.
It's simply a "feel good" exercise whereby people can get out their frustration, but little more.
2
Rosa Park's compared to the recent Women's Wail? This is why the word spurious was devised. When millions of us protested against the Vietnam war, there were distinct goals. Get the Congress to defund the war. Pressure President Johnson to step down, elect officials who would fight against the Military Industrial Complex. Targets and goals. To say that a gazelle jumping in the air to demonstrate its power is cute figurative language, but if it could actually prove to its predators that it had accomplished a mission, we'd be placing its effigy on protest flags instead of the ugly signs we saw at the Wail.
2
Our "distinct goal" is not losing what we've gained. Perhaps it's reproductive rights, perhaps it's workplace non-discrimination. We're not cute, we're frightened and angry. And on that Saturday we knew we weren't alone.
It's a lot easier, frankly, to march for your "distinct goals." It's a grander statement when conservative women and liberal women, each group willing to accept what might be different goals, are marching together.
It's a lot easier, frankly, to march for your "distinct goals." It's a grander statement when conservative women and liberal women, each group willing to accept what might be different goals, are marching together.
1
A march shows how many people are willig to get up off their duffs and show up. That shows plenty. (As Woody Allen said, 90% of success is showing up.) And I do recall very well the 1960's refrain: What do you acccomplish by all this marching? And singing? It doesn't do any good, give up, go home, stop blocking traffic. The marches drove LBJ from office, and drove Nixon insane with paranoia and ultimately changed public opinion and history with a vast and repeated show of physical public commitment. That can't be done with clicks and won't be done wth clicks as long as human beings have bodies to commit to their cause. People react to that, and that is why a protest march size matters, and tha is why Trump lies about it.
4
A protest is not ever won if it isn't consistent and continuous. THAT is how you win.
A one-day turnout is just flicked off like an 'event' and forgotten.
A many-day peaceful march got MLK pretty far, eh? Gandhi? Do americans even know Gandhi marched? Buddha was always on the move. Jesus seemed to always be on the move.
A one-day turnout is just flicked off like an 'event' and forgotten.
A many-day peaceful march got MLK pretty far, eh? Gandhi? Do americans even know Gandhi marched? Buddha was always on the move. Jesus seemed to always be on the move.
1
You can give me all the analogies you want: I know what I felt when I was there. We will not forget. As a retired woman engineer, I remember well what it was like in back when. A lot of people with me on Boston Common had different issues than my own, but what we had in common is this: we're not going back to the old days. As I watch the new president sign all sorts of stuff with only men behind him, I think, watch out, we won't have it. If you exclude us from your decisions, you will have both Democratic and Republican women busting your doors down.
And I have no idea why you're telling me "Occupy" protests had no repercussions. Can I just mention.....Bernie Sanders? What do you think that was all about? And believe it or not, what created Bernie Sanders ultimately ended us up with what we have now. Plenty of people voted for Bernie before Trump because of income inequality. If Clinton had embraced the issue, she would have picked up enough red states to win. No question. So maybe some movements don't have an immediate effect on policy, but just simmer below the surface for a while before showing up big time in election results.
Take away what women have gained and you won't last long. Trust me.
And I have no idea why you're telling me "Occupy" protests had no repercussions. Can I just mention.....Bernie Sanders? What do you think that was all about? And believe it or not, what created Bernie Sanders ultimately ended us up with what we have now. Plenty of people voted for Bernie before Trump because of income inequality. If Clinton had embraced the issue, she would have picked up enough red states to win. No question. So maybe some movements don't have an immediate effect on policy, but just simmer below the surface for a while before showing up big time in election results.
Take away what women have gained and you won't last long. Trust me.
12
But Trump thinks size matters, so the large protests will drive him even crazier.
7
If size didn't matter, Trump wouldn't be so bothered by the lack of turnout for his inauguration and, admittedly to a lesser degree (at least publicly), by the enormous turnout for the worldwide protests. But Tufekci fails to account for an important point that was codified in the 2014 Princeton Report: our leaders don't care what "the people" want. Special interests have long driven legislation over popular will and Republicans' bare-knuckled tactics to gain a SCOTUS seat and take down Hilary Clinton. Fervent, self-perpetuating ideological "purity" is what's left. As for getting to work, that is always the case.
3
Yes, protesting should not be seen as speaking to power but as speaking to the People. It is a way to communicate with those that may join you.
Many deride Occupy, as global corporate mass media told them to, but Occupy did exactly what the author asks participants in the Woman's Match to do, we created and spun off networks of people that, for example, raised the minimum wage around the country, influenced Dodd Frank. Only people that thought Occupy was to save the world in two months think it was a failure.
The Tea Party is often held up as a success, but can you name one thing that the Tea Party has ever gotten accomplished for anyone making less than a million dollars a year? Occupy Sandy was in every neighborhood hit by the storm for over a year, organizing millions of hours of volunteer hours and moving millions of dollars of supplies.
Yes it is all about outreach, and protest is only one way to do that. Get creative and educate the world about the centralization of the world economy in the hands is perks like Trump.
Many deride Occupy, as global corporate mass media told them to, but Occupy did exactly what the author asks participants in the Woman's Match to do, we created and spun off networks of people that, for example, raised the minimum wage around the country, influenced Dodd Frank. Only people that thought Occupy was to save the world in two months think it was a failure.
The Tea Party is often held up as a success, but can you name one thing that the Tea Party has ever gotten accomplished for anyone making less than a million dollars a year? Occupy Sandy was in every neighborhood hit by the storm for over a year, organizing millions of hours of volunteer hours and moving millions of dollars of supplies.
Yes it is all about outreach, and protest is only one way to do that. Get creative and educate the world about the centralization of the world economy in the hands is perks like Trump.
2
I think Ms Tufekci missed the point of the march. Most of us have been in a state of despair since the election. The march was the first ray of hope that we can pull ourselves out of this hole. Yes we looked silly in our pink hats but for the first time in months we could laugh and smile and that sense of comfort is what will spur us onto action.
6
It’s odd to me that so few of the commenters, as well as Ms. Tufekci, get it. Perhaps you are older, as I am, and understand that there is a lot to lose here. Despair is the correct word.
In way, it’s good that younger women don’t get it—it means they have a higher baseline of expectations. Hurray for that! But I would like to send this message to them all: I was around way back when women were dismissed out of hand simply because they were women. And I would also point out that there are countries where this is still so. Don’t take anything for granted.
By the way, I was dressed entirely in black as I stood with over 100,000 men and women on Boston Common. I didn’t know about the pink hats. One would have really stood out atop my funeral attire. In mourning, yet still hopeful.
In way, it’s good that younger women don’t get it—it means they have a higher baseline of expectations. Hurray for that! But I would like to send this message to them all: I was around way back when women were dismissed out of hand simply because they were women. And I would also point out that there are countries where this is still so. Don’t take anything for granted.
By the way, I was dressed entirely in black as I stood with over 100,000 men and women on Boston Common. I didn’t know about the pink hats. One would have really stood out atop my funeral attire. In mourning, yet still hopeful.
3
Never mind silly distractions about crowd size:
Do fake protests by feel-good marchers to nowhere themselves matter, regardless of size guesstimates?
Did they prevent the Democrats from making a terrible mistake in nominating for president a notably unpopular and untrustworthy candidate who was under federal investigation and who would have been the second oldest president ever?
Did they prevent the Republicans from failing to lift a finger to head off the nomination and election of the oldest and least qualified and most shamefully ill-chosen US president ever?
Did such "protests" do anything meaningful to block the obviously-coming worst foreign policy blunder in US history (the deceit-laden and blunder-ridden "cakewalk"to Baghdad which ultimately led to turning much of Iraq over to ISIS, and which both the two above presidential candidates endorsed, and in the first case willingly voted to help enable)?
Have phony protest marches, organized by bogus corporatized clickavist online donation panhandlers, done anything to change climate and energy policies, or reform gun laws, or curb the spreading rot of urban sprawl, deteriorating education systems, dumbed-down politics or rising inequality?
Do fake protests by feel-good marchers to nowhere themselves matter, regardless of size guesstimates?
Did they prevent the Democrats from making a terrible mistake in nominating for president a notably unpopular and untrustworthy candidate who was under federal investigation and who would have been the second oldest president ever?
Did they prevent the Republicans from failing to lift a finger to head off the nomination and election of the oldest and least qualified and most shamefully ill-chosen US president ever?
