Portside

Because so many of us are being called to the barricades these days to resist Trump, understanding what went wrong in our analysis can help organizers to understand what leads to powerful massive protest and what doesn't. For example, many of us did not predict the size and scope of the Women's march, the first protest of the Trump era. Originally launched on a Facebook posting on November 9th, it quickly turned in to the first and most massive outpouring of protest against Trump worldwide. When Conde Nast published a phonebook thick coffee table photo book commemorating the march, you knew there was combustible combination of mass sentiment that led to these huge actions.

In the run up to May 1, we predicted that the protests would exceed the May 1, 2006 anti-Sensenbrenner mobilizations because of the outpouring of anti-Trump sentiment in the immigrant community. http://stansburyforum.com/with-the-u-s-working-class-under-attack-unions-can-reclaim-may-day-in-solidarity-with-immigrant-workers/ We said that "the Latino media was abuzz with talk of the rally" and we urged labor unions and the Labor for Our Revolution network to support the marchers.[1]

In 2006 there were two rallies at separate times in LA each with almost one million participants. They were broad expressions of anger at the proposed federal legislation that would severely limit the lives and rights of immigrants. The media was abuzz with talk of the rally. El Piolin, El Mandril and El Cucuy della Manana all promoted the rally on LA Latino drive-time radio. Hometown associations (HTA’s) from villages in Mexico were called out by the Mexican consulate. The owner of American Apparel at the time, Dov Charney closed his factory in LA and told its 3,000 employees to march.

The march went way beyond the limited numbers of unions and immigrant rights groups and involved masses of immigrants and their families. This was a perfect storm -- or as immigrant rights leader and strategist Gaspar Rivera Salgado, a Project Director at the UCLA Labor Center put it: “In regards to the marches, I think that the 2006 mobilizations were made possible because of an alignment of several factors very difficult to duplicate: complete alignment of all different political sectors (unions, immigrant-led organizations, Chicano orgs Mexican Home Town Associations, and political elites etc.); the threat of a draconian bill (Sensenbrenner), and the alignment of commercial media (Univision, Telemundo, La Opinion, Hoy and especially the top entertainment talk radio shows -Cucuy, Piolin and Mandril). The top three radio talk shows in LA had at that time a massive reach in the millions of daily listeners who were bombarded with a clear unified message from all the guests in the shows: go out to march or this is the end of the world as we know it!

There has not been an alignment like this from all multiple sectors since then. Why? If only we understood the reason we could rewrite history.”[2]

In building for May 1, 2017 several labor unions and national and regional immigrant rights organizations promised deep participation. Members of SEIU's United Service Workers West representing more than 45,000 workers in California proposed a strike of its janitors, security guards and airport workers. Similar calls emerged from other unions, and immigrant rights groups like CHIRLA in Southern California and Movimento Cosecha went all out: "May 1st is the first step in a series of strikes and boycotts that will change the conversation on immigration," said Maria Fernanda Cabello, a spokesperson from Movimiento Cosecha, an immigrant rights coalition organizing a Newark, NJ rally.

Initially turnout at the 2017 LA rally was predicted to be one million, but then downsized to 100,000, but the actual final count was probably closer to 30,000. In 2006, cities with far smaller immigrant populations like Denver or even Omaha were able to turn out 30,000. The LA rally ended up being the usual suspects without the expected broader outpouring of community marchers.

With all the anger and outrage at Trump, the question is why didn't Rivera Salgado's perfect constellation of factors happen? Several factors were different in 2006 than May 1, 2017.

1. FEAR - In 2006 there was fear and anger about what Sensenbrenner would mean in the future for immigrants. In the January 2017 Women's March there was fear about what Trump would do to women and all living creatures. But in the immigrant community prior to the May 1, there was actual fear of protesting in the streets. The much-publicized activities of the newly invigorated ICE were a major deterrent to public action. Immigrants were afraid of being picked up at the protest!

2. NO BUZZ - This fear factor for the community and for its own self-preservation probably led the Latino media and business class not to climb on board the way they did in 2006. The drive time shows did not push the march and as one leading SEIU organizer and strategist, Sanjay Garla Organizing Director of USWW said, “Our organizers found in talking to many of our members that they were only hearing about the May Day actions from the union.” That was a clear sign to Garla that there was no community buzz.

3. TOO BROAD- In 2006, the marches were very focused on the issue of immigrant rights and did not have a broader anti-capitalist or anti-system focus. That might have enabled a broader united front than this year's all out against Trump focus.

As we enter into the next stage of the anti-Trump struggle, these issues of messaging and capacity will be critical to the challenge of the 2018-midterm elections. If we are to retake the house for the Democrats and elect more Bernie-crats, getting our focus and message right becomes crucial. Is our message just anti-Trump and remove the giant Cheeto? Or is it a rejection of Republican policies like the repeal of the ACA and the devastation of healthcare? Can we insert platform issues like Single Payer/Medicare for All and Free Tuition nationwide or is each race a matter of local messaging and forces? Organizers need to be aware of time, place and condition in analyzing the midterms and every mobilization that we engage in. These authors certainly misjudged the May 1, 2017 moment. What's important is to learn from our mistakes and build the power of the people's movement so that we can arrest the Right's momentum in 2018 and dump Trump in 2020 (or perhaps sooner)!