Grappling with the difficult questions of protest.
Because no one has the best answers. But we can try to find better ones.
Note: The situation in LA is developing rapidly. I’ve had to update this piece just in the course of writing it over the last couple hours. While the protests in LA are the inciting incident for what’s being talked about here, I want the readers to come away from this piece not looking just at what’s happening in one city today, but what they will do in their own communities in the coming weeks.
First Thoughts
When all this started happening over the weekend, I was quite irate. At the president and his fascist goons carrying out their horrific “mass deportations” regime of course, but also at the (very small) segment of protestors in Paramount, CA who decided to pick a violent fight with the authorities by throwing cement blocks and fireworks at them, sparking the chain events which lead to Trump’s brazen actions to militarize the federal response. If you haven’t read the memo he issued yesterday, do so. It’s alarming as hell. How could they not know they’re playing into the hands of the administration by giving them exactly the type of footage they need for the propaganda reels?
A good friend was kind enough to remind me that even if I think these people were being dumb, its also the type of excessive state terror against a community that’s difficult to expect people to respond to without their emotions taking over.
I can sit here in semi-rural Illinois chiding the Latino community in LA to think about strategic goals and tactical resistance and such, but in part that’s because ICE isn’t breaking into the homes of my neighbors and hauling them off in the gulag van.
I’m sure I’d be inclined to a less restrained response if it was my family or friends they were harassing right in front of me.
And, ultimately, this is the nature of living in a country of 330+ million people. No matter if 99% of protests remain non-violent, all you need is a group of - (A) very upset people responding to the terror of the moment or (B) a bunch of anarchists who see this as their moment - for things to go very wrong. With a country this big, you’re going to have plenty of both groups spread across a large geographic area. Eventually, something, somewhere is going to happen where it really is the protestors who started the violence first.
Which brings us to a series of serious questions that anyone engaging in protest movements has to ask themselves.
All Roads Lead to a Military Response
Let’s start with acknowledging the extraordinary situation this country finds itself in at the present moment. While people might have differing views on how well previous presidents or state/local governments have responded to protestors in our lifetime, the fact is that until recently, we’ve been very far removed from the type of actions taken by Southern governors back in the 50’s and 60’s. Politicians were aware that they could overstep some boundary, and even the most “law-and-order” types have been wary of the liabilities that come with perceptions of abusing the populace ever since the civil rights era. Being mean to protestors might have earned you points on Fox News, but the voters tended to reward candidates with a track record of being able to diffuse situations with as little disruption as possible, not the ones who escalated the disorder.
Donald Trump does not seek the reputation of being a conflict-resolver, however. His goal is not to bring lawful order to a dangerous situation and make the people feel safe again. It’s to heighten the sense of chaos and justify the use of continued force by creating a state of constant chaos.
I think its inevitable that we would get to a point where Trump authorized the Secretary of Defense to use the regular military forces, not just the National Guard, against American civilians. Pete Hegseth has already deployed the Marines to Los Angeles, and the memorandum the president has drafted is intentionally not limited in its scope. If some situation should break out in El Paso, Texas or Springfield, Ohio (the place with all the Haitians that Trump-Vance demagogued last summer), this same memo could be used to send federal troops out there.
Trump has admired the Chinese response to Tiananmen Square since the day it happened. Much like tariffs, this is an obsession he’s had since the 1980’s and is dead set on making happen no matter what.
Which brings us to our first question:
If Trump was always going to deploy the military against civilians, does it matter if protests get violent or not?
I think yes, it does matter. As previously stated, there’s no way to ensure that protests never get violent or out-of-hand. But that doesn’t mean protestors shouldn’t try to remain as disciplined as possible and really watch the behavior of their own ranks.
Why does it matter? Because protests are essentially about optics. If there’s going to be footage of the authorities busting up a group of people, you want it to look like they’re doing it because they can’t stand you exercising your legal First Amendment rights, not because some people started pelting the cops with bricks or an anarchist tossed a Molotov cocktail at a car. Protests movements are about proving to the public that you have the moral superiority, and maybe it’s not “right” that people feel more strongly about a couple pieces of imagery than the complete set of facts on the ground, but effective protest movement are about what does get results, not what you think should get results.
Because while you might know that your cause is just, what people see is what people see.
The other reason that it matters is there is a real disparity of force. Even a large group of people armed with bricks and bats and flammable devices is not a match for a police force with access to a much bigger variety of non-lethal and lethal tools, including military-grade hardware. Or, as the Trump administration is now deploying, an actual military force with the real-deal military hardware. Attempts to oppose the authorities through violent means is recklessly unserious, and a danger to the majority of fellow protestors who showed up not looking to get caught in the middle of a fight. Unless you’re ready to start waging guerilla warfare against federal forces with guns and bombs of your own, stop cosplaying as resistance fighters. It might feel empowering to stand atop the barricades waving the red flag of revolution, but the people you’re claiming to protect are not going to have that same feeling of glory when the tanks start rolling in.
But people can’t just not protest. That’s irresponsible too. So, the next question is:
How do we confront the administration without giving them the conflict they want?
Picking fights with the anarchists and socialist rabble-rousers is the favored terrain of fascist leaders going back to Hitler and Mussolini. It helps them look tough and consolidate power. One of the reasons the Trump administration is deliberately provoking the type of protests they hope will end in violence is because they want to use it as a display of force to scare people away from the type of protests and confrontations they don’t want want you to be engaging in.