Did such "protests" do anything meaningful to block the obviously-coming worst foreign policy blunder in US history (the deceit-laden and blunder-ridden "cakewalk"to Baghdad which ultimately led to turning much of Iraq over to ISIS, and which both the two above presidential candidates endorsed, and in the first case willingly voted to help enable)?
Have phony protest marches, organized by bogus corporatized clickavist online donation panhandlers, done anything to change climate and energy policies, or reform gun laws, or curb the spreading rot of urban sprawl, deteriorating education systems, dumbed-down politics or rising inequality?
Sadly there is no indication that the protest size matters, same with the polls. If that mattered Madame Hillary Clinton would be the President of United States as we write.
Then there will not be any tantrums from Donald Trump with his limited vocabulary , alternative facts by Kellyanne Conway or unbelievable lectures from Stephen K. Bannon who just surfaced from underground.
Then there will not be any tantrums from Donald Trump with his limited vocabulary , alternative facts by Kellyanne Conway or unbelievable lectures from Stephen K. Bannon who just surfaced from underground.
4
Successful marches usually are identified with a morally courageous, highly admired leader or one with a large following. Besides MLK and the March on Washington; Al Sharpton and Richie Perez led huge protests against police killings of people of color in the Giulliani era that led to convictions of police officers. That era was followed by movements that were led through consensus decision-making, including; Occupy, Arab Awakening, Black Lives Matter and the Women's March. Are we in an era when we are afraid to take courageous leadership roles? Did the assassinations of the Kennedy brothers, MLK, Medgar Evers and Malcolm X result in the lack of people to lead openly and effectively?
Back when people protested after the election, a friend of mine commented "I wonder how many of those people didn't vote, and whether that made the difference". Many of those state contests were close and could have shifted the electoral votes toward the Democrats.
Protests have no legal effect. Voting against a politician does -- it may get him out of office, and it may scare others into abandoning certain policies.
Last week somebody complained in this comment section that conservatives were "voting in droves" in the election. But that was not the problem. The problem was the liberals did not vote in droves, considering more cool to do protests.
Protests have no legal effect. Voting against a politician does -- it may get him out of office, and it may scare others into abandoning certain policies.
Last week somebody complained in this comment section that conservatives were "voting in droves" in the election. But that was not the problem. The problem was the liberals did not vote in droves, considering more cool to do protests.
1
The three million estimate is almost certainly false and the product of wilful deceit. Go to the page where it is being tallied, click on the link to the estimate for Pittsburgh and read the whole article. On the tally page (the Google spreadsheet), a number of 25,000 is given for both the low end and high end estimates, but in the article you read that the low end estimate should be closer to 4,000. If this sort of deceit is repeated throughout the tally, and given that they are clearly willing to ignore evidence with regards to Pittsburgh, one would expect further deceptions, the low end 3 million number is likely wildly off. But hey, in the age of Fake News, let's present it as real.
1
So, does this explain why the popular vote numbers are meaningless?
1
Our meaningless popular votes sure go a long way to explain why we are governed by some of the most dishonest people on this planet.
1
I was sitting in my living room watching Trump's inauguration speech and felt so depressed and saddened that this was who we elected to lead our country. I am almost 74 and visualized our great democracy slipping into the abyss.
Then the Women's March took place the next day. A sincere thank for giving me and millions more hope. It could not have come at a better time.
Size does matter and whether or not there is another March like this one the importance and impact will be felt for yes to come.
Then the Women's March took place the next day. A sincere thank for giving me and millions more hope. It could not have come at a better time.
Size does matter and whether or not there is another March like this one the importance and impact will be felt for yes to come.
123
Ugh. So tired of the scrutiny of this march on how effective it was or will be. I can't remember any other march in recent history that's been so talked about, criticized and analyzed after the fact. Welcome to a woman's world.
18
Participating in The Women's March in DC on Saturday made me feel good. Now it is up to me to follow through and take the next steps. I know I'm not alone in that desire.
10
This latest protest was after the fact and has no follow up. What a waste of time (and money).
2
Don't talk to me about "Resistance." Resistance is what people do in an occupied country. Resistance does not necessarily remove the occupiers. In fact, occupiers are often not only impervious to resistance, resistance sometimes makes occupiers even stronger.
I want to know how we're going to overthrow the Republicans and keep them out of power. Otherwise, you are not talking about anything I'm interested in hearing.
So right now, all I want to hear about is how we're going to vote them out of power. We have failed to do this for years. We are supposed to learn from failure. What have we learned?
I want to know how we're going to overthrow the Republicans and keep them out of power. Otherwise, you are not talking about anything I'm interested in hearing.
So right now, all I want to hear about is how we're going to vote them out of power. We have failed to do this for years. We are supposed to learn from failure. What have we learned?
3
Just go to Indivisible.com. Download the manual. Find a group. There are thousands being added every day. Get to work!
1
Vote.
1
Trump is crazy.
Trump is insecure, very insecure.
Too many mental issues has trump.
He is incredibly dangerous.
And size does matter.
Trump is insecure, very insecure.
Too many mental issues has trump.
He is incredibly dangerous.
And size does matter.
3
Size of what? His fingers? It matters more to have a goal. He just has tactics. Opposing him needs more than that to make the opposition effective.
Crowd size matters at the least in that it reveals yet another aspect of the President's mental illness.
5
Yes what happens next is what matters most. But let's not underestimate the two important effects the march has already had:
First, it has signalled to members of the anti-Trump majority that they are not by any means alone and are, in fact, part of a "movement' every bit as large as the one Trump claims backs him. While this feeling of being connected to a large and impassioned movement doesn't guarantee strong follow-up to the march it certainly has given many of Trump's opponents more confidence and more energy to resist Trump and may lead more people to take effective action against Trump in the coming months.
Second, it has clearly upset Trump to the extent that he has spent the first week of his presidency obsessing in childish ways about crowd sizes. Trump's behaviour has, in turn, emboldened the press to start stating bluntly that Trump is lying, not just about crowd sizes, but about many other things. And Trump's behaviour has also set off alarm bells among many more responsible people throughout government, the business community, and the public in general. This has already begun to weaken Trump as president and cast even greater doubt on his emotional fitness for the presidency.
So yes, strong follow-up to the march will be essential to making it a true success. But let's not ignore the fact that it has already achieved two important victories.
First, it has signalled to members of the anti-Trump majority that they are not by any means alone and are, in fact, part of a "movement' every bit as large as the one Trump claims backs him. While this feeling of being connected to a large and impassioned movement doesn't guarantee strong follow-up to the march it certainly has given many of Trump's opponents more confidence and more energy to resist Trump and may lead more people to take effective action against Trump in the coming months.
Second, it has clearly upset Trump to the extent that he has spent the first week of his presidency obsessing in childish ways about crowd sizes. Trump's behaviour has, in turn, emboldened the press to start stating bluntly that Trump is lying, not just about crowd sizes, but about many other things. And Trump's behaviour has also set off alarm bells among many more responsible people throughout government, the business community, and the public in general. This has already begun to weaken Trump as president and cast even greater doubt on his emotional fitness for the presidency.
So yes, strong follow-up to the march will be essential to making it a true success. But let's not ignore the fact that it has already achieved two important victories.
17
Agreed. More large protests will have a similar effect. Trump cares most of all about his popularity. He will not be able to stomach mass protests without responding.
2
The real value is the common experience shared by so many different demonstrations, and the common organizing tools they all shared. The challenge now is to make local changes that visibly show the futility of Trump's rhetoric. Jobs. Housing. Economic mobility. Community.
2
Aside from the fact that Prof. Tufekci appears to be promoting the case made in her book, it is clear that numbers DO count, as well as the follow through afterwards. I have taken part in numerous protests since 1967 to now, it is clear to me that when the voting public makes its opinion known, politicians do notice. Because of the myriad issues that motivated millions of voters to march, this can & will make a difference. The protests in 2003 did little to stop the war machine, and they never drew the numbers the protest last Saturday did, precisely because the media bought into and promoted the lies about Saddam Hussein & WMDs, as well as the fact that the war did not personally affect the majority of the electorate (aside from military families), so W and Cheney got their way. Now, the media is exposing the overt lies of the DT administration.
The difference is not only in the numbers who protested, but the fact that the issues that drew the millions affects the majority of us on a personal level (e.g., repealing the ACA, denying reproductive rights, and promoting overt racism), and has led in the past week to more grassroots action locally. The main difference in Saturday's protest may have been the ease of networking (college campuses, churches, and CBOs vs. e-mails, tweets, and social media). Prof. Tufekci is correct that the motives that led to the millions in the street must be maintained, but denigrating the forces that brought folk to the street is self-defeating.
