I frequently see people on the various 50501 subreddits asking people to check their pet issues at the door. To go protest for specifically dethroning Trump and his Republican regime and to focus solely on that. Sometimes these posts are very vague, sometimes they are specifically asking pro-Palestinian or trans rights protesters to leave that issue at home.
I totally get this instinct. The left has historically been plagued by infighting. With respect to Palestine in particular, that is an issue which the DNC and the DCCC have made absolutely clear they will not budge on, and that understandably makes people nervous. There's a lot of very legitimate anxiety over the possibility that civil protest carries us through to 2026 and then the Democratic party only coughs up center right candidates and the protest movement fails to translate into electoral support, killing any hope of fixing things.
I think we are all aware that we are staring down the reality midterms (assuming we still have free and fair ones in 2026) where the Democratic party is going to run a bunch of transphobic, starkly anti-immigration, who are going to try primarily to appeal to conservatives. And if I had to guess, a lot of us are trying to brace ourselves for the reality of what the leftist infighting about that is going to look like. Especially after Harris lost not because Trump gained any votes since 2020, but because the Democratic party had reduced turnout across demographics.
So there is an urge to create a movement which can hold together in spite of that. Which brings as many people on board as possible. Which isn't going to fall apart at the finish line over specific wedge issues. If what I'm saying strikes any sort of chord in you, believe me I get it. The thought keeps me up at night.
But I don't think asking people to keep their "distracting messages" at home and out of these protests actually helps.
Because those "distracting messages" are things people actually care about. Enough to show up and be involved and form community about. And people are more likely to believe politicians and leadership figures actually have interests aligned with the movements they claim to represent when those leadership figures show that they hold meaningful and distinguishing personal opinions which they hold to even when it might not be politically optimal.
People don't just abstractly want an America without Trump, people have positive and inspiring visions of what they actually want America to be. And the people who care enough to put themselves out there and protest a fascist regime specifically because of something they care about? The people who see violence halfway across the world and imagine a nation which is better than that? The trans people who believe this nation can have a place for them, their allies care enough to fight for that?
Whether you agree with them or not, those people care. They have skin in the game. Those people who you might be worried will clash with centrist or right leaning Democrats, because they protested the Democrats too? The thing to focus on is the fact they were protesting. They were showing up. Anybody who has a positive and constructive vision of the United States of America which shines so brightly in their mind that when they put their body in the streets to protest fascism they are thinking "this, this is what I'm fighting fascism for"? Those people show up.
I know that personally, when I see huge variety of signs of protests, I'm not seeing a fractured movement, I'm one hundred reasons people cherish enough to risk protesting fascism.
And I think you will find these people very pragmatic about who they are willing to fight beside to deal with Trump. Tell somebody that they can be loud and vocal about their issues, so long as they are willing to be in the same crowd as people who have other highest priority issues? Anybody in that position knows that having a foot in the door for whatever comes after Trump is better than nothing.
Unless you tell them they have to leave their issues at home. Because that is overtly telling them that even raising the possibility of their issues being addressed is too much. That there is no resolution for their issues to be found in this movement.
So they're going to join different groups, focus more narrowly on their specific issues. They will still be fighting. But they will not be part of the much vaunted big tent. Insisting people with specific priority issues leave those issues out of their protest is unquestionably going to fracture the movement.
But who will be part of the big tent, who will only join if those loud and proud voices weren't present?
Because we're not talking about people who disagree about whether we have the "luxury" to fight for these issues. If you're one of those people who thinks of those fights as luxuries right now, I'm sure you're still going to be fighting if even people show up at protests with Palestinian and trans flags. We're not even talking about people who are outright transphobic or racist, but see Donald Trump as the principal threat. Because those people aren't going home because of pride flags either.
We are talking specifically about the people who would home rather than protest against Donald Trump. Who would rather have Trump if they thought there was any chance that the movement against Trump might result in trans rights, or divestment from the IDF, or more immigration, for public health care, or whatever other "distracting messages" you might be worried about.
And I hope you can forgive me for making presumptions about strangers, but I just don't think anybody in that group is going to be all that dedicated to fighting fascism.
Call me a cynic, but if somebody is driving by a protest and thinking about showing up at the next one, but then they see a trans flag and decide they don't want to protest Trump that badly, I just don't trust their commitment.
If we make a big tent by telling people to leave certain issues at home, specifically to invite that group of people in, I just don't think the big tent is going to have much force behind it. If we characterize the movement by not offending the sensibilities of its most conditional supporters, I think we will weaken the movement rather than strengthen it. When a movement's message is defined by the reticence of its least committed members, well ... first you get a big tent. And then it deflates.
Politics is determined by those who show up, especially in the system the United States has. What we need isn't to maximize the number of people who are tepidly on board with protesting Trump, we need people who are going to have follow through. We need people who care. Who have faith in what they're fighting for, whatever specific issue that may be.
I won't paint a rosy picture about it.This is messy. It opens the door to infighting. There will be wedge issues that people will try to exploit. It takes work to make a coalition work, and it is often frustrating and painful work.
But no one has ever actually made a big tent by limiting which ideas are allowed in the tent. If you want a big tent, you just invite people to show up. With all their baggage and crusades that drive them.
And the people who would rather have fascism than protest next to a proud Palestinian or a trans person, well. Don't stress over it. I promise you they're not worth the effort.
Originally Posted By u/Sengachi At 2025-04-26 10:13:55 PM | Source