What to do when ICE shows up.
Over the past several weeks, we’ve seen a very effective way that communities have confronted the ICE agents that have shown up in their towns. Following these people around and filming them while non-stop asking questions - “Why are you wearing masks.” “Where’s your badge?” “Let me see your warrant.” - these things make the enforcers (many of them not actual border patrol agents but “deputized” volunteers who are way out of their element) extremely uncomfortable. They don’t have the ability to arrest the folks following them around with cameras, and they can’t really do their jobs with everyone gathering around and (non-violently) heckling them. A lot of times these goons just leave because they can’t take it anymore. In other instances, folks have formed human barricades between the immigration enforcers and their victims, not punching out, but simply refusing to let them nab people without providing their credentials first - something these masked men either don’t have or don’t want to show because they don’t want their names becoming a matter of public record.
This is where a person’s power as a citizen really matters. These ICE guys think they can get away with things because undocumented people don’t really have a means to resist them. But as a citizen, particularly if you’re, you know, a white citizen. They’re going to have to show that badge to arrest you, and on what ground if you’re not doing anything illegal? Theoretically, they could bring you in for “obstructing a law enforcement officer” - but if you’re the type of person who is inclined to a confrontational act of defiance that’s going to get you arrested (and not everyone is, myself included) then it’s much better for that to be the heroism you get caught on camera for which makes the rounds on TV and social media. Not to mention that except for spending the night in the clink and legal fees for your court case, it’s the type of flimsy charge that isn’t really going to stick and that you aren’t facing years in prison with the same way that taking a cop’s riot shield and beating him over the head with it is going to get you in a lot of trouble.
Of course, these tactics aren’t going to be applicable in every situation. Trucks full of ICE agents descending on the Garment District in LA, or raids in communities that have a high percentage of illegal immigrants compared to citizens are ones in which these civil resistance things aren’t really going to be effective at preventing dozens of people from getting hauled off in a show of force. But it will create the type of footage where people watching it have to wonder if the people they’re taking away really are all illegals and criminals.
Mass protests require a critical mass.
I’ve spent a lot of time here talking about why violence at protests helps clear a path for Trump’s authoritarian escalations and why “moral superiority” matters and such. But the biggest reason that I want protest organizers and the people at these events to be really disciplined in their approach is because the above all things, to be successful, the protest movement needs numbers. Trumpism, like all fascist brands, is inherently a populist movement that derives its power from the perception of public support, up until the point that power is consolidated enough that it doesn’t matter anymore. Trump may not enjoy a majority of public support, but his popularity ratings are still hanging somewhere in the mid-40’s percent range - a solid plurality compared to the people who are either actively opposed or indifferent to what he’s doing.
Breaking Trumpism requires breaking the perception of popularity. Doing so requires a visible show of discontent across the country - not just in cities, but in the suburbs and rural towns too. This means you need large numbers of people showing up to protest across a diverse array of people, and that includes pulling in people who don’t have the “revolutionary spirit” but still feel like there’s something wrong about what’s going on.
There’s a lot of folks who would like to show up at a rally, but won’t do it if they’re afraid that its going to turn into a chaotic situation. Protest organizers and rest of the people at these events have a responsibility to create a space that’s inviting for the fence-sitters to show up and join them.
This Saturday…
This upcoming Saturday, June 14th, is the day of Trump’s military parade in DC, where the tanks will quite literally be in the streets. It’s also the day of the “No Kings” protests being organized by Indivisible in towns and cities across the country.
Cards on the table, I’m a member of Indivisible. So yes, I’m inclined to talk about them favorably.
But there’s a reason the organization had an appeal to me. And it’s that they’re incredibly disciplined and thoughtful in their approach. These are the people behind the “Tesla Takedown” protests which were much more effective at destroying the brand value of Musk’s main source of wealth than any of the people blowing up Cybertrucks (which, let’s be honest, the Cybertruck doesn’t need any outsider help setting itself on fire), and they did it without giving Pam Bondi any ammunition to work with.
In the meetings I attend with my chapter of Indivisible, a lot of care is taken around planning protests - not just how to effectively message to a broad audience, but also how to ensure that the media coverage of these events favorably represents the cause, part of which entails explicit instructions to identify problematic elements in the crowd and remove them from the event without causing a ruckus.
People who are monitoring the No Kings protest planning - and I encourage you to use the Mobilize website to find one near you - will notice that they have events planned around the entire nation. Not just in the big cities or major suburbs, but small towns too. Their goal is to get to that magic number of 3.5% percent of the country out there protesting that day - about 11.5 million people (which might seem impossible, but remember that averages out to only about 230,000 per state, in reality some more than others, of course).
The one city where there isn’t a No Kings protest planned?
Washington, DC. Where the military parade is happening.
The folks running Indivisible understand that Trump would love nothing more than a chance to have his own Tiananmen Square to just rip the fucking mask off and be done with the last of the pretenses. So they’re not putting people on the streets to chuck rocks at the tanks, as good as that might make some people feel.
This isn’t a cowardly tactic of non-confrontation. It’s part of a strategic goal to build a national base of power first, and then go for a more direct confrontation later once they’ve been able to prove to the public that the emperor is as naked as, well… Elon might have deleted his Epstein list comment, but you can fill in the implication.
Because that’s how you win. And, to quote James Carville. Winning is everything.