The difference is not only in the numbers who protested, but the fact that the issues that drew the millions affects the majority of us on a personal level (e.g., repealing the ACA, denying reproductive rights, and promoting overt racism), and has led in the past week to more grassroots action locally. The main difference in Saturday's protest may have been the ease of networking (college campuses, churches, and CBOs vs. e-mails, tweets, and social media). Prof. Tufekci is correct that the motives that led to the millions in the street must be maintained, but denigrating the forces that brought folk to the street is self-defeating.
5
Today's story about hybridizing human and big genes to develop a new kind of medicine ought to provoke a much more serious discussion on ... abortion. Would such a hybrid be sacrosanct because of human genes? THAT kind of discussion begins to dis-aggregate the ideological rigidity of Trump's supporters, and their reliance on oversimplified, unresearched, and painfully ignorant lies.
Of course size matters. Not only do massive public protests have a visual impact for those on the sidelines, but they demonstrate a deep commitment for those who participate. Do you really think the recent Women's March would have gotten as much coverage and support if it was replaced with a blog with a million "Thumbs Up"? Social media protests tend to be lazy and very insular. Think of the difference between real friend and a Facebook friend.
30
Yes it is important to meet real humans and talk with them face to face. That is how you build the trust to build real networks. A lot can be done on line, but if at all possible get out on the street to make real connections with real people.
And saving the world is really a lot of fun. It is not grim, angry work, like Hannity likes to pretend. We don't hate. We want to save the billionaires from their self destructive behavior before they destroy us too.
Saving the world is chanting, singing, music making, dancing, sign making, puppet making, costumes, comedy, livestreaming, and sometimes getting angry, and talking to smart people that care about their world who you may agree or disagree with, but who are willing to support your cause while you support theirs. And most important loving the world and the people in it.
Protesting is invigorating, and makes you feel the power of the People, and it makes you cry from the sheer joy that you are not alone and that you can change the world. And it makes you healthier.
Don't sit alone watching the end of democracy on Facebook and waiting for some hero to come save it. We are all the heroes. We all have to save it together.
This is what democracy looks like.
And saving the world is really a lot of fun. It is not grim, angry work, like Hannity likes to pretend. We don't hate. We want to save the billionaires from their self destructive behavior before they destroy us too.
Saving the world is chanting, singing, music making, dancing, sign making, puppet making, costumes, comedy, livestreaming, and sometimes getting angry, and talking to smart people that care about their world who you may agree or disagree with, but who are willing to support your cause while you support theirs. And most important loving the world and the people in it.
Protesting is invigorating, and makes you feel the power of the People, and it makes you cry from the sheer joy that you are not alone and that you can change the world. And it makes you healthier.
Don't sit alone watching the end of democracy on Facebook and waiting for some hero to come save it. We are all the heroes. We all have to save it together.
This is what democracy looks like.
2
"...the significance of a protest depends on what happens afterward...", and with this pathologically thin-skinned president, there may be a better chance that a casual dismissal is not in the cards. Trump will help us keep the issues alive as he will no doubt keep promoting new, outlandish government overreach (not very conservative, is he) and reflexively challenge "threats" to his brand. We may have a better chance with this twit than we did with W over Iraq.
5
Where is the "government overreach" in canceling 75% of government regulations, other than that it is being done by the Trump "government?." Or is your view similar to Joe McCarthy's when told that someone was an "anti-communist." "I don't care what kind of communist he is," said Mccarthy. "I'm against all of them."
The real challenge of some of these demonstrations is to make Putin's puppet appear as superficial, naive, rhetorical, and destructive as he really is. If they had made fun of Trump, citing the overreach of his superficial and largely naive ideology of "the marketplace," for one example, with "tickets to ride his slide" for the opposition, they would at least have made a statement with some ripple effect.
I agree that a protest is a beginning and there needs to be a sustained effort to defeat the agenda of our current administration. I would, however, like to point out that a large reason that the Tea Party was able to sustain their protests and turn them into elected office for their candidates is the assistance in state general assemblies offered by ALEC in drafting model legislation that aligned perfectly with TPA goals. I also think the millions of dollars poured into states where relative unknown candidates of the TPA challenged incumbents in primaries, helped immensely in getting these candidates elected. I saw the foolish meme this week that George Soros funded the pink "pussy" hats of the women at the marches, and of course that is untrue, but if we are to get candidates elected, it is not only dedication and hard work, but also the support of progressive benefactors.
8
Don't take money from the rich to save us from the rich. The money only gets in the way. it is something to fight over, and something to compromise your principals to keep. That is why the Democrats are losing. They worry more about keeping their donors happy than doing the right thing.
And Bernie showed you don't need their money. You need networks of people that care, and that will donate their time and energy.
All of those advertising dollars that were poured into Jeb!, et al, did not stop Trump, who spent almost nothing. He was a protest vote against the establishment. Unfortunately, he happens to also be the establishment. His core of racist sexist xenophobes will stay loyal, but as the swing voters who thought they were voting against the "center" realize that he is more of the same, they will drop him like a hot potato.
Trump is great at making enemies, and this may be just what we need to galvanize the country and the world to save itself from him and his colleagues in the global billionaire class.
And Bernie showed you don't need their money. You need networks of people that care, and that will donate their time and energy.
All of those advertising dollars that were poured into Jeb!, et al, did not stop Trump, who spent almost nothing. He was a protest vote against the establishment. Unfortunately, he happens to also be the establishment. His core of racist sexist xenophobes will stay loyal, but as the swing voters who thought they were voting against the "center" realize that he is more of the same, they will drop him like a hot potato.
Trump is great at making enemies, and this may be just what we need to galvanize the country and the world to save itself from him and his colleagues in the global billionaire class.
1
Please go to the website-- WomensMarch.com and sign up to learn about current and upcoming actions.
Speakers at the DC march said over and over that a one-day event would not be enough to make the change we want to see.
Speakers at the DC march said over and over that a one-day event would not be enough to make the change we want to see.
17
Oh, make no mistake, the size of this one mattered, a lot, to someone with small hands.
The Women's March was not a mere temper tantrum of sore losers. We snowflakes did not go home and take a nap. Coming together by the millions to show our shared values and peacefully demonstrate our anger was just the beginning of a blizzard that is going to continue blowing back against Trumpism and the whole scorched Earth Republican agenda. More and more thinking people awake daily to the dangers and are becoming active however they are able, whether contacting their representatives, subscribing to real news sources, donating to human rights groups, helping to organize in their communities, writing for social media, fighting trolls, or actively loving our addlepated friends and neighbors who got us into this mess so they can gracefully admit they were wrong after they lose their health care and have to wait until 70 to retire.
Stronger together.
The Women's March was not a mere temper tantrum of sore losers. We snowflakes did not go home and take a nap. Coming together by the millions to show our shared values and peacefully demonstrate our anger was just the beginning of a blizzard that is going to continue blowing back against Trumpism and the whole scorched Earth Republican agenda. More and more thinking people awake daily to the dangers and are becoming active however they are able, whether contacting their representatives, subscribing to real news sources, donating to human rights groups, helping to organize in their communities, writing for social media, fighting trolls, or actively loving our addlepated friends and neighbors who got us into this mess so they can gracefully admit they were wrong after they lose their health care and have to wait until 70 to retire.
Stronger together.
43
Apparently it does matter given the efforts this week to diminish the effect of the largest mass protest in U.S. history plus satellite protests around the world (including 80,000 protestors in London). Critics console themselves by saying it was premature - as if we all didn't witness the ghastly behaviour of this President as a campaigner and/or public figure in the last four plus decades and the chaos and chicanery of his transition; as if decent, moral people empathetic to others didn't already know enough to launch a protest against him. Six days later conservative pundits are still trying to wish it away like some "big day out" for the ladies who will now retreat back to their sewing circles and yoga classes, having gotten that out of their system. Good luck with that. Size does matter. It matters in the tallying of the popular vote which the President lost by nearly 3M; apparently it matters at the President's inauguration which despite the devotion of his supporters had low turnout, a lot of empty white space and empty grandstands - the Commander-in-Chief is obsessed with it. It might not have as much influence as money but size, in this instance, is a measure of mobilisation and the protesting and activism has just begun. Many commentators are willing to give the "early days" pass to the Trump administration but are hellbent on crushing the authentic grassroots movement of the Women's March. It's a double standard that women are used to but they will not be deterred.
30
Ms. Tufecki is wrong.
