On last Saturday, I visited a modest representation of the ongoing resistance movement in its diminished state. Following Donald Trump’s second inauguration, numerous street demonstrations took place; however, they were relatively minor and disorganized, involving only a few hundred participants. angered due to the defunding of USAID, or a few thousand dollars support The most structured initiative to date, the 50501 campaign ("50 states, 50 protests, 1 movement"), brings together various activists. Their title suggests broad scope rather than deep focus.
Outside a Tesla dealership in the Gowanus district of Brooklyn, approximately 200 individuals assembled on the pavement near an intersection. These protesters shook tambourines and clashed cymbals with the aim of encouraging vehicles driving past to sound their horns as a sign of dissent towards Elon Musk, who served as a key advisor to Trump and promotes electric automobiles like those made by Tesla. Amongst various reactions to the incoming government, these anti-Tesla demonstrations stand out; at present, the firm’s share value has dropped roughly fifty percent from what it was in December. Some placards called for Musk's expulsion from the country, while another urged motorists to protest through their use of car horns. Beep Beep If You Find Elon A Bit Dodgy . A person dressed in a gorilla costume brandished a sign that said He Kills Monkeys, Too .
Despite the vibrant atmosphere on the streets—which were undeniably lively—the majority of participants had salt-and-pepper hair, with few young adults or families present. The attendees seemed to possess a well-honed instinct for political action, likely stemming from their involvement in previous protests such as those against the Iraq War in 2003 or possibly extending back to demonstrations during the Vietnam era. It became clear this rally was primarily for dedicated activists. Perhaps the most telling message was conveyed by a sign that read: The protests will escalate until the Constitution is upheld. This statement was indeed a warning, yet it simultaneously recognized that significant opportunities for expansion still existed.
Despite this, people within the drained anti-Trump alliance are finding encouragement from these sporadic protests. Currently, an assortment of progressive organizations united under the slogan "Hands Off!" intends to organize numerous similar events across the nation. Such efforts have prompted participants in the Harvard’s Crowd Counting Consortium, who monitor instances of civic discontent, to take notice. conclude Recently, it has been noted that resistance remains "very much alive," with demonstrations being "more common and widespread than critics often imply." Their key discovery reveals something seemingly paradoxical: In February 2025, there were double the amount of protests compared to those held in February 2017, which marked the chaotic start of President Trump’s initial term; specifically, 2,085 events contrasted against 937 back then. However, this data comes with a significant qualifier—what counts as a protest can include small gatherings such as distributing pamphlets on college campuses. Thus, when considering individual participants rather than recorded incidents, the total number of distinct protestors today is considerably lower than it was eight years prior.
[ Why Canadians Currently Outshine Americans in Protesting Against Trump ]
The estimated number of participants for last February fell between approximately 125,000 and 184,000, as reported. Jeremy Pressman One of the consortium’s co-directors and also a professor at the University of Connecticut made this statement. The typical protest size was estimated between 60 to 88 individuals. According to Pressman in March, these figures saw a significant rise; however, the mean attendance per protest remained approximately constant.
This implies, at most, an alternative approach to protest movements: one that is significantly decentralized, progressing very slowly, characterized more by persistence than active opposition. "There seems to be something developing," remarked journalist Ali Velshi. wrote On MSNBC last week, "a distinct type of movement emerging at present, which has maintained consistent and enduring progress." The Bulwark , Jonathan V. Last emphasized The strategic benefit of a progression moving from the outskirts towards Washington.
Is it superior even though it’s different? Would one large protest involving 100,000 individuals be equivalent to having 1,000 smaller protests with 100 participants each? I presented this paradoxical query to Erica Chenoweth, a Harvard professor and consortium co-director. coined The concept suggests that if any protest movement mobilized 3.5 percent of a nation's populace, it could accomplish its objectives. In current terms for the U.S., this equates to roughly 12 million individuals. Is it significant whether you reach this percentage rapidly or gradually? "It remains unclear," Chenoweth informed me, "but potentially each approach generates momentum."
So far in Trump 2.0, despite the decentralized approach leading to slower progress, it has ironically resulted in two contrasting outcomes: Activists have numerous tasks at hand, yet a significantly bigger segment of dissidents lacks an effective way to express themselves. For disillusioned Generation Z members or occupied Millennials who might consider joining protests, their reasons for participating differ greatly from those of dedicated demonstrators who regularly take part. The larger demographic requires feeling secure as well as perceiving substantial collective influence through large-scale marches. As the philosopher noted, "When people come together and act collectively, power emerges; however, this power dissipates instantly once they separate." Hannah Arendt wrote in The Human Condition Many individuals participate in demonstrations to showcase their influence rather than highlight their outsider status. It’s exactly these kinds of efforts, met with continual obstacles, that seem even harder now compared to before.
