FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

In Defense of Protesting Donald Trump

The liberal establishment is positioning itself against anti-Trump protests across the country. Commentators, like the Daily Show’s Trevor Noah, are now calling for restraint, asserting that the recent protests and shutdowns are counterproductive and ultimately undermine the interests of Trump’s opposition.

I have a few thoughts on this.

First, if you are not among the groups of people most viciously dehumanized—and, really, targeted for worse—by Trump and his campaign, you probably have no business issuing such a critique. Seemingly, the current protest tactics are being employed, foremost, by immigrants and People of Color. It is these groups that, in the face of Trump’s campaign, rely on collective resistance to maintain dignity and well being. At this point, you need to make a choice. Are you going to stand with them or undermine them? I know I’ll be doing what I can to support these efforts, even if that means having difficult conversations with milquetoast liberals and progressives about why anti-Trump actions are reasonable and appropriate.

Next, the matter of these protests is not a free speech issue—at least not in the particular way it’s being presented. “Free speech,” strictly speaking, refers to how governments mediate and block the speech of citizens. What we have with the anti-Trump protests is citizens standing up to another citizen. (Though one might argue that Trump is more an agent of the state at this point, which further complicates these claims of a “free speech” issue.)

Let’s break down what’s really happening with these actions. The protesters are essentially using speech to challenge antagonistic, opposing speech from Trump. What gives the protest actions weight is simply the fact that large numbers of people back them, saying “dehumanizing others is unacceptable” or “Trump’s bigotry is not welcome here,” etc. There is nothing wrong with that.

And remember, even if protesters were to shut down every single Trump event, the man would still be capable of disseminating his toxic message without breaking a sweat. He would still have all of the US corporate news-media to use as a soapbox. He would still have his billions of dollars to promote his campaign for the presidency. The people standing up to Trump don’t have those things. By protesting, they’re simply doing what’s needed to do to allow for their speech to be heard. Without the protests, Trump would proceed to denigrate them without challenge and further erase their message. In this way, the protests actually promote a higher standard of free speech.

What’s more, the movement most insistently labeling the protests as a free speech issue—the US conservative movement—is one which regularly uses brazen and violent tactics that actually squelch free speech. Remember when a bunch of right-wing goons shut down the national dialogue on universal health care by showing up to town hall meetings across the country with firearms? Remember how the US conservative movement routinely calls for violent state repression in response to social justice movements like Black Lives Matter and Occupy Wall Street? What about the treatment of peaceful protesters at Donald Trump events?

These people are not serious about free speech. They wield the concept, selectively, to amplify their own voices and silence their opposition.

And consider this grim reality: the right’s brazen, heavy-handed tactics work. The US conservative movement, from its grassroots to elected officials, fights for exactly what it wants—tooth and nail. And its successes reflect that. The outcomes are horrendous, yes, but conservatives have for decades earned what they’ve sought. They understand how the system works.

Meanwhile, liberals and progressives have consistently lauded themselves for being more politically “sensible” and “reasonable”—more open to compromise. But where has it gotten us?

Well, the US is currently embroiled in several foreign imperial wars; our social programs have been decimated; structural racism infects our society from top to bottom; we still have an exclusionist for-profit health care system; we’re driving a global ecological crisis; we live in an economy characterized by malignant wealth inequality and widespread poverty; our infrastructure is crumbling; and our drinking water grows evermore toxic.

So, do you want to keep playing the game of “pragmatism”—i.e. pandering liberal and conservative establishments—and continue losing? Or do you want to stand firm, back what is right without equivocation, and take a real shot at finally stopping this madness?

Now is the time to make that choice.

More articles by:
bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550
September 23, 2019
Tracey Aikman
President Trump, I’m One of the Workers You Lied To
B. R. Gowani
How news media should handle Trump’s lies
Weekend Edition
September 20, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Ismael Hossein-Zadeh
Unipolar Governance of the Multipolar World
Rob Urie
Strike for the Environment, Strike for Social Justice, Strike!
Miguel Gutierrez
El Desmadre: The Colonial Roots of Anti-Mexican Violence
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Pompeo and Circumstance
Andrew Levine
Why Democrats Really Should Not All Get Along But Sometimes Must Anyway
Louis Proyect
A Rebellion for the Wild West
T.J. Coles
A Taste of Their Own Medicine: the Politicians Who Robbed Iranians and Libyans Fear the Same for Brexit Britain
H. Bruce Franklin
How We Launched Our Forever War in the Middle East
Lee Hall
Mayor Obedience Training, From the Pet Products Industry
Louis Yako
Working in America: Paychecks for Silence
Michael D. Yates
Radical Education
Jonathan Cook
Israelis Have Shown Netanyahu the Door. Can He Inflict More Damage Before He Exits?
Valerie Reynoso
The Rising Monopoly of Monsanto-Bayer
John Steppling
American Psychopathy
Ralph Nader
25 Ways the Canadian Health Care System is Better than Obamacare for the 2020 Elections
Ramzy Baroud
Apartheid Made Official: Deal of the Century is a Ploy and Annexation is the New Reality
Vincent Emanuele
Small Town Values
John Feffer
The Threat of Bolton Has Retreated, But Not the Threat of War
David Rosen
Evangelicals, Abstinence, Abortion and the Mainstreaming of Sex
Judy Rohrer
“Make ‘America’ White Again”: White Resentment Under the Obama & Trump Presidencies
John W. Whitehead
The Police State’s Language of Force
Kathleen Wallace
Noblesse the Sleaze
Farzana Versey
Why Should Kashmiris be Indian?
Nyla Ali Khan
Why Are Modi and His Cohort Paranoid About Diversity?
Shawn Fremstad
The Official U.S. Poverty Rate is Based on a Hopelessly Out-of-Date Metric
Mel Gurtov
No War for Saudi Oil!
Robert Koehler
‘I’m Afraid You Have Humans’
David Swanson
Every Peace Group and Activist Should Join Strike DC for the Earth’s Climate
Scott Owen
In Defense of Non-violent Actions in Revolutionary Times
Jesse Jackson
Can America Break Its Gun Addiction?
Priti Gulati Cox
Sidewalk Museum of Congress: Who Says Kansas is Flat?
Mohamad Shaaf
The Current Political Crisis: Its Roots in Concentrated Capital with the Resulting Concentrated Political Power
Max Moran
Revolving Door Project Probes Thiel’s White House Connection
Arshad Khan
Unhappy India
Nick Pemberton
Norman Fucking Rockwell! and 24 Other Favorite Albums
Nicky Reid
The Bigotry of ‘Hate Speech’ and Facebook Fascism
Paul Armentano
To Make Vaping Safer, Legalize Cannabis
Jill Richardson
Punching Through Bad Headlines
Jessicah Pierre
What the Felicity Huffman Scandal Says About America
John Kendall Hawkins
Draining the Swamp, From the Beginning of Time
Julian Rose
Four Funerals and a Wedding: A Brief History of the War on Humanity
Victor Grossman
Film, Music and Elections in Germany
Charles R. Larson
Review: Ahmet Altan’s “I Will Never See the World Again”
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail