The recent “No Kings” protests marked a significant milestone in the growing resistance against the authoritarian tendencies of the second Trump administration, with participation estimates ranging from two to six million people across the country. Uniquely, many attendees were older and more politically moderate, and the protests extended into Trump-supporting regions, rather than being confined to urban centers.
Trump dismissed the protests, joking about not feeling like a king, yet his actions reflect authoritarianism, such as imposing tariffs unilaterally and deploying armed troops for domestic enforcement. His approach to governance often circumvents legal and democratic norms, raising concerns about escalating conflicts, such as potential military actions against Iran.
While the protests effectively highlighted Trump’s authoritarian behavior, the framing of the opposition is crucial. Earlier events, like the “Fighting Oligarchy” rallies by Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez, successfully combined resistance to Trump’s actions with a critique of economic inequality. However, some Democrats, like Sen. Elissa Slotkin, promoted a more narrow focus on opposing Trump’s personal power, potentially sidelining broader discussions about economic disparity.
The article warns against allowing the anti-Trump narrative to lose sight of the interconnectedness between economic power and political authority. It emphasizes that the issues fueling Trumpism are deeply rooted in societal inequality. There is hope for future mobilization, but the message must encompass both the rejection of undue power (“No Kings”) and the systemic issues of economic inequality (“No Oligarchy”).