Trump's initial term was marked by a succession of massive rallies: the Women’s March that welcomed his inauguration. estimated up to 4.6 million individuals nationwide participated in the March for Our Lives event after the 2018 Parkland shooting ( 1.2 million ), and—it surpasses all prior American protest movements—the Black Lives Matter protests following the death of George Floyd (with estimates ranging from 15 million to 26 million participants, as reported) polls The Women's March was well-organized and focused, whereas the demonstrations in June 2020 were mostly unplanned and dispersed. However, both events stood out due to one key metric often used to gauge the impact of protests: the remarkably high number of participants involved.
At first glance, the waning enthusiasm for protesting against Trump during his second term – despite the numerous daily controversies he sparks – can be seen merely as a shift in the political climate. In 2017, Trump’s victory came as a jolt to liberal supporters who anticipated having Hillary Clinton as their president. The fact that he lost the popular vote added to feelings that his presidency might have been unfairly obtained, which encouraged some influential figures, including several Republicans, to challenge him boldly. This all contributed to an impression that protests had real potential to effect change. By contrast, none of those elements apply today: Trump isn’t surprising anymore; he secured the majority in the popular vote; and both his own party members and corporate leaders now support him wholeheartedly. Pressman pondered whether this new scenario may instigate "a distinct sort of disillusionment," one that feels more disorienting than galvanizing: “Perhaps individuals felt knocked off balance initially. It might take considerable time—or perhaps never—to regain momentum.”
[ There is no resistance ]
Following a presentation at the University of Glasgow by lecturer Michael T. Heaney, surveyed Participants from both the Women’s March and January’s significantly smaller People’s March highlighted a distinct difference. He informed me that there was a 12 percent decrease in political enthusiasm; "hope" as an incentive for protest declined by 10 percent, and "pride" dropped by 9 percent. Between 2017 and 2025, what saw an increase? "Frustration," rising by 3 percent, and "anger," increasing by 8 percent.
Beside this demoralization is a valid sense of precaution; simply engaging in protest has grown riskier. The president not only said He wouldn’t hesitate to employ the military against "the internal foe," yet methods of surveillance have grown both more widespread and advanced. These include technologies like facial recognition, geolocation tracking, and artificial intelligence-powered identification systems. Both local law enforcement agencies and federal bodies such as the FBI have historically misused tools designed for keeping an eye on protests—a troubling practice stretching far back into the past. COINTELPRO In the 1960s, however, an individual participating in a non-violent event during the 20th century might have felt confident about blending into a crowd of anonymous faces. Modern technology has changed this dynamic entirely. Safety in large groups is now obsolete; one can no longer fade away unnoticed.
Merely attending a protest leaves you susceptible, as Chris Gilliard, a Just Tech fellow at the Social Science Research Council, explained to me: "The various gadgets individuals possess and utilize continuously emit data, ranging from the vehicles they may have driven to reach the location to the surveillance cameras in subway stations to their wristwear, mobile phones, and every conceivable electronic device." Even so, this exposure remains significant. safety instructions Provided by an event organizer for today’s peaceful protests, one emphasized line read "Assume nothing about your safety." Additionally, they stated, “WEAR A MASK… make sure to turn off location services, remove biometric data, and clear personal information from your phone at minimum. Write down your emergency contact details somewhere on your person.” Such instructions may be discouraging for those who rarely participate in protests or individuals wishing to express their concerns publicly for the first time. As noted by Chenoweth, this could explain why localized, smaller-scale protests seem more appealing right now. She explained, “They’re simpler to manage; quicker to cancel abruptly if needed; and much easier to disperse swiftly when necessary," adding that small, agile groups might find these factors reassuring.
The quantity of laws aimed at restricting protests is growing. Both federal and state-level legislative activity has surged recently, especially starting from January. In 2025 alone, 41 anti-protest bills were proposed across 21 states as well as in Congress. This trend continues to escalate. includes Legislation proposed by Congress targets protesters who "intentionally obstruct traffic," impede the construction of pipelines in any manner, or wear a mask that "suppresses" someone else. The Trump administration sought to have Columbia University implement a ban on masks as part of their conditions for reinstating $400 million in federal funds. Many peaceful demonstrators use masks not to threaten individuals but to prevent identification through facial recognition technology.
Many of today’s celebrated movements started off being seen as unlawful disturbances, yet Trump has uniquely recast protests by associating them with disorderly crowds, even when they remained non-violent. Following the death of George Floyd, despite some instances of property damage and theft, the vast majority of responses were peaceful demonstrations. study By the organization Armed Conflict Location & Event Data. However, the Black Lives Matter demonstrations from that summer are now recalled by Trump and his followers primarily as widespread acts of rioting. Pro-Palestinian activities during the last one and a half years were sometimes marked by aggressive tactics, potentially tarnishing the image of such movements. Nevertheless, Trump took this stance even further by labeling all genuine concerns about massive casualties in Gaza as support for Hamas and initiated efforts to expel non-citizens involved in these matters. Mahmoud Khalil, the ex-Columbia graduate student facing imminent deportation, was singled out by authorities specifically due to his public participation in protests. unmasked .
[ Christopher L Eisgruber: The expense of the government’s assault on Columbia ]
Just two years back, carrying a placard and stepping outside to participate in a demonstration often felt empowering and uplifting. Today, however, such an action is marred by concerns over monitoring and repercussions, along with the risk of facing serious criminal charges, leading many to experience a profound feeling of helplessness.
Why does scale play such an important role during protests beyond what scholars like Chenoweth suggest? While quantifiable measures offer some insight, they fall short of capturing everything. Massive rallies serve as a spectacle demonstrating unity where people shed personal identities to embody collective resolve. Such cohesion emerges solely when the crowd exceeds merely one eccentric attendee in costume. These events can fortify your spirit, affirming not only your isolation from solitude but also positioning you firmly within a community of fellow members. In his work, the renowned sociologist Émile Durkheim aptly termed this phenomenon. collective effervescence .
For those observing from above—the senators, judges, CEOs—large-scale protests serve as tangible representations of public sentiment. While such gatherings may render an individual anonymous within the crowd, they amplify collective opinions significantly. Regardless of personal reflections on the 2020 Black Lives Matter demonstrations, all societal sectors were forced to acknowledge their scale; even figures like Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, appeared prompted to respond. take a knee Trump's campaign to eliminate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives is, in numerous aspects, a reaction against the transformations brought about by these demonstrations. Overseas, take for instance the large-scale mobilizations that led to positive outcomes in 2023: the protests in Israel against Benjamin Netanyahu’s proposed judicial changes. Those demonstrations successfully halted the nation’s activities and compelled Netanyahu to reconsider his stance. relent .
The most hopeful narrative that activists share regarding the current situation is one of incubation: It’s impossible to reach big unless you go through small Groups are coming together to form alliances, establish organizational frameworks, and gauge local support. Such groundwork is essential for movements aiming sustainability. A significant criticism of the demonstrations during Trump's initial term was their rapid decline after an intense start. Consequently, this phase might differ. Hunter Dunn, a student at Pepperdine University serving as the national press contact for the 50501 movement, mentioned that being younger sets him apart from many protesters; however, like others combating youthful despair, he envisions reaching milestones akin to those seen in iconic marches such as one held in 1963 in Washington D.C. "Just announcing plans won’t bring millions instantly," he explained. "It requires building momentum week-by-week, month-to-month—even potentially spanning years—to create a robust movement capable of marching confidently yet peacefully on Washington without fear of governmental backlash."
However, there is another grim perspective that these activists aren’t sharing: This could be an endless struggle. It’s not about a gradual build-up leading to a climactic conclusion, but rather a weakened substitute for widespread activism; it’s not meant to precede an explosion, but instead serves as a predictable safety valve.
There isn't any evidence yet suggesting that this narrative of protests will continue into Trump’s second term. Last week, Senator Chris Murphy It was mentioned that resistance from the Democratic Party could necessitate "large-scale mobilization." The demonstrations this past weekend might serve as an initial turning point in that regard—or they could merely perpetuate the sporadic pattern observed thus far. Some activists directed my attention to the sizable gatherings welcoming Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez during their continuing "Fight Against Oligarchy" tour. Notably highlighted was the substantial number of attendees, with more than 30,000 people showing up at these events. Denver —referring to the sort of "significant figure," as Chenoweth pointed out, that can generate momentum.
In a Reddit thread aimed at garnering backing for the nationwide protests scheduled for April 5—with over 1,000 demonstrations anticipated—a user provided an unambiguous response regarding how to generate enthusiasm. "We urge you to attend the biggest protest possible," ProtectResist posted. "Having 200 individuals spread across 100 events won’t catch media attention. However, having 20,000 participants at a single rally certainly will."