{"id":3908,"date":"2025-04-30T01:39:06","date_gmt":"2025-04-30T09:39:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/treehousewriters.com\/wp53\/?p=3908"},"modified":"2025-03-18T11:43:23","modified_gmt":"2025-03-18T19:43:23","slug":"reprint-social-movements-constrained-trump-in-his-first-term-more-than-people-realize","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/treehousewriters.com\/wp53\/2025\/04\/30\/reprint-social-movements-constrained-trump-in-his-first-term-more-than-people-realize\/","title":{"rendered":"Reprint: Social movements constrained Trump in his first term \u2013 more than people\u00a0realize"},"content":{"rendered":"

This article first appeared in\u00a0The Conversation<\/i>. I offer it here with permission because now, more than ever, we need hope. Hope and belief in our power to resist and ultimately defeat a tyrant.<\/p>\n

Social movements constrained Trump in his first term \u2013 more than people\u00a0realize<\/h1>\n
\n

Kevin A. Young<\/a>,\u00a0UMass Amherst<\/a><\/em><\/span>Donald Trump\u2019s first term as president saw some of the\u00a0largest mass protests seen in the U.S. in over 50 years<\/a>, from the 2017 Women\u2019s March to the 2020 protests after George Floyd\u2019s murder.<\/p>\n

Things feel different this time around. Critics seem quieter. Some point to\u00a0fear of retribution<\/a>. But there\u2019s also a sense that the protests of Trump\u2019s first term were ultimately\u00a0futile<\/a>. This has contributed to a widespread mood of\u00a0despair<\/a>.<\/p>\n

As The New York Times noted\u00a0not long ago<\/a>, Trump \u201chad not appeared to be swayed by protests, petitions, hashtag campaigns or other tools of mass dissent.\u201d\u00a0That\u2019s a common<\/a>\u00a0perspective<\/a>\u00a0these days.<\/p>\n

But what if it\u2019s wrong?<\/p>\n

As\u00a0a historian<\/a>, I study how our narratives about the past shape our actions in the present. In this case, it\u2019s particularly important to get the history right.<\/p>\n

In fact, popular resistance in Trump\u2019s first term accomplished more than many observers realize; it\u2019s just that most wins happened outside the spotlight. In my view, the most visible tactics \u2013 petitions, hashtags, occasional marches in Washington \u2013 had less impact than the quieter work of organizing in communities and workplaces.<\/p>\n

Understanding when movements succeeded during Trump\u2019s first term is important for identifying how activists can effectively oppose Trump policy in his second administration.<\/p>\n

Quiet victories of the sanctuary movement<\/h2>\n

Mass deportation<\/a>\u00a0has been a cornerstone of Trump\u2019s agenda for\u00a0more than a decade<\/a>. Yet despite his early pledge to create a \u201cdeportation force<\/a>\u201d that would\u00a0expel millions<\/a>, Trump deported\u00a0only half<\/a>\u00a0as many people in his first term as Barack Obama did in his first term.<\/p>\n

Progressive activists were a key reason. By combining decentralized organizing and\u00a0nationwide<\/a>\u00a0resource-sharing<\/a>, they successfully pushed\u00a0scores of state<\/a>\u00a0and local<\/a>\u00a0governments to adopt sanctuary laws that limited cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE.<\/p>\n

When\u00a0the sociologist Adam Safer examined<\/a>\u00a0thousands of cities and dozens of states, he found that a specific type of sanctuary law that activists supported \u2013 barring local jails and prisons from active cooperation with ICE \u2013 successfully reduced ICE arrests. A study by legal scholar David K. Hausman\u00a0confirmed this finding<\/a>. Notably, Hausman also found that sanctuary policies had \u201cno detectable effect on crime rates,\u201d contrary to what many\u00a0politicians allege<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Another important influence on state and local officials was employers\u2019 resistance to mass deportation. The E-Verify system requiring employers to verify workers\u2019 legal status went\u00a0virtually unenforced<\/a>, since businesses quietly objected to it. As this example suggests, popular resistance to Trump\u2019s agenda was most effective when it exploited tensions between the administration and capitalists.<\/p>\n

The \u2018rising tide\u2019 against fossil fuels<\/h2>\n

In his effort to prop up the fossil fuel industry, Trump in his first term withdrew from the Paris climate agreement, weakened or eliminated\u00a0over 100 environmental protections<\/a>\u00a0and pushed other measures to obstruct the transition to green energy.<\/p>\n

Researchers projected that these policies would kill\u00a0tens of thousands<\/a>\u00a0of people in just the United States by 2028, primarily from exposure to air pollutants. Other studies estimated that the increased carbon pollution would contribute to\u00a0tens<\/a>\u00a0of\u00a0millions<\/a>\u00a0of deaths, and untold other suffering, by century\u2019s end.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s not the whole story, though. Trump\u2019s first-term energy agenda was\u00a0partly thwarted<\/a>\u00a0by a combination of environmental activism and market forces.<\/p>\n

