By MICHAEL SCHREIBER
June 14 was a day of contrasts. Under gray skies in Washington, D.C., Donald Trump celebrated his birthday with a sparsely attended military parade. In the meantime, in cities and towns nationwide, millions of people took to the streets around the slogan of “No Kings!” The outpouring of protesters—led by a coalition of democracy activists, labor organizations, and civil rights groups—was of historic proportion. It was a magnificent display of courage, resistance, and determination.
The president, who has only half-jokingly styled himself a “king,” had obviously hoped that he could produce a spectacle that would rival those of other authoritarian and self-aggrandizing “Great Leaders” in history. As it turned out, however, the bleachers along the parade route were largely empty. The president and guests sat stoically behind bulletproof glass and visibly struggled to stay awake as endless columns of tanks and trucks rolled by. The liveliest portion of the $45 million extravaganza was when a couple of robot dogs pranced before the reviewing stand.
Of course, Trump’s paean to the military was closely tied to his declaration of war on immigrants—signaled by the administration’s call-up of National Guard and Marine units against protesters in Los Angeles the week before. And it coincided with Israel’s unprovoked attack on Iran, which has been aided by the U.S. military. U.S. Navy ships have been rushed to the Persian Gulf while Trump is weighing whether to become more directly involved in the war against Iran. Such a move would threaten to spark a much wider war in the Middle East.
Trump proclaimed that acts of dissent would not be allowed in Washington, D.C., on June 14, and that protests of his military parade would be met by “very heavy force.” He motivated his threats by describing protesters as “people who hate our country.” Similarly, when asked by the press about the protests of immigration raids in Los Angeles, he exclaimed, “These are paid insurrectionists!” But rather than frightening most people, Trump’s attempts at intimidation seemed to have persuaded many more to join the protests.
“President Trump wants tanks in the street and a made-for-TV display of dominance for his birthday,” the No Kings protest movement stated on its website. “But real power isn’t staged in Washington. It rises up everywhere else. No Kings is a nationwide day of defiance.”
People responded to the call to action; they came into the streets like never before. Colorful signs and chants soundly rejected Trump’s increasingly authoritarian policies. The protesters singled out the brutal deportation raids against immigrants, raising demands such as “National Guard out of L.A.!” Other demands addressed impending cuts to Medicaid and other social programs, attacks on DEI and trans people, gutting of measures against climate change and for environmental protection, and much more.
Anu Joshi, national campaign director for immigration at the American Civil Liberties Union, one of the leading organizers of the rallies, said that people appeared shaken by the “cruelty” they have witnessed from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids. “We’re just seeing the incredible abuse of power that this administration is exercising, and people just can’t sit on the sidelines anymore,” she told the press. “I think when you see children being zip tied by agents wearing face masks and ripped away from their parents because they are going to their court date, people are moved by that and they don’t want to live in a country where that is the law of the land.”
The largest protest mobilization in history?
Major sponsors of the national mobilization—including Indivisible, ACLU, 50501, Move On!, etc.—agreed that over 5 million people participated in No Kings events in at least 2100 towns and cities around the country. It was possibly the largest nationwide single-day political demonstration in U.S. history, even exceeding the over 4 million who demonstrated nationwide in the Women’s March that took place soon after Trump first came to power in 2017.
The numbers of demonstrators in single locations were also extraordinary. The largest action was in Boston, where the No Kings event coincided with the previously planned annual LGBTQ Pride parade. Indivisible and 50501 partnered with Boston Pride for the People as the chief sponsors of the combined event. About 1 million people reportedly filled Boston Common and lined the streets. Banners read: “Resist with Pride” and “No Kings but Yaaas Queen!”
About 200,000 came out for the No Kings march in Los Angeles—the epicenter of Trump’s anti-immigrant roundups during the last couple of weeks. The crowd included a great many people of Mexican or Central American heritage. As they marched, they passed National Guard troops or Marines who were stationed outside government buildings. Unfortunately, toward the end of the event, police with horses and armored cars attacked a number of protesters. They used rubber bullets, flash-bang grenades, and tear gas against the marchers—injuring several people.
In a statement to FOX News, Hunter Dunn, national spokesperson for 50501, said: “Today, over 200,000 people gathered peacefully in downtown Los Angeles to protest the egregious overreach of this administration. While the official No Kings event concluded earlier in the day, many remained in the streets to continue their nonviolent dissent. The escalation came from law enforcement, not protesters—who responded with tear gas and violent crowd suppression. One organizer was shot directly with a rubber bullet, while passing out supplies. We unequivocally condemn this unnecessary and aggressive use of force, and we stand with every person who chose peace in the face of provocation.”
Philadelphia, which had been denoted as the “flagship city” for No Kings protests, saw 100,000 people march up the Benjamin Franklin Parkway despite a continuous light rain and predictions of a heavier downpour (the police gave a figure of 80,000 marchers). The huge and densely packed crowd shouted, “Whose streets? Our streets!” They seemed younger and more diverse than at many of the earlier anti-Trump marches, with a broader array of issues and demands reflected on their signs. A lively Palestine solidarity contingent also took part in the march with banners and flags.
Many teachers marched in Philadelphia behind a wide American Federation of Teachers banner—just as a large number of teachers did in other cities—and AFT President Randi Weingarten addressed the rally. For the most part, however, the unions failed to organize their members to participate in the action as organized contingents. Likewise, nationally, the labor movement—which is key to organizing a powerful fightback against government cutbacks and repression—has generally been slow in getting involved in protests.
Organizers reported that about 100,000 marched in New York City, braving a steady light rain and rows of intimidating cops in riot gear. Close to 100,000 marched in San Francisco, organizers say 70,000 in Chicago, at least 70,000 in Seattle, and 60,000 in San Diego. Other cities also saw tens of thousands respond to the call for protests on June 14. According to the media, Dallas had a protest of about 11,000 people despite Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s call for National Guard troops to counter statewide protests.