Yes, it's easier to organize a protest using social media.
No, it's not easier to persuade people to get up off their couch, stand up for several hours in whatever weather is present in their city on the day scheduled.
Conversely, I would say that Ms. Tufecki's generation's preferred formats, of emails and on-line"click-here-to-add-your-name" protests are far less effective. Anyone can sit at their computer and sign on to twenty petitions in less than an hour. I'm sure someone like Donald Trump has no problem dismissing that. But when 3.5 million people in cities all over the country and around the world go to a public place to stand together, he cannot ignore those numbers. He can pretend to believe all the alternative facts he wants, but deep down he knows that these people got up and joined together against him.
My wife and I took a bus for 4 hours from NYC to Washington, D.C. to protest for six hours on Saturday, January 21. The bus took even longer getting back to NY, because of the fog. That's a sixteen-hour effort, gladly taken to participate with others to stand up for women's rights and against the policies of Donald Trump.
Ms. Tufecki's column is an insult to everyone who participated in real, stand up and be counted protest.
Yes, it's easier to organize a protest using social media.
No, it's not easier to persuade people to get up off their couch, stand up for several hours in whatever weather is present in their city on the day scheduled.
Conversely, I would say that Ms. Tufecki's generation's preferred formats, of emails and on-line"click-here-to-add-your-name" protests are far less effective. Anyone can sit at their computer and sign on to twenty petitions in less than an hour. I'm sure someone like Donald Trump has no problem dismissing that. But when 3.5 million people in cities all over the country and around the world go to a public place to stand together, he cannot ignore those numbers. He can pretend to believe all the alternative facts he wants, but deep down he knows that these people got up and joined together against him.
My wife and I took a bus for 4 hours from NYC to Washington, D.C. to protest for six hours on Saturday, January 21. The bus took even longer getting back to NY, because of the fog. That's a sixteen-hour effort, gladly taken to participate with others to stand up for women's rights and against the policies of Donald Trump.
Ms. Tufecki's column is an insult to everyone who participated in real, stand up and be counted protest.
190
Bless you.
Right: and all that travel is expensive. Committing money to getting to a protest--especially when there was a satellite protest closer by, as in the case of people who left NYC to protest in DC--is putting your money where your mouth is.
1
It's a variation on that old saw, which these days would be, 'Never bring a bus to a gunfight.'
1
Maybe a crowd of today can't be compared to one of twenty years ago. But that's not the issue here. Inaugural crowds were the day before the protest crowds. The technology, time etc, are identical. This says a lot.
And while the factors mentioned here may be true, they fail to take into account the modern choice of time. In an era where tweets count investing only seconds, bothering to commit the time not to mention time off from work says everything,
No, feet on the ground still matter. A lot. trump's dismay tells us how much it still matters.
And while the factors mentioned here may be true, they fail to take into account the modern choice of time. In an era where tweets count investing only seconds, bothering to commit the time not to mention time off from work says everything,
No, feet on the ground still matter. A lot. trump's dismay tells us how much it still matters.
49
It won't be enough to stop Trump and the Republicans from polluting the federal judiciary with young religious crusaders to wreck rational jurisprudence for two generations.
2
Does size matter in the digital age?
Yes, and no. Drawing out millions to hop on buses and march is significant, because everyone has other things to do, and that bar of inertia is difficult to overcome. Getting someone on a bus is a big signal. There used to be an idea that one complaint to a company represented 10,000 customers. Now it may only represent a 1000, but if you get a hundred complaints it is still a big deal. That's a lot of unhappy customers ready to desert you. Several million people on the streets is still significant.
It doesn't matter, not because of the internet age, but because of the age of gerrymander. If the protests come from people who are not the base and not the swing voter, then your government doesn't give a (place your own intensifier euphemism here.) Using the business analogy, if your Congress and White House don't consider you a customer, they don't care if you are unhappy.
So the impact of the size of the crowd is not diminished by the information age, but by the fact that we have a government uninterested in serving the whole country, not just half of it.
Yes, and no. Drawing out millions to hop on buses and march is significant, because everyone has other things to do, and that bar of inertia is difficult to overcome. Getting someone on a bus is a big signal. There used to be an idea that one complaint to a company represented 10,000 customers. Now it may only represent a 1000, but if you get a hundred complaints it is still a big deal. That's a lot of unhappy customers ready to desert you. Several million people on the streets is still significant.
It doesn't matter, not because of the internet age, but because of the age of gerrymander. If the protests come from people who are not the base and not the swing voter, then your government doesn't give a (place your own intensifier euphemism here.) Using the business analogy, if your Congress and White House don't consider you a customer, they don't care if you are unhappy.
So the impact of the size of the crowd is not diminished by the information age, but by the fact that we have a government uninterested in serving the whole country, not just half of it.
23
It all depends on the particulars.
Sure, continuing coordination, focused legislation, get-out-the-vote efforts, and communication link-ups are important.
But there is a lot more involved: the content and the presentation of the "movement." The Tea Party and Trump's other supporters had a common anger and a throw-the bums-out attitude combined with FOXNews type repeated and clear message: one side (Hillary) were the bums, the other side represented throwing them out.
The Women's march, Hillary and Bernie supporters are more thoughtful (read disorganized) because they are not mindless pawns of such a meaningless attitude. There is no consistent goal or message -- some blacks complained that the white women at the march did not support the Black Lives Matter movement so visibly, moderate women were not appreciative of the extremist disgustingly off-color messages of some. [Meanwhile the Tea Party accepted racists, homophobes, and Nazis with open arms].
There was no clear goal to the march, except opposition to Trump, who is in for at least 4 years, and there is no focused media message, except for "what's happening here?" Until the DNC (the only viable organizing force available) gets its act together with a clear vision acceptable to all and presented consistently, the Women's March folk and their sympathizers will be also-rans. We must stop our internal petty arguments over priorities.
There is one thing to do: Get our folks in office first!
Sure, continuing coordination, focused legislation, get-out-the-vote efforts, and communication link-ups are important.
But there is a lot more involved: the content and the presentation of the "movement." The Tea Party and Trump's other supporters had a common anger and a throw-the bums-out attitude combined with FOXNews type repeated and clear message: one side (Hillary) were the bums, the other side represented throwing them out.
The Women's march, Hillary and Bernie supporters are more thoughtful (read disorganized) because they are not mindless pawns of such a meaningless attitude. There is no consistent goal or message -- some blacks complained that the white women at the march did not support the Black Lives Matter movement so visibly, moderate women were not appreciative of the extremist disgustingly off-color messages of some. [Meanwhile the Tea Party accepted racists, homophobes, and Nazis with open arms].
There was no clear goal to the march, except opposition to Trump, who is in for at least 4 years, and there is no focused media message, except for "what's happening here?" Until the DNC (the only viable organizing force available) gets its act together with a clear vision acceptable to all and presented consistently, the Women's March folk and their sympathizers will be also-rans. We must stop our internal petty arguments over priorities.
There is one thing to do: Get our folks in office first!
13
The March was about a lot more than "opposition to Trump." Were you there? Or did you watch it on the news? Immigrants' rights, women's reproductive rights, First Amendment rights, Equal pay for equal work...there were signs for all these issues, and lots more.
1
One way to get out the vote for "our people" would be to have every Democrat running for Congress and Senate campaign on the 'if you vote for me I'll vote for impeachment' ticket. This would force Republican candidates to support a President already deeply unpopular whose popularity will be even lower in two years.
2
To Julia Holcomb,
I think these short comments lead to misunderstanding. To clarify my intended point -- I was not in any way putting down the breadth and depth of the march and the marchers. My intended point was to highlight how organized the Trump forces were in getting him elected. They did it, and now we're in trouble. When asked, many of those who voted for him did not really care about his views on many issues of interest to others who voted for him -- they were all united in getting him elected and in keeping Hillary out of office. To the extent that the march included all the issues you mentioned, the effect can be divided -- the whole becomes less than the sum of the parts. To be effective the marchers need to focus on electing representatives with a general vision we can all support (diversity, equality, justice, etc.) without getting into priorities among them and even particulars. That would divide us. Once we have a majority of reps in office then we can work on all our particular (yes, they are important) issues. But we need sharp focus and a simple clear message. (Sure I'd like our politics to be more complex and philosophically sophisticated. But this is a democracy where we have to communicate easily with a lot of people, not all well informed or willing to spend too much time on things).
