Why did people march on January 21, 2017? As a team of sociologists interested in social movements, we know there are many possible answers to this seemingly simple question.
As a team of sociologists we have developed a multi-method, multi-site research project, Mobilizing Millions: Engendering Protest Across the Globe. We want to understand why people participate in a march of this scale, at a critical historical juncture in our political landscape. Within weeks of discussion of the first march, there were already “sister” march pages national and internationally. While it is beyond the scope of this post to discuss all of the project findings thus far, the predictability of the racial tensions visible in social media or the role of men, local opportunities and challenges we do offer some early findings.
In the project’s first phase, we had team members on the ground in Austin, TX; Boston, MA; Los Angeles, CA; New York, NY; Philadelphia, PA; Portland, OR; Santa Barbara, CA and St. Louis, MO. We are currently conducting a survey about the motivations and experiences that brought millions of people to the marches worldwide. We recruited respondents from marches in the aforementioned cities, and online. This has resulted in responses from around the world. Our preliminary findings from the observations and survey highlight that 1) there were a range of reasons people attended marches and 2) across and within sites, there were varying experiences of “the” march in any location.
One striking similarity we observed across sites was the limited visible presence of social movement organizations (SMOs). For sure, SMOs became visible in social media leading up to the event (particularly for the DC march). Unlike at social movement gatherings such as the US Social Forum or conservative equivalents, the sheer number of unaffiliated people dwarfed any delegations or representatives from SMOs. Of our almost 60-member nation-wide team across sites only a handful had encountered anyone handing out organizational material, as we would see at other protest. This is perhaps what brought many people to the march—an opportunity to be an individual connecting with other individuals. However, this is an empirical question as is what this means for the future of social movement organizing. We hope others join us in answering.
Second, while the energy was palpable at all of the marches so was the confusion. As various media sources reported, attendance at all sites far exceeded projections, sometimes by 10 times. Consequently, the physical presence of the expanded beyond organizers’ expectations, which in many places required a schedule shifted. At all marches there were points where participants in central areas could not move and most people could not hear scheduled speakers even if they were physically close to a stage. Across the sites, we also observed how this challenge stimulated different responses. In multiple locations, people gathering spontaneously created their own sub-marches out of excitement as happened in DC when a band started playing on Madison street and people followed. Or, while waiting, waiting participants chanted “march, march.” Still, in many locations, once the official march started, people created sub-marches out of necessity because the pre-planned march route was impassable. When faced with standing for an hour to wait their “turn” to walk or create an alternative, they chose the latter.
Creativity was visible in artistic forms as well. While there were professionally printed signs (and T-shirts), there was a wealth of handmade signs at the marches. As expected, a slew that referenced phrases the president-elect had said noting, for example, “this pussy grabs back.” Yet there was also a range of other signs ranging from simple text to complicated storyboards (see below).
Across sites, we also saw many differences: including which types of organizations sponsored (or “supported” or “ were affiliated with”) that march.
At the Austin, Texas march, marchers’ signs and chants reflected a wide variety of concerns, including women’s reproductive health care, Black Lives Matter, and environmental justice. The emotional tenor was frequently celebratory, though it varied from one point in the march to another across a crowd reported to be more than 40,000. Many speeches at the rally immediately following the march connected the actions of the Texas state legislature–on whose front steps the march began and ended–to the broader national context.
The Los Angeles March numbers suggest it exceeded DC participation. There was a noticeable presence of signs about immigration and in Spanish, which is not surprising considering the local and state demographics.
The Philadelphia, PA march was close to bigger cities of in New York and DC. Some participants noted that due to the location it was “competing” for marchers.
The Portland, OR protest also exceeded attendance expectations as marchers withstood hours of pouring rain. Holding the “sister” marches on the same day worldwide emphasized the magnitude and assists in building collective identity. Yet it also meant organizers in different locations faced vastly different challenges. Factors such as weather that might not have existed if organizers had been scheduling based solely on local norms and contexts.
To help provide a preliminary sense of the motivations and continued engagement of marchers, we examined a sample of the ~40,000 tweets posted over two months. The analysis continues.
In the coming month, we are launching a separate survey to better understand a group social movement scholars are sometimes less inclined to study: people who do not participate in marches on January 21 (there are exceptions to this of course). As social movement scholars know, mobilization is actually a rare occurrence when we consider the range of grievances present in any society at any given moment. For a second phase of the project, we will conduct interviews with select survey participants.
