These days, millions of people across the United States have taken to the streets under the slogan “No to the King,” protesting what they call a “drift toward absolute rule.” Over 2,700 protest events have been organized in all 50 U.S. states. This movement spans from major cities like New York and Chicago to small towns. It is being led by a coalition of civil society groups, labor unions, and progressive movements. What is unfolding in the U.S. right now is the third major wave of opposition to Donald Trump’s policies since his return to the White House.
The history of the United States is full of moments when people stood up against the concentration of power and injustice. The American Revolution in the 18th century is the first and most significant example of resistance against absolute dominion; it was founded on the assertion of citizens’ natural rights.
In the 20th century, the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s showed how peaceful and organised civic activism could change deeply‐rooted legal and institutional discrimination. The leadership of Martin Luther King Jr. and the strategy of non-violent resistance left invaluable lessons about the power of organised protest.
The “Occupy Wall Street” movement in 2011 was also a direct reaction to the concentration of wealth and the influence of major financial firms in politics. Although that movement did not achieve broad structural reforms, it introduced the discourse of “the 1% versus the 99%” into U.S. public discussion a discourse that now resonates in the “No to Kings” movement.
The “No to Kings” movement is one of the largest protest waves in contemporary U.S. history. It represents the deep anger and discontent of millions of American citizens toward extreme concentration of power and the erosion of democratic accomplishments during the Trump presidency.
The roots of this protest wave must be sought in several structural factors. First, the sharp rise in economic inequality which has pushed the gap between affluent classes and workers/middle classes to historic levels. Second, the crisis of public trust in political, media and judicial institutions, as shown in repeated surveys. Third, the widespread feeling of political marginalisation, among many citizens there is the sense that their voices are not heard in the country’s decision-making processes.
The federal government shutdown lasting eighteen days, the extreme immigration policies, pressure on independent media, reductions in budgets for education and research, and efforts to expand executive powers in relation to legislative and judicial bodies, all these have paved the way for the emergent “No to Kings” movement in the U.S.
The “No to Kings” movement is distinguished by a few specific characteristics. First, the simultaneous and extensive coordination, which shows the conscious use of communications technologies and social networks. Second, the broad societal composition of participants, ranging from students and teachers to workers and government employees.
This movement goes beyond a single‐party current; it encompasses individuals and groups from civil society activists, students, teachers, public‐service workers, labourers, and civil rights groups on a mass scale.
Protests and marches, peaceful assemblies, street gatherings, public meetings, the formation of special groups for information dissemination and civic mobilisation, distribution of statements, videos and analytical materials about the dangers of power concentration and the importance of accountable institutions in the U.S. political system, and educational sessions, all these represent various forms of presence of this emergent and powerful movement in America.
The “No to Kings” protests across the United States are not simply a symbolic reaction against power concentration; they signify a deep societal need to defend the gains made by the unionised workforce and under-privileged sectors of American society over the last century. The success of this movement depends on its ability to turn protest energy into structural programmes and reforms, reforms capable of rebalancing power, limiting the illegitimate influence of money and lobbying, and shaping a more democratic and responsive future for all citizens of the country.