I think these short comments lead to misunderstanding. To clarify my intended point -- I was not in any way putting down the breadth and depth of the march and the marchers. My intended point was to highlight how organized the Trump forces were in getting him elected. They did it, and now we're in trouble. When asked, many of those who voted for him did not really care about his views on many issues of interest to others who voted for him -- they were all united in getting him elected and in keeping Hillary out of office. To the extent that the march included all the issues you mentioned, the effect can be divided -- the whole becomes less than the sum of the parts. To be effective the marchers need to focus on electing representatives with a general vision we can all support (diversity, equality, justice, etc.) without getting into priorities among them and even particulars. That would divide us. Once we have a majority of reps in office then we can work on all our particular (yes, they are important) issues. But we need sharp focus and a simple clear message. (Sure I'd like our politics to be more complex and philosophically sophisticated. But this is a democracy where we have to communicate easily with a lot of people, not all well informed or willing to spend too much time on things).
3
Perhaps the egomaniac-in-chief should read your column. It may help him move on and prevent him from ordering the Park Service to 'doctor' the inauguration photos.
11
The protests cited by the author all contributed to and continue to disentangling the democratic party from knots of neoliberal centrism. The bowline on bight of Wall Street, slippery hitch of Silicon Valley, and double overhand of New York Times editorial are finally coming untied. Despite his racism, misogyny, ill temper, thin skin and small hands, Trump is a doer that follows through and gets things done. So was Mayor Richard J. Daley, btw. Good grief New York Times, just because this op-ed writer anecdotal protesting was feckless, doesn't mean it's so for the billions and billions and gazillions of progressives here in the hinterlands and elsewhere. Not everybody wants to shut up and wear a "kick me" sign on their backs so they can ply their trade without upsetting Frank Bruni types.
5
Thx you for your wonderful writing!
1
The protests matter, what doesn't make sense is comparing the protest turnout size to the inauguration turnout. The inauguration, which I attended, mostly required tickets which were all accounted for and had to be acquired weeks in advance. I walked three miles, went through two security gates, and stood in the rain for three hours with hundreds of thousands of my fellow Americans of all types. There was no pushing or arguing, it was a beautiful experience. People were either local anomalies or made a weekend out of it spending thousands of dollars. Hotels were at least $500 a night.
The demonstrations required a subway ride. There were no tickets and no security. The inauguration took place at noon, the demonstrations went on all day. The difference in the number of subway riders by 11 AM was less than 80,000 the meaning of which is clouded by the people who worked Saturday. Nearly no one worked on Inauguration Day which was a federal holiday and the whole downtown was fenced and nearly all businesses were closed.
Both events were amazing displays of democracy and I applaud everyone who wants their voice heard. As much as I enjoyed the inauguration I want dissent heard, who knows I may want to dissent too.
What happens with both groups depends on many factors, the tea party parlayed their movement into political power, Occupy did not. Studying the groups may explain why, but disparaging each other won't.
The demonstrations required a subway ride. There were no tickets and no security. The inauguration took place at noon, the demonstrations went on all day. The difference in the number of subway riders by 11 AM was less than 80,000 the meaning of which is clouded by the people who worked Saturday. Nearly no one worked on Inauguration Day which was a federal holiday and the whole downtown was fenced and nearly all businesses were closed.
Both events were amazing displays of democracy and I applaud everyone who wants their voice heard. As much as I enjoyed the inauguration I want dissent heard, who knows I may want to dissent too.
What happens with both groups depends on many factors, the tea party parlayed their movement into political power, Occupy did not. Studying the groups may explain why, but disparaging each other won't.
12
Whoa! The column didn't mention the inauguration, you did. The meaningful comparison for the inauguration is with President Obama's in 2009. While Trump has tried to portray these as equal, Trump's was in fact much smaller.
3
My brother, who lives near DC, got tickets to the inauguration on the day of, so its not true that tickets were all accounted for and acquired weeks in advance. Moreover people could attend the inauguration and watch it from the mall without tickets.
I attended the march, and it required a lot more effort than "a subway ride." I live in NY. I took a vacation day from work on Friday and drove 5 hours to DC. As I was driving up I saw many cars full of women on the NJ Turnpike with signs indicating that they were going to the march too.
I attended the march, and it required a lot more effort than "a subway ride." I live in NY. I took a vacation day from work on Friday and drove 5 hours to DC. As I was driving up I saw many cars full of women on the NJ Turnpike with signs indicating that they were going to the march too.
3
You say that it doesn't make sense comparing the inauguration crowd to the Women's March crowd, then proceed to do just that.
4
Getting the left to agree on a "ferociously focused agenda" will be difficult. We have no analog to Fox News, no analog to the fundamentalists ministers who preach sermons that are interchangeable, no analog to Rush Limbaugh, and because we tend to be humanists we are reluctant to find an "other" to demonize. And unless the Democratic Party gets behind a clear agenda they are unlikely to lead on this issue. They are the "We're not Republican" party and as such they are reacting to whatever agenda the Republicans advance instead of putting forth an agenda of their own. MAYBE the Justice Democrats will pull the party to the left the same way the Tea Party pulled the Republicans to the right. In the meantime, don't just make signs: phone your elected officials at all levels of government to tell them what you think of the direction our country is headed.
30
Republicanism is simply a cult for simpletons.
The left seems to find plenty of wealthy people, conservatives and gun owners to demonize.
2
I'd say the NYT/DNC/MSM/CNN/Eight years of drift Obama administration show you have plenty of extremism to answer for. That you don't have an "other" to demonize is belied by your " it's their fault we're the do nothings we are excuse. It's pathetically humorous to gauge the overdone reaction to a week of Trump and eight years of" leading from behind". Why don't you reactionary lemmings try something new for a change, take responsibility for the damage, your party/media has done to our body politic.
3
In general, conservatives don't like to March. We don't particularly like big crowds and the hassle. We understand it means nothing. We read, collect information and vote. We can watch anything we want on TV.
So, no. Crowds at marches (in general) mean nothing.
So, no. Crowds at marches (in general) mean nothing.
15
I guess the crowds need pitchforks and torches to really matter
1
You're right that it's a hassle. You're wrong that it means nothing. Disrupting your life to travel halfway across the country in a bus to stand in the cold and demonstrate what you believe, takes commitment. So keep watching TV. THAT means nothing.
2
So say you. We'll see, won't we?
2
Size is an indicator, but never has been confirmation of a movement's strength, whether good or bad. E.g., small groups like American revolutionaries, the tiny Nazi Party, various resistance movements like the French and Italian undergrounds, French impressionists, the Jewish community. And so on. And, try not to choke Times' readers, but - Trump supporters.
There are force multipliers that make one group powerful or go viral as opposed to all others. Motivation, energy, just being right time, right place matter and many small things. It's very unpredictable because we can't read people's minds and see what is really motivating them. You would think after all these years and the disaster of the two parties' nominees for the White House, groups like No Labels would take off. They just don't motivate people.
There are force multipliers that make one group powerful or go viral as opposed to all others. Motivation, energy, just being right time, right place matter and many small things. It's very unpredictable because we can't read people's minds and see what is really motivating them. You would think after all these years and the disaster of the two parties' nominees for the White House, groups like No Labels would take off. They just don't motivate people.
11
Agreed, Ms. Tufekci. Thanks for thinking it through here.
Another thought. Any mass protest represents groupthink, rather than individual conviction. Might as well be a handful as three million. In both cases, there's only one basic, crudely articulated idea. Groupthink doesn't do subtlety, or in-depth. Powerful people understand that, and they feel free to treat both the handful and the three million pretty much the same. And that's sensible, because they are.
If you want to effect change, then, you'll do it in the focused, articulate, and cogent follow-up - as you seem to suggest - not by having more big parades.
Another thought. Any mass protest represents groupthink, rather than individual conviction. Might as well be a handful as three million. In both cases, there's only one basic, crudely articulated idea. Groupthink doesn't do subtlety, or in-depth. Powerful people understand that, and they feel free to treat both the handful and the three million pretty much the same. And that's sensible, because they are.
If you want to effect change, then, you'll do it in the focused, articulate, and cogent follow-up - as you seem to suggest - not by having more big parades.
26
I suggest you take a look at Eric Hoffer's "True Believer" which discusses group think. I think you find that your "any mass protest" will not hold. It's much more complicated and nuanced that that. Your notion suggests that consensus impossible because it is mere brainwashing. While it is true there is an element of group think in everything from religion to corporations as well as nations, solidarity than just manipulation.
13
A protest march certainly does not rely on group think. Yes it is easier to get people organized against something than for something else, but it is precisely because there are many different reasons to protest.