Understanding the range of responses to grievances is critical as we move into this new era. If the first month of Trump’s presidency is any indication of the years to come, scholars and activists across the political spectrum will have many opportunities to engage these questions.
This article was originally published by Sociological Images under a CC-BY-NC-SA licence
Rate and Review
Rate this article
Review this article
Log into OpenLearn to leave reviews and join in the conversation.
Article reviews
Women marched against Trump in support of men who imprison their wives. They marched in support of countries whose 'Age of Consent' Laws look laudable until you see that the divorce laws in those countries cover Children of the age of nine. There is no 'Rape Within Marriage' in those countries and therefor no 'Statutory Rape either within marriage.
I am not racist, but when, in Britain the hot spots for postal voting abuse and forced marriage and enslavement of Daughters in Law and even female genital mutilation. Exile of naughty sons. Bondsmanship. Brainwashing of children againsrt the people they share the Country with,I begin to wonder whether Trump Should be marched against for letting anti-feminist, Child abusing, freedom denying men who live in the Middle Ages to enter America at all!
Why did they march against Trump. Because criticism of Islam is racist and Islamic Criticism of our society is 'Freedom of Speech.
America's Roger Williams was wrong in his little statement about the civil power and other sects and religions. 1: Permit. 2: Protect. But why do we allow a religion to flourish in our countries which is Expansionist and Theocratic. It wants the freedom to remove the freedoms from every one else.
Britain has had it's share of Theocracies and made a good job of disposing of them. Laudians. Presbyterians. Roman Catholics. Even the Baptists in early Cromwellian Ireland who had a massive old boys network of powerful jobs for the Boys.
People who are ignorant see Oliver Cromwell as a tyrant because he dismissed a Parliament which was set on making itself the supreme power in the land, including over the JUdiciary. Unelected, immoveable with new members selected by the sitting members (a bit like Blair's Labour Party).
We turn our eyes. We fear to comment. We ignore abuses and we deny thousands of British and American citizens their basic Human Rights.
What aspect of Islamic behaviour did you March Against Donald Trump for?
Who will you march against if you bother to think? African Potentates and other Despots who are welcome in Britain and America. Arab dignitaries with their queue of Child Brides and their Philipine servants/slaves. Russian Oligarchs who should be supporting Russia and helping to restore or create Industry. Indian Billionaires from a Country which has 29% (17% of the worlds poor) of its population living on less than $2 a day. Where selling votes is endemic. Where, in the construction of the Commonwealth Games' Stadium tens of thousands of People were driven from the slums and shanty towns around Dehli and told to go away. Provision was a piece of buldozed land, 35 miles away from Dehli. The majority of the menial Work done in Dehli was by the peoplle in those slums, now 35 miles away from a source of income. As always with India the corruption helped build a stadium that started to fall apart as soon as it was built.
If I ma wrong, I'd love to know. I'd like to think that we all share our Countries with people who have the same Democratic and Social Ideals which we thought to be our Birthright.
My message to Donald Trump is manifold. Liberals cannot be weak. A weak Liberal is a dead Liberal. Freedom is something that must be shared equally. You cannot give freedom to Nazis and you cannot give freedom to Theocrats who would take everybody's freedom. There isn't an Islamic State that gives freedom to worship to everybody, or freedom to vote for Women, or even the very Basic freedom of Speech. Egypt comes closest. If they had not thrown out the Radical Parliament than the lives of non Muslims in Egypt would not have been worth living. Mr Trump should look at the different Democracy in China, where they have a vote that goes in a pocket and when, Trains don't turn up to take them Home at New Year, Heads roll. China has excellent working relationships with other countries around the Globe. Not nasty little men in uniform, spreading Dogma, but Engineers and Innovators like The British Victorians. Mr Trump: do not listen to the people who ask if we can trust Russia, because Russia is now akin to Post WW1 Germany. The question should be.... Why Should Russia trust us? We know that symbiosis is powerful. The sharks trust the cleaner fist to not take lumps out of them. I trust the guy in my local shop not to sell me poisoned food. The parasite that kills its host dies. So it is with Russia. Take time to do it and create a symbiosis. The Russian man in the Street might hark back to the Communist days but he knows that he doesn't miss the fear of the knock on the door at 4AM. If Russia and America start to tolerate each other and America shares its enthusiam whilst Russia shares resources and a few cultural benefits, like Grannies living at home with the Family and communities where a mother is never in a place where people aren't aware if she has difficulties, maybe America might heal some of its own wounds.
Sorry this has taken so much of your time, but I have been pondering this since 1989.