Unfortunately, Trump’s attempts to create an atmosphere of chaos and fear did stir a handful of far-right people to try to disrupt some protest events with violence. A person drove his SUV into protesters in Riverside, Calif., causing injuries, while a similar incident took place in Virginia; a fatal shooting took place in Utah; and fascist Proud Boys made an appearance at a demonstration in Georgia. In the meantime, some 10,000 people demonstrated in Minnesota, despite Gov. Tim Walz’s request to cancel all protests following the assassination of state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband by a right-wing vigilante on the morning of June 14.
Where do we go from here?
In all, the No Kings actions, coming just five months into Trump’s administration, were an excellent launching pad for building a sustained movement of resistance. The mobilization on June 14 gained strength not only through the coalition of big organizations that sponsored the major events but also through the heavy footwork by grassroots activists—often members of local chapters of Indivisible, 50501, and other groups. Now, what will it take to move decisively forward?
“No Kings!” was fine as a general defensive slogan to unite people against the rise of authoritarianism. But rather than merely protesting for the restoration of things that the Trump administration has removed or is threatening to abolish, we should go on to demand far-reaching measures that can achieve true economic and social justice for all people. To do this, we must present clear and concrete demands to the government—the entire government, not just Trump and not just the Republicans.
These essential demands, and the strategy and tactics to achieve them, can best be decided and put into action by means of mass democratic assemblies and unified coalitions, centered on expressing the deep needs and concerns of working people and oppressed communities. These coalitions should function with democratically elected leaderships who are representative of and accountable to the participants.
What kinds of demands should be raised? They might address, for example, questions of the federal budget. They could point out that money that is now to be appropriated for the imperialist war machine (at least $895 billion), building a wall on the Mexican border ($50 billion), beefing up the dragnet against immigrants (an estimated $34 billion to $160 billion), direct subsidies for oil drilling (current estimates range from $14 billion to $52 billion a year), and lavish perks for the super-wealthy could be redirected to items that people really need—such as quality affordable housing, free health care for all, and strict protections against environmental pollution.
It is essential that the labor unions get fully involved; in fact, they should take the lead in organizing workers and their allies in a concerted struggle against both the government and the bosses to gain the economic and social benefits that working people need.
In recent months, the AFL-CIO and some unions like the AFT and government workers in the SEIU, AFGE, UFCW, etc. have co-sponsored anti-Trump rallies here and there. There are indications that union participation might now be increasing. According to Carl Rosen, president of United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, a new formation called Labor for Democracy helped to bring together 15 national unions and hundreds of locals and regional bodies to back the No Kings Day protests. He said that they recognize that “the labor movement has a special role to play in defending democracy in our country.” (The website https://laborfordemocracy.org/ is due to be launched soon.)
Ultimately, the “heavy hitters” that organize workers in industry, transportation, and the docks need to make their presence felt in the movement. Such workers have unmatched power to fight for change; their tactics extend beyond street demonstrations to actions at the workplace—pickets, slowdowns, strikes, and factory sit-down occupations—that can have a jolting economic impact.
Organized labor’s concerns go beyond the shop floor; they also include the political sphere. If Trump decides to bomb Iran, for instance, the conflagration would affect working people in this country and all over the world. At the very least, oil and gas prices would rise in this country and domestic repression would be heightened, while the lives of U.S. workers in the armed forces would be threatened. How could the antiwar movement respond? Let’s suppose that port workers, warehouse workers, and railroad workers mount an antiwar protest by sitting down on the job so that nothing moves! That would really send an effective “message” to the war makers!
Unfortunately, political strikes and sit-ins are unlikely to take place in the near future. The unions have been hobbled because of their bureaucratized leaderships’ almost universal support of the Democratic Party—while a few have recently strayed to the Republican Party. Unless this collaboration with one of the bosses’ parties is broken, we can foresee that most labor leaders will concentrate their efforts—and the funds derived from the dues of union members—on supporting major-party candidates in the 2026 Congressional elections. Next to those electoral campaigns, the necessary struggles of working people will take second place.
In 2017, we saw in the aftermath of the massive Women’s March, which was led primarily by organizations tied to the Democratic Party, that the movement suddenly collapsed into a campaign to elect politicians to office. That must not happen again.
But supporting Democratic or other big-party politicians presents more dangers than merely being a distraction at election time. Such support also establishes limits on how far a struggle can go with its demands and strategies. The Democratic Party, which like the Republicans mainly depends on capitalist donors for its support, is interested primarily in maintaining the status quo. It is not going to allow trade-union leaders, or protest movement leaders—or anybody else it believes it can successfully co-opt—to fight for and achieve demands that upset the regular workings of U.S capitalism; unless, of course, it is forced to make concessions.
As it is, as long as the Democratic Party establishment feels that it has the unions, the NGOs, and other social organizations in its pocket, the politicians will continue to induce working people to accept crumbs so that they don’t take the whole pie.
Moreover, failing to take up working-class battles in order to better align with Democrats further pushes workers away from union politics and toward the far right. That some union leaders, like Sean O’Brien of the Teamsters, have used that trend as a justification to pivot to supporting Republicans is even more shortsighted given that the government’s policies actively undermine the ability of unions to organize and grow. It’s like filling your gas tank with sugar water because the meter is reading low; the meter may now read full but you’ve ruined the engine. The engine of strong union politics can only be fueled by a committed, unapologetic defense of working people’s needs.
For these reasons alone, a successful working-class movement for radical change must be fully independent of the Democratic Party. Ultimately, the labor movement and its allies need to establish their own party, which can consistently and militantly organize the fight for the needs of working people and the oppressed.