There are many reasons to protest Trump, for example. There are many that would have been there to protest Hillary also, as they both represent the global oligarchy, and its world wide looting. Many are against a president who lies constantly. Many were there to protest his hateful rhetoric and policy promises, and in support of majorities and minorities abused by genderist and racist propaganda and institutions. Many were there to protest the ramping up of supply side economics and the privatization of everything. Many were there because they thought the election was stolen from Hillary. Many were there though they thought the election was stolen from Bernie, and handed to Trump by Hillary. Many were there to protest the destruction of the environment. Most were there for some combination off these, or even other reasons, but few were there for all of them.
There are a lot of good reasons to protest Trump, and his fox in every chicken coop cabinet.
Wanting to save the world from psychopathic pathological liar is unifying, but it it's not group think.
Group think is when half the country thinks they have to vote for one pro corporate looting lesser evil or the other, because voting for a good candidate is a waste of their vote. Where did that get us?
There are many reasons to protest Trump, for example. There are many that would have been there to protest Hillary also, as they both represent the global oligarchy, and its world wide looting. Many are against a president who lies constantly. Many were there to protest his hateful rhetoric and policy promises, and in support of majorities and minorities abused by genderist and racist propaganda and institutions. Many were there to protest the ramping up of supply side economics and the privatization of everything. Many were there because they thought the election was stolen from Hillary. Many were there though they thought the election was stolen from Bernie, and handed to Trump by Hillary. Many were there to protest the destruction of the environment. Most were there for some combination off these, or even other reasons, but few were there for all of them.
There are a lot of good reasons to protest Trump, and his fox in every chicken coop cabinet.
Wanting to save the world from psychopathic pathological liar is unifying, but it it's not group think.
Group think is when half the country thinks they have to vote for one pro corporate looting lesser evil or the other, because voting for a good candidate is a waste of their vote. Where did that get us?
1
Interesting concept, this 'groupthink'; however, I see it as a common and very real falsehood. The falsehood is: extrapolating group characteristics to individuals is simply assuming too much. We humans do it all the time, and for very powerful reasons: we don't have time, energy, or information not to do it when something seems to demand (even if that is a totally internal mental process) that we judge or assess a situation. Being a Georgian and long time Civil War buff, I offer this anecdote as an example: as is well known, Georgia held a 'convention' in January of 1861 and voted to secede--> Georgians supported the concept of slavery. However, there were three votes before a majority was reached and the arguments along the way involved assessing the new legislators elected in other states, doubts about the incoming president's ability to make policy and the pace of growth in local agricultural productivity. While the world takes away 'they decided to secede', the actuality was vastly more nuanced
2
In many ways, I liken the recent Women's March to 9/11. After that tragedy, I remember seeing a drawing of a fierce looking eagle sitting and sharpening its talons. The march last Saturday was not a walk in the park--it was overcast, somewhat chilly but it was empowering to be with that determined group of women and men. Mr. Trump and his flying monkeys will find that sea of determined people in their faces as they seek to pillage the planet and harm its people.
122
Interesting comment and observation -- about the Eagle.
Many are unaware that the emblem of the US is borrowed from the Iroquois Confederacy (at Ben Franklin's suggestion) during our first form of government under the Articles of Confederation.
Our emblem, in its original version held five arrows, not 13, the number of nations in the Iroquois confederacy.
The Eagle's most important attribute is its vision -- its ability to sense danger from afar and arouse the unity among the nations to meet a threat before it becomes overwhelming to the people of the individual nation/states.
The word "caucus", the provision that allows people to speak without interruption until they are fully heard, is also borrowed from the same source.
The first word in the Constitution is "We", and as if it needed emphasis, is followed by "... the People." is that word, We, so difficult to understand?
"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
Beware of flying monkeys wearing brown shirts.
Many are unaware that the emblem of the US is borrowed from the Iroquois Confederacy (at Ben Franklin's suggestion) during our first form of government under the Articles of Confederation.
Our emblem, in its original version held five arrows, not 13, the number of nations in the Iroquois confederacy.
The Eagle's most important attribute is its vision -- its ability to sense danger from afar and arouse the unity among the nations to meet a threat before it becomes overwhelming to the people of the individual nation/states.
The word "caucus", the provision that allows people to speak without interruption until they are fully heard, is also borrowed from the same source.
The first word in the Constitution is "We", and as if it needed emphasis, is followed by "... the People." is that word, We, so difficult to understand?
"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
Beware of flying monkeys wearing brown shirts.
They won't care if they are in their faces. So how will we stop the pillage and harm?
I must have brushed shoulders with you in 2003 as I flew in from Minnesota to Washington for the protest and under the organization of Code Pink, we visited numerous women senators to plead with them to impede the Iraq War effort. I think, while there was an unexpectedly good response from the city itself, the anti-war sentiment, while larger than assumed, it was definitely not large enough to have turned the country's direction around. Also it did not have the organizing power of the Internet or the financial and organizing skill of the Koch brothers as did the Tea Party.
On the other hand. I took part in the Vietnam March on Washington in the spring of 1969, (if memory serves me correctly) as I was living in Washington. The sentiment of anti-war fever was, I think, huge, but the powers of the war machine on the other side was more in control and the popular pro-Vietnam sentiment was also very passionate.
The Women's March today has the sentiment of the majority, and ff not the Koch Brothers, the tools of the Tea Party, so follow-through is key, but the underlying sentiments of the country in the historical moment matter greatly. I think this march has huge potential because of that. The oligarchy will be out in force as opposition this time so we shall see.
On the other hand. I took part in the Vietnam March on Washington in the spring of 1969, (if memory serves me correctly) as I was living in Washington. The sentiment of anti-war fever was, I think, huge, but the powers of the war machine on the other side was more in control and the popular pro-Vietnam sentiment was also very passionate.
The Women's March today has the sentiment of the majority, and ff not the Koch Brothers, the tools of the Tea Party, so follow-through is key, but the underlying sentiments of the country in the historical moment matter greatly. I think this march has huge potential because of that. The oligarchy will be out in force as opposition this time so we shall see.
80
Prof. Tufekci makes a good point about the need for follow through. But I think there are some clear distinctions between the Women's march and the protests against the Iraq war in 2003, and the Occupy protests in 2011.
The Occupy protests in 2011 were tiny, especially in the US; the typical Occupy march involved thousands of people, not hundreds of thousands, and really are not comparable to the Women's marches.
The 2003 protests against the Iraq war were large, but the issue was not an existential one for most of the Americans who were marching. Yes we deplored the war and the loss of life we knew it would entail, but it was on the other side of the world and not something that directly touched the lives of the majority of Americans who were not fighting in it (or had family members who were). This does not make it any less of a tragedy, but it does help to explain the lack of follow through.
The actions planned by the current administration will directly impact millions of Americans. Moreover, the hate and bigotry stoked by the campaign has already made daily life in America worse than it was a year ago for many of us. No one can ignore this, we feel it every day, and the headlines are a constant reminder.
Many of us have friends or family members for whom this is truly an existential issue. I honestly fear for their safety, especially those who are trans-gendered, Hispanic, or Muslim (in addition to being female).
The Occupy protests in 2011 were tiny, especially in the US; the typical Occupy march involved thousands of people, not hundreds of thousands, and really are not comparable to the Women's marches.
The 2003 protests against the Iraq war were large, but the issue was not an existential one for most of the Americans who were marching. Yes we deplored the war and the loss of life we knew it would entail, but it was on the other side of the world and not something that directly touched the lives of the majority of Americans who were not fighting in it (or had family members who were). This does not make it any less of a tragedy, but it does help to explain the lack of follow through.
The actions planned by the current administration will directly impact millions of Americans. Moreover, the hate and bigotry stoked by the campaign has already made daily life in America worse than it was a year ago for many of us. No one can ignore this, we feel it every day, and the headlines are a constant reminder.
Many of us have friends or family members for whom this is truly an existential issue. I honestly fear for their safety, especially those who are trans-gendered, Hispanic, or Muslim (in addition to being female).
72
The current administration "has already made daily life in America worse" is the kind of exaggeration that proves the point of media critics. "The headlines are a constant reminder." Put down what Steve Bannon calls the enemy for a week. Read another newspaper and change the TV channel. You'll feel much better.
