No Kings March--What Next?

My sole prediction is that the future lies ahead

Millions of Americans marched peacefully Saturday to demonstrate their dissatisfaction with their government’s policies, but because we’ve yet to evolve into an instantaneous democracy where their demands for change could provide instant reform and relief, there’s no guarantee that their enthusiasm will change anything at all.

Time will tell. Democracy by internet polls remains a faraway promise or threat.

At minimum the marches provided a sense of community and reassured those unhappy and fearful about White House policies that they are not isolated and alone. The jury’s out on whether their enthusiasm will be a modest historic footnote like the one following Trump’s first inauguration that apparently eclipsed his claimed “record” crowd or the even less remembered March on Versailles of 1789 that discomfited the king and seen as the launch of the French Revolution that brought big and bloody change.

Those who occupied Wall Street a few years ago confirmed that commitment often fades before change arrives And those who demonstrated after George Floyd’s death remind us that public reaction can move things in unanticipated and less than helpful directions.

I personally continue to be involved in informal discussions about whether the anti Vietnam war marches of the 1960s accelerated the peace. Aging marchers continue to take pride in ousting Lyndon Johnson, but some see the resulting election of Richard Nixon as a less than positive result.

Despite Saturday’s enthusiasm, our current question remains whether you can beat something with nothing – whether American voters are so dissatisfied with the status quo that they’re willing to embrace a regime that promises to be very different with minimum attention to the details – a replay of the dynamic that made Donald Trump our current President.

Will that strategy work again? Will the Democrats– our only hope insofar as no credible third party is on the horizon–have the discipline and focus to keep the spotlight on Trump and paper over their internal tensions?

Some respected pundits like James Carville and modest civilians like me, suggest that's now a winning strategy and that it is devilishly dangerous to get into the details. It is easy to unite a majority in criticism of cruel and unfair Trump anti-immigration initiatives. Coming up with a better policy is a challenge that invites division.

Tariff and trade policy is equally divisive. And there’s no clear political win in talking about foreign policy ranging from the Middle East to ukraine. Recently the debate over Abundance (cutting red tape so government can quickly deliver vs.soaking the rich) is splitting the chattering class.

Much as political science professors and good government types see elections as a rational debate among various policy options, that isn’t what our next election will be about. It will more likely be a repeat of the usual debate about who can best be trusted to steer our ship of state during weather conditions no one can anticipate. You don’t have to be a weatherman to win political office.

I lack the courage or confidence to predict where the marchers will go from here, whether Saturday’s effort will be the start of something big or just another flash in the pan. I am confident though, that the chances are best if they can continue to focus on the Big issue that unites them than the smaller sharp disagreements that continue to bubble just below the surface.

Saturday’s success may be adequate to power a continuing effort, especially if Trump continues his inclination to fuel the fire, but maintaining opposition unity will be an ongoing challenge.