A progressive movement requires more than faux-radical sloganeering
By THEO KAYSER — tfkayser@ucdavis.edu
Nationwide “No Kings” protests were held on Oct. 18, including here in the City of Davis. These protests followed demonstrations (which took place under the same name) earlier this year — both of which were aimed at the Trump administration’s actions since entering office in January.
The event boasted over 7 million attendees across all 50 states, totalling 14-times the size of the crowd at President Donald Trump’s inaugurations from 2016 and 2024 combined. The alleged goal of this movement was to condemn President Trump’s heavy-handed approach to executive power, which he’s taken in spite of widespread dissent.
In today’s era of consistently low voter turnout, these widespread mass protests are an encouraging sign of a politically rejuvenated American population — at last willing to attempt to mobilize against the wrongdoings of the United States government. However, this political angst in and of itself is not enough to create progressive change.
While this energy and enthusiasm is admirable, in order to generate real change we should carefully inspect the issues at hand, and make sure not to fall into the trap of scapegoating issues of deportation, genocide, corruption, homlessness and food insecurity as being the fault of one man: “King” Trump.
The foremost reason for skepticism of these protests is their proximity to the Democratic Party — especially members whose own policy records align quite closely with many actions being taken by the Trump administration — which they claim to vehemently oppose.
One among several vocal proponents for attendance at these protests was the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate in 2024, Kamala Harris. Harris, as Vice President and “Border Czar” from 2020-2024, oversaw the detention of upwards of 3 million immigrants in her own right. For those rightfully condemning the more overt and publicized Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids that have occurred in recent months, these metrics might also be relevant to examine. Immigration has long been a method of scapegoating in American politics, and attributing this systemic issue to the presidency of one man is infantile. Demonizing marginalized groups in this way has routinely been a political strategy of the Democratic Party, and only seems to become an issue when it’s the other team committing the evil.
The term “No Kings” takes direct aim at the authoritative, decidedly undemocratic nature of Trump’s presidency.
In doing so, it crucially dodges poignant criticism of any material issue. Of all the things to take issue with in Trump’s regime, the haste of action is a baffling choice — If you’re in the Democratic Party, you can’t criticize the true evil he’s committing without condemning policies you yourself supported just a year ago.
The No Kings platform does not specifically take aim at anything that Trump is doing with this authoritarian power. I might assert this is because officials who are propping up these protests (Kamala Harris, for example), wish to co-opt society’s political frustration and funnel it into support for their party just to do the same thing more discreetly.
This gameplan for the Democrats is nothing new. In 2008, a vote for Barack Obama was advertised as the “Audacity of Hope” while in actuality, a vote for Barack Obama was a continuation of misguided foreign wars and siding with big banks in a moment of financial collapse. In 1992, a vote for Bill Clinton was a move left from Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush — two of the most violently imperialist presidents in U.S. history. The result was a furtherance of austerity measures and the crown jewel of U.S. neoliberal trade policy: the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). In both cases, Democrats took political unrest aimed at Republicans and falsely advertised themselves as bringers of change. I see little indication of today’s Democratic Party being any different.
Any of those aspiring to create a meaningful progressive movement in the wake of the horrors which surround us should be certain to not allow enemies of the cause to fester within its walls. An optimistic view of these protests is a slippery slope towards our perception of a country unified around the ideals of democracy and independence it was founded on — as opposed to one ideologically dominated by a class more interested in self preservation than the common good; I am skeptical.
Written by: Theo Kayser — tfkayser@ucdavis.edu
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed by individual columnists belong to the columnists alone and do not necessarily indicate the views and opinions held by The California Aggie.