3
Victor -
Indeed the objectives of the protest, which are likely not be the same for all participants, do matter. But I think you understate your final point. Preserving our democracy is an existential point for ALL of us, even those who believe that those in power today are on their side. Suppression of dissent and inquiry, rewriting history, obfuscation of the truth, in the long run this will destroy us. Today we can choose either willful blindness or a palpitating fear. If the fear doesn't motivate us today to get on a bus, or a subway, or sign a petition, or make some calls or write some letters, tomorrow we won't have that choice. The actions planned by this administration will directly impact every American, including those not yet born, and virtually every human on the planet. The willfully blind can ignore dissent of almost any sort, or choose their facts to support their worldview. But participating is motivating and reinforcing, all the more so when you're part of a massive group of living, breathing, walking, shouting and even singing people, who are showing what matters to them.
Indeed the objectives of the protest, which are likely not be the same for all participants, do matter. But I think you understate your final point. Preserving our democracy is an existential point for ALL of us, even those who believe that those in power today are on their side. Suppression of dissent and inquiry, rewriting history, obfuscation of the truth, in the long run this will destroy us. Today we can choose either willful blindness or a palpitating fear. If the fear doesn't motivate us today to get on a bus, or a subway, or sign a petition, or make some calls or write some letters, tomorrow we won't have that choice. The actions planned by this administration will directly impact every American, including those not yet born, and virtually every human on the planet. The willfully blind can ignore dissent of almost any sort, or choose their facts to support their worldview. But participating is motivating and reinforcing, all the more so when you're part of a massive group of living, breathing, walking, shouting and even singing people, who are showing what matters to them.
3
leftorright: I read other newspapers. It doesn't make me feel better, because it doesn't change the facts ("alternative facts" don't count). People who oppose the mission of the agency they are about to lead are being appointed. Trump's press secretary is saying absurd things. Trump is signaling that he will build the wall (but, what a shock, Mexico will not pay for it), monies for police training for dealing with sexual assault are being cut off -- the list goes on.
If you approve of those things, of course you'll feel fine. If you don't, reading another newspaper will certainly give a broader perspective, but will not change reality.
If you approve of those things, of course you'll feel fine. If you don't, reading another newspaper will certainly give a broader perspective, but will not change reality.
5
The Democrats spent a billion dollars to elect Donald Trump. Surely they could spend a fraction of that to back candidates - even long shots - in races across the country. who would at least get the message out. Now, if they only had a message...
14
You bet your booties. The shear numbers world wide wakes those who where just watching up. Resistance will grow and take on many other forms. Everyone will have to find their own way to fight back against this mad & destructive presidency.
As you say: Lets Get to Work.
As you say: Lets Get to Work.
40
Preach!
Large in numbers but legally inchoate, that is, until they focus on a common goal. A goal such as the appointment of a Special Prosecutor who can bring charges against the president for these abuses of power we see are already going forward, as if George III of England were being channeled in daily briefings. Meantime all this venting of spleen reminds one of the failed initiative to recast the word "womyn" so that it would not have "-man" as its root. Ineffectual and even contemptible...
6
I totally disagree with this column. In protest terms, size DOES matter. It indicates a certain unity of purpose. Does anyone cover or even notice a protest attended by 5 or 6 people? Size also draws attention not only to the issues but is a measure of the support behind them. Both Bernie Sanders and DJT benefited from the large crowds during the the election period. We are inspired to go further when we can measure the power of our ideas by the number of people who share them, and it sure is much easier to "go forward from there" when the support has been trumpeted by thousands or millions. Resist, march and organize. It is a tool to shape public policy. Remember that none of the people in Congress will be there if no one votes for them. Our very votes are a form of support or protest, and have more impact the larger the turnout during elections.
241
This column angered me greatly!
This “self-styled technologist” who gave a TED talk (!) is an associate professor who looks under 30 years of age.
Did she read the individual stories in this newspapers? There were 60+ year old women who had considered themselves lifelong Republicans and lived in towns decimated by the shuttering of a major manufacturing plant. Women who had families and had NEVER protested before now screwed up the courage to ride a bus with total strangers 400to 1,000 miles and more.
Women who had never left the safety of home and family before go sleep on a stranger’s floor or couch. Women who FINALLY said “ENOUGH!”
Women who now felt empowered to go back home and run for the school board. Women who found their voice. Women who had never heard of Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, yada, yada--left their comfort zones to go protest.
Women who had never met a Muslim woman in a hijab were now marching elbow in elbow. Women getting over the differences that the LEADERS were fighting over -“No anti-abortion women please!”
Women who now KNEW they made a difference.
Easily organized? I’ve protested since I returned from Vietnam as a Captain in the US Army Nurse Corps of the 44th Medical Battalion, now 68 y/o disabled with Stage 4 cancer and arthritis riding on a bus, cold, but marching.
Miss Millennial Zeynep Tufnekci, Miss Native Digital this was a YUGE step for millions of women who were laughed at, castigated on Trump’s Twitter account.
We CHANGED.
This “self-styled technologist” who gave a TED talk (!) is an associate professor who looks under 30 years of age.
Did she read the individual stories in this newspapers? There were 60+ year old women who had considered themselves lifelong Republicans and lived in towns decimated by the shuttering of a major manufacturing plant. Women who had families and had NEVER protested before now screwed up the courage to ride a bus with total strangers 400to 1,000 miles and more.
Women who had never left the safety of home and family before go sleep on a stranger’s floor or couch. Women who FINALLY said “ENOUGH!”
Women who now felt empowered to go back home and run for the school board. Women who found their voice. Women who had never heard of Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, yada, yada--left their comfort zones to go protest.
Women who had never met a Muslim woman in a hijab were now marching elbow in elbow. Women getting over the differences that the LEADERS were fighting over -“No anti-abortion women please!”
Women who now KNEW they made a difference.
Easily organized? I’ve protested since I returned from Vietnam as a Captain in the US Army Nurse Corps of the 44th Medical Battalion, now 68 y/o disabled with Stage 4 cancer and arthritis riding on a bus, cold, but marching.
Miss Millennial Zeynep Tufnekci, Miss Native Digital this was a YUGE step for millions of women who were laughed at, castigated on Trump’s Twitter account.
We CHANGED.
414
Nuschler
YOU GO GIRL!
Thank you for so many services you have given this country - with more to come. We salute you!
MIMA
YOU GO GIRL!
Thank you for so many services you have given this country - with more to come. We salute you!
MIMA
3
Isn't that the writer's point? It's a first step, so it's a great start, but only a start.
3
Thank you. The column was dispiriting.
1
Before the March we were already organizing. Michael Moore gave great advice on how to keep our voices heard and we listened. We're calling, writing, and attending town halls. America is sick and tired of being sick and tired.
101
In the alternative media the Women's March is compared to the Color Revolutions that the US supported in other countries. The as mobilization tactics used are the same - as is the participation of many Soros-supported NGOs.
Now comes the delicate subject of the follow through. Here I have to disagree with the author. The Tea Party was only a success in one very specific way. It has become a cancer inside the Republican Party that has taken over its host. And - given that it is dominated by a few ultra-rich donors - that has seriously damaged American democracy.
I don't think the organizers of the Women's March should aim for a similar coup. Instead they should formulate a few narrow goals. Unfortunately they don't seem to be even close to that. The protests were anti-Trump but didn't have clear goals by themselves.
Now comes the delicate subject of the follow through. Here I have to disagree with the author. The Tea Party was only a success in one very specific way. It has become a cancer inside the Republican Party that has taken over its host. And - given that it is dominated by a few ultra-rich donors - that has seriously damaged American democracy.
I don't think the organizers of the Women's March should aim for a similar coup. Instead they should formulate a few narrow goals. Unfortunately they don't seem to be even close to that. The protests were anti-Trump but didn't have clear goals by themselves.
10
The Trump agenda is vast. I don't think anyone could have brought so many people together over a single issue, or even three or four. The point of the march was to oppose pretty much the entire agenda.
I don't know of anyone who looks to the march organizers per se for future leadership. Back home, there are single-focus organizations to support, and reports are that donations and memberships are soaring. There will be active follow-through. As another commenter pointed out, the issues are not abstract. They affect us directly, often quickly. That's plenty of motivation.
I don't know of anyone who looks to the march organizers per se for future leadership. Back home, there are single-focus organizations to support, and reports are that donations and memberships are soaring. There will be active follow-through. As another commenter pointed out, the issues are not abstract. They affect us directly, often quickly. That's plenty of motivation.
4
The seminal protest of this century was the Arab Spring protest in Cairo. It was sparked by an extreme act of personal outrage by a single individual. Its purpose was to overthrow a much-maligned dictatorship. Millions gathered in the central square of Cairo and when they defied the government, they were shot upon.
