The anti-Trump camp was in disarray. How has No Kings managed to unite it?
Two months ago, around the US, mass demonstrations against Donald Trump were organised in what felt like the beginning of the great unfreezing of the popular movement. Since the inauguration in January there have been plenty of ad-hoc anti-Trump protests, but compared to the huge numbers that turned out in 2017 – half a million at the Women's March in Washington DC alone – the response has been muted. What was the point? The threat was so large, and the failure of the first movement apparently so great, that Americans have been suffering from what appeared to be a case of embarrassed paralysis: a sense, at once sheepish and depressed, that pink hats weren't moving the needle on this one.
It looks as if that thinking has changed. On Saturday, in a follow-up to the protests in April, more than 2,000 coordinated marches took place in the US, organised by multiple groups under the umbrella No Kings Day and attended by numbers that at a glance seem startling. While in the capital on Saturday, Trump oversaw his weird, sparsely attended Kim Jong-un style military parade, an estimated 5 million people country-wide took to the streets to protest peacefully against him, including an estimated 80,000 in Philadelphia, 75,000 in Chicago, 50,000 in New York, 20,000 in Phoenix, and 7,000 in Honolulu. More heartening still were the numbers from deep red states, such as the 2,000 odd protesters who gathered in Mobile, Alabama, and a reported 4,000 in Louisville, Kentucky.
These protests were different in nature to their earlier incarnations, according to the accounts of some of those in attendance. I was in New York last month and friends who'd been at the march in April recounted, with amusement and despair, how few young people had shown up. In addition, said a friend, an elderly demonstrator marching close to them had shushed the crowd and put her fingers in her ears, and another set of women had started dancing, obliviously, to the music being played by pro-Trump counter-protesters on the sidelines. All successful protests require participants to forgive each other their differences, but we shook with laughter as he told us how hopeless and uninspiring – 'it's a protest sweetie, what did you expect?' – he'd found some of his fellow marchers.
It was a different story on Saturday. The crowds were bigger – by some estimates, the largest country-wide demonstrations ever recorded – younger, more energised and more focused. There was, I gather, a sense of urgency unleashed by the feeling not only that these protests were long overdue but that, after Trump's deployment of the national guard in LA, some critical line had been crossed. Meanwhile, as a unifying slogan, the No Kings thing really seems to be working. When I first heard the phrase I thought it was limp – my forelock-tugging Pavlovian response to the word 'king' and any reference to monarchy, I guess.
I forgot: Americans presented with the same word go to George III not Charles III, and the signs on Saturday took up No Kings with real relish. This is a significant victory, given how hard it is to unite diverse constituencies under a single, snappy umbrella. There were a lot of very funny signs on the marches (some standouts: 'Only he could ruin tacos'; 'If Kamala were president we'd be at brunch' and my favourite, 'Trump cheats at golf'.) But overarching them all was a slogan that in the most efficient way possible presented multiple groups with a non-partisan way to come out against Trump.
So far, No Kings has also avoided some of the mistakes of the Women's March, in which the celebrity of the organisers came to overshadow and poison the movement. The No Kings motif was coined earlier this year by the progressive group 50501 – the name is a reference to 50 protests, 50 states, one movement – and was created before the 17 February demonstrations as an alternative to the hashtag #NotMyPresidentsDay, which it was felt, shrewdly, struck the wrong tone. Instead, the group launched the phrase 'No Kings on Presidents Day,' which by this month had compacted down into No Kings Day. As yet, 50501, which grew out of a Reddit post, has no identifiable leaders.
This makes it a much harder target for Trump's 'black propagandists' to divide protesters via their political differences. Instead, No Kings seems to be offering a very broad on-ramp to protesters by way of a story that is simple and true: that opposition to Trump's autocratic style is an act of patriotism with its roots in the country's very foundations.