By comparison, the Women's March was a cheery gathering that lacked a grave and focused purpose. And its opposition to the government was expressed in a manner that was not intended to alarm anyone. And, in fact, it alarmed no no one.
What determines the seriousness of a protest isn't the numbers who show up, it's who shows up and why.
By comparison, the Women's March was a cheery gathering that lacked a grave and focused purpose. And its opposition to the government was expressed in a manner that was not intended to alarm anyone. And, in fact, it alarmed no no one.
What determines the seriousness of a protest isn't the numbers who show up, it's who shows up and why.
30
I was in DC, and there were a lot of protest newbies there, cautious and quiet, not joining chants, not banging on stuff, just being there because they had to. It is easy to dismiss them as "not serious," but that is a grave error.
New people is exactly what is needed and exactly why some of us have been protesting for a long time. Even as I tried to energize the many who were quiet, I rejoiced in their participation, because it meant they were paying attention to the world around them, and wanted to do something about it.
Welcome the newbies with open arms. Find out what they are interested in and help them pursue it.
Also the singe issue focus thing is a way to split up the power of our networks, and make them compete instead of cooperate.
Occupy was powerful exactly because it brought together many different groups with many different agendas, to fight against the people that have caused most of our problems, the global oligarchy made up of people like Trump.
At Occupy we met, we discussed, we planned, and we created new networks of people that support each others causes, because alone we are weak, but together we are strong.
These networks are raising the minimum wage, stopped TPP, helped write Dodd Frank, helped Bernie nearly take the Democratic nomination, helped millions of people affected by Hurricane Sandy (google Tea Party Sandy, then Occupy Sandy), helped start BLM, bought and forgave over $15 million in debt and wrote the Debt Resistors Manual, etc.
New people is exactly what is needed and exactly why some of us have been protesting for a long time. Even as I tried to energize the many who were quiet, I rejoiced in their participation, because it meant they were paying attention to the world around them, and wanted to do something about it.
Welcome the newbies with open arms. Find out what they are interested in and help them pursue it.
Also the singe issue focus thing is a way to split up the power of our networks, and make them compete instead of cooperate.
Occupy was powerful exactly because it brought together many different groups with many different agendas, to fight against the people that have caused most of our problems, the global oligarchy made up of people like Trump.
At Occupy we met, we discussed, we planned, and we created new networks of people that support each others causes, because alone we are weak, but together we are strong.
These networks are raising the minimum wage, stopped TPP, helped write Dodd Frank, helped Bernie nearly take the Democratic nomination, helped millions of people affected by Hurricane Sandy (google Tea Party Sandy, then Occupy Sandy), helped start BLM, bought and forgave over $15 million in debt and wrote the Debt Resistors Manual, etc.
4
It alarmed Trump.
And I say again: the assertion that there is no clear purpose to the March is a canard. And no, the purpose was not simply anti-Trump. Read the signs. Listen to the speeches and songs.
Stop dismissing women. Just...stop.
And I say again: the assertion that there is no clear purpose to the March is a canard. And no, the purpose was not simply anti-Trump. Read the signs. Listen to the speeches and songs.
Stop dismissing women. Just...stop.
3
I beg to differ. The Women's March alarmed DJT "Ratings Machine" to such an extent that he began his very disturbing, very public arguments re his own Inaugural crowd size as response...immediately. And he has not yet stopped.
2
A) The Women's March did not expect ever to be "the largest March" in history. We only expected about 200,000 marchers in DC. Magnitude and numbers were never a goal.
B) Just so the author knows, the marchers have already planned meetings and strategies. Numerous ways to contact legislators have been shared. Marchers have gathered others as well and they will be or already have been knocking on legislators' office doors, literally.
C) Local news stations and newspapers have done articles on their community marchers, thus helping their communities contact real people to get more information. I was interviewed by our newspaper and TV station already and have recruited new interested volunteers to join in this movement.
We're not taking this lightly. We're not bragging or disputing "numbers" like others in this country, particularly one person in DC. It's not numbers we're trying to impress with.
We know gathering is just the beginning. But I can tell you this:
There are a lot of very concerned Americans out here, men, women, young and old, healthy and disabled, many ethnic and religious backgrounds.
Although we met together in large numbers, we know, as Martin Luther King knew, and his followers, that this movement may take time. It will take grit. It will take passion and fortitude.
The Republicans are a stubborn lot. But the mid terms will come and I believe all naysayers, even perhaps Ms. Tufekci, will be surprised.
We're not going away.
B) Just so the author knows, the marchers have already planned meetings and strategies. Numerous ways to contact legislators have been shared. Marchers have gathered others as well and they will be or already have been knocking on legislators' office doors, literally.
C) Local news stations and newspapers have done articles on their community marchers, thus helping their communities contact real people to get more information. I was interviewed by our newspaper and TV station already and have recruited new interested volunteers to join in this movement.
We're not taking this lightly. We're not bragging or disputing "numbers" like others in this country, particularly one person in DC. It's not numbers we're trying to impress with.
We know gathering is just the beginning. But I can tell you this:
There are a lot of very concerned Americans out here, men, women, young and old, healthy and disabled, many ethnic and religious backgrounds.
Although we met together in large numbers, we know, as Martin Luther King knew, and his followers, that this movement may take time. It will take grit. It will take passion and fortitude.
The Republicans are a stubborn lot. But the mid terms will come and I believe all naysayers, even perhaps Ms. Tufekci, will be surprised.
We're not going away.
479
Heartening. Thank you.
2
Excellent! But a lot of bad stuff will happen before the midterms. There will be a lot of things to stop before the midterms come around. If Democrats are seen as heroically standing in the way of the oligarchy agenda, they will win seats. If they are still in retreat, triangulating and compromising, they will implode.
2
All women that attended the march had good intentions BUT this great protest just happened right after a historical event -President Elect TRUMP swear in ceremony-- so the women's March ALWAYS will have Trump name front and center--
so thanks him for all the attention received...
Also as I woman I support you all those the marched but you made a mistake you invited Hollywood & lacked goal and a leader...
All historical marches around the world have had a leader and clear goals NOT this Women's March.. where is the Dr King of this march?
Vote America and only then our voices will be heard!
Women for Trump!
so thanks him for all the attention received...
Also as I woman I support you all those the marched but you made a mistake you invited Hollywood & lacked goal and a leader...
All historical marches around the world have had a leader and clear goals NOT this Women's March.. where is the Dr King of this march?
Vote America and only then our voices will be heard!
Women for Trump!
1
At least the Tea Party had a clear message, this is just plain old fashion anger.
10
Did you ACTUALLY LOOK at the faces of the marchers? I don't think I saw a single face of anger. Pure joy is what I saw. Joy at being able to express themselves and do something positive in an increasingly frightening country. I was grinning just looking at them. #Rorschachblot
7
After Saturday's March, plans were made for a conference call. Organizers expected the conference call to attract about 2000 people; instead, SIXTY THOUSAND PEOPLE joined in the conference call, 25,000 on the phone, 35,000 listening to the live stream. I'm encouraged!
Here is the discussion. Invaluable "W5" info (who, what, where, when and why)
https://act.moveon.org/survey/indivisible
Here is the discussion. Invaluable "W5" info (who, what, where, when and why)
https://act.moveon.org/survey/indivisible
153
Thank you for the link.
1
As they say in golf and in tennis (and in business): It's all in the follow-through.
The follow-through makes all the difference for both the protesters as well as for the person (or thing) against whom the protests are taking place.
So far everyone seems to be weak of following-through.
The follow-through makes all the difference for both the protesters as well as for the person (or thing) against whom the protests are taking place.
So far everyone seems to be weak of following-through.
12
May I remind you it's been less than a week. We ARE mobilizing and it will be much to the chagrin of the naysayers.
45
Joshua
It hasn't even been a week. It has not been weak. It's a strong group with strong concerns and strong wills. There's not one thing weak. It will take time. We are prepared.
It hasn't even been a week. It has not been weak. It's a strong group with strong concerns and strong wills. There's not one thing weak. It will take time. We are prepared.
18
<< So far everyone seems to be weak of following-through. >>
Not weak in my corner of the world. Bet my Republican congressman doesn't think so, either. (Although only five days have passed since the Women's March and much of his fan mail may not have arrived yet.)
Not weak in my corner of the world. Bet my Republican congressman doesn't think so, either. (Although only five days have passed since the Women's March and much of his fan mail may not have arrived yet.)
39