Emma Brockes is a Guardian columnist
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
Maintenance fund to give £9bn a year to fix schools, hospitals and prisons
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
Daily Mirror
29 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Keir Starmer calls for Iran nuke talks as Trump ponders joining Israel strikes
"We need to de-escalate this," the PM said. "Yes the nuclear issue has to be dealt with, but it's better dealt with through negotiations than by way of conflict" Keir Starmer has called for Iran's nuclear programme to be dealt with through negotiations rather than conflict. Last night Donald Trump continued to weigh up whether to send America's military to help Israel strike Iran's military facilities. It following days of Israeli bombardment of Iran, and Tehran counterattacking with missile strikes on Israeli towns and cities. Speaking to broadcasters this morning, the Prime Minister said: "Obviously all of us, the UK included, are very concerned about the nuclear programme that Iran is developing, long been concerned about that. "We also completely recognise Israel's right to self defence. "But the principle is that we need to de-escalate this. There's a real risk of escalation here that will impact the region, possibly beyond the region, into Gaza and obviously It's already having an impact on the economy." Mr Starmer went on: "I've been absolutely clear about this - yes the nuclear issue has to be dealt with, but it's better dealt with through negotiations than by way of conflict." When he took office in 2018, Donald Trump pulled the US off the nuclear treaty with Iran which had prevented the state working towards a nuclear since 2015 when it was signed. Britain has continued to urge de-escalation, but has deployed two refuelling tankers and 14 Typhoon jets to Cyprus to protect British personnel and interests in the Middle East. The Foreign Office has evacuated family members of British Embassy staff from Israel but not advised UK nationals to leave the country. Asked if Mr Starmer would prefer Mr Trump to go down the route of diplomacy rather than military action, a No 10 spokesman said: "The Prime Minister has been clear that his priority is de-escalation." The spokesman added: "Clearly de-escalation is the priority, and we would not want to see anything that ramps up the situation. "That is our priority. We have been clear on that for a number of days now. De-escalation remains this Government's priority." Asked if the UK would block the US from using the Diego Garcia base to launch a strike against Iran, the spokesman said: "I'm not going to get into hypothetical situations and I'm not going to speculate on future operations, but we continue to liaise with international partners as the Prime Minister has done for a number of days now and will continue to do so." An Iranian missile hit the main hospital in southern Israel early Thursday, wounding people and causing "extensive damage" but no serious injuries, the medical facility said. Israeli media aired footage of blown-out windows and heavy black smoke. Get Donald Trump updates straight to your WhatsApp! As tension between the White House and Europe heats up, the Mirror has launched its very own US Politics WhatsApp community where you'll get all the latest news from across the pond. We'll send you the latest breaking updates and exclusives all directly to your phone. Users must download or already have WhatsApp on their phones to join in. All you have to do to join is click on this link, select 'Join Chat' and you're in! We may also send you stories from other titles across the Reach group. We will also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose Exit group. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. Other missiles hit a high-rise apartment building in Tel Aviv and other sites in central Israel. At least 40 people were wounded, according to Israel's Magen David Adom rescue service. Israel, meanwhile, carried out strikes on Iran's Arak heavy water reactor, its latest attack on Iran's sprawling nuclear program. Iranian state television said there was "no radiation danger whatsoever" and that the facility had been evacuated before the attack. The seventh day of conflict came a day after Iran's supreme leader rejected U.S. calls for surrender and warned that any military involvement by the Americans would cause "irreparable damage to them."
Daily Mirror
35 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
'We're heading for World War 3, but no-one knows why'
How did it come to this? The world's most oppressed and misunderstood people, denied a state of their own for a thousand years, dropping bunker-busting bombs on the stateless, poor and oppressed people next door. People who live cheek-by-jowl with democracy and freedom and wealth and Eurovision, who see its benefits for others every single day, and still think they're a bad idea. A nation subject to United Nations inspections, swingeing sanctions, and an arse-backwards fundamentalism that thinks the Middle Ages were a bit too racy and modern, on the cusp of developing the most technologically-advanced weapons in history. And the most powerful nation on Earth, which has guaranteed the security and scrutiny and non-nuclear conflicts, reduced to trolling the world because it doesn't want to police the things that, if they're not policed, mean it's World War Three. Never has there been a time where so many people wake up in the morning, to so little reason for optimism, and ask themselves just what the f*** is going on. And when all the world seems powerless, everyone in it feels there's nothing they can do. Well, you're wrong there. Power comes from knowledge, and all you need to do is stop shouting or fretting or crying, and try to understand. Israel lashes out because its people have been under the lash for centuries, and within living memory they were all but exterminated in the most gruesome ways humankind has ever invented. Trauma can enter the bones and be transferred in utero. Ask yourself what your grandchildren would do, if they grew up knowing it had happened once to your family already and were daily attacked by the unhinged bloke down the road. Iran rains hellfire on Israel because it relies on fear and oppression and insularity for its sick interpretation of an otherwise-peaceful faith, for its power and its sense of self. Within living memory, the Satanic West has tried to overturn a popular uprising and prop up an oppressive monarchy for the sake of stripping its oil reserves. When that didn't work, the Satanists let their mate move in next door, and gave him missiles. And America - oh, America. A shining city on a hill, with an orange version of Jabba the Hutt unwilling to roll off his golden chaise longue unless there's something shiny in it for him. Donald Trump rejects war of all sorts not because he's a man of faith or peace, but because it's a net cost and his bone spurs prevent him from experiencing any sense of active duty. I've been around for almost half a century, and grew up watching TV footage of missiles and stone-throwers and bomb attacks and hostage-taking in the Holy Land. It's never been as scary as now, from this distance, because nuclear war wasn't a possibility. But the fear everyone closer to it felt then has led them to the place where there's a real risk of radiation, in all senses of the word. If Trump sends his B2 bombers in with the 13-ton bunker busters to destroy the enrichment plant buried inside an Iranian mountain, US troops and embassies and citizens worldwide will be targeted by Islamic terror. If he doesn't, Israel will step up its own military action and the entire Middle East will spiral into war that won't be a binary fight between two regimes, but a hydra-like conflict of infinite variety, with religions, sects, schisms, ethnicity, history and hatreds that you would never unpick. And all in a place where the oil is. Where the trade passes. Where the migration, the domestic security threats, and the arguments all arise. If you wanted to make the world a significantly-worse and more appalling place, the best way of doing it would be to lob a bomb into the Middle East. And yet, if he doesn't, the significant Jewish minority in his own country will turn against him, his arms industry would suffer, the US economy will hit the toilet and Iran could get a nuke inside a year and it'll all go bang anyway. There are so many areas of similarity between all these opposing arguments that you'd think they'd notice. They're all angry old men. They're ultra-conservative, corrupt, and absolutist. Trump's the only one who eats bacon, but they're all happy to send in the heavies and baton, tear gas, or shoot whoever gets in their way. And the power they wield all relies on making people afraid of the other guy, over there, even though he's just like them. You can ask how we got here by looking at eons of history, or the post-war consensus, or October 7. You can shrug your shoulders and say it's always been a troublespot, or - as loudmouths and social media are forever encouraging us to do - you can pick a side and join the shouting. But to steal a bit of fundamentalism back for the sake of common sense, what went wrong is everyone forgot what the Holy Land was for. All these men battle for power over a group of rocks in a part of the world where people used to have good ideas. It's been raging for centuries, with the occasional pocket of peaceful co-existence. But the ideas seem to have run out. Iran is a massive, beautiful country filled with the nicest people. Its regime is on its last legs, its leaders incompetent, and its citizenship thirsty for reform. Israel is tiny, disproportionately successful, and packed with lovely things, from Netta to diamonds and the vital ingredient for Jaffa cakes. Both have a total lack of hope, because the one nation in the world whose actual job is to be that beacon has put a grasping troll in charge of the light. Lots of people see it. You are not alone in how you feel. And if everyone realised that how we got here was by failing to understand what it's like to be someone else, then maybe we'd all be someone better. And to prove the point, I suggest Ayatollah Khameni runs America for a day, Trump takes over Israel, and Netanyahu works out of Tehran. I swear, it'd be no bloody different, and that's what people need to remember. There is no such thing as 'the other guy'.