His failure<\/a>\u00a0to resuscitate the U.S. coal industry was especially stark. Coal-fired plant capacity\u00a0declined faster<\/a>\u00a0during Trump\u2019s first term than during any four-year period in any country, ever. Some of the same coal barons who\u00a0celebrated Trump\u2019s victory<\/a>\u00a0in 2016 soon went bankrupt.<\/p>\n

CBS News covered the bankruptcy of coal firm Murray Energy, founded by Trump supporter Robert E. Murray.<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The most obvious reasons for coal\u2019s decline were the U.S. natural gas boom and the falling cost of renewable energy. But its decline was hastened by the\u00a0hundreds of local organizations<\/a>\u00a0that protested coal projects,\u00a0filed lawsuits<\/a>\u00a0against regulators and\u00a0pushed financial institutions<\/a>\u00a0to disinvest from the sector. The presence of strong local movements may help explain the\u00a0regional variation<\/a>\u00a0in coal\u2019s fortunes.<\/p>\n

Environmentalists also won some important battles against oil and gas pipelines, power plants and drilling projects. In a\u00a0surprising number of cases<\/a>, organizers defeated polluters through a combination of litigation, civil disobedience and other protests, and by pressuring banks, insurers and big investors.<\/p>\n

In 2018, one pipeline CEO lamented the \u201crising tide<\/a>\u00a0of protests, litigation and vandalism\u201d facing his industry, saying \u201cthe level of intensity has ramped up,\u201d with \u201cmore opponents\u201d who are \u201cbetter organized.\u201d<\/p>\n

Green energy also expanded much faster than Trump and his allies would have liked, albeit\u00a0not fast enough<\/a>\u00a0to avert ecological collapse. The U.S.\u00a0wind energy sector grew<\/a>\u00a0more in Trump\u2019s first term than under any other president, while\u00a0solar capacity<\/a>\u00a0more than doubled. Research shows that this progress was due in part to\u00a0the environmental movement\u2019s<\/a>\u00a0organizing<\/a>, particularly at the state and local levels.<\/p>\n

As with immigration, Trump\u2019s energy agenda divided both political and business elites. Some investors\u00a0became reluctant<\/a>\u00a0to keep their money in the sector, and some even\u00a0subsidized environmental activism<\/a>.\u00a0Judges<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0regulators<\/a>\u00a0didn\u2019t always share Trump\u2019s commitment to propping up fossil fuels. These tensions between the White House and business leaders created openings that climate activists could exploit.<\/p>\n

Worker victories in unlikely places<\/h2>\n

Despite Trump\u00a0self-promoting<\/a>\u00a0as a man of the people, his policies hurt workers in numerous ways \u2013 from his attack on\u00a0workers\u2019 rights<\/a>\u00a0to his\u00a0regressive tax policies<\/a>, which\u00a0accelerated<\/a>\u00a0the upward redistribution of wealth.<\/p>\n

Nonetheless, workers\u2019 direct action on the job won meaningful victories. For example, educators across the country organized dozens of major strikes for\u00a0better pay<\/a>,\u00a0more school funding<\/a>\u00a0and even\u00a0against ICE<\/a>. Workers in hotels, supermarkets and other\u00a0private-sector industries<\/a>\u00a0also walked out. Ultimately,\u00a0more U.S. workers<\/a>\u00a0went on strike in 2018 than in any year since 1986.<\/p>\n

This happened not just in progressive strongholds but\u00a0also in conservative states<\/a>\u00a0like West Virginia, Oklahoma and Kentucky. At least\u00a035 of the educators\u2019 strikes<\/a>\u00a0defied state laws denying workers the right to strike.<\/p>\n

In addition to winning<\/a>\u00a0gains for workers, the strike wave apparently also\u00a0worked against<\/a>\u00a0Republicans at election time by increasing political awareness and voter mobilization. The indirect impact on elections is a\u00a0common side effect<\/a>\u00a0of labor militancy and\u00a0mass protest<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Quiet acts of worker defiance also constrained Trump. The early months of the COVID-19 pandemic featured widespread resistance to policies that raised the\u00a0risk of infection<\/a>, particularly the lack of mask mandates.<\/p>\n

Safety-conscious workers frequently disobeyed their employers, in ways\u00a0seldom reflected in official strike data<\/a>. Many customers steered clear of businesses where people were unmasked. These disruptions, and fears they might escalate,\u00a0led businesses to lobby government<\/a>\u00a0for mask mandates.<\/p>\n

This resistance surely\u00a0saved many lives<\/a>. With more coordination, it might have\u00a0forced a decisive reorientation<\/a>\u00a0in how\u00a0government and business<\/a>\u00a0responded to the virus.<\/p>\n

Labor momentum could continue into Trump\u2019s second term. Low unemployment, strong\u00a0union finances<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0widespread support for unions<\/a>\u00a0offer opportunities<\/a>\u00a0for the labor movement.<\/p>\n

Beyond marches<\/h2>\n

Progressive movements have no direct influence over Republicans in Washington. However, they have more potential influence over businesses, lower courts, regulators and state and local politicians.<\/p>\n

Of these targets, business ultimately has the most power. Business will usually be able to\u00a0constrain<\/a>\u00a0the administration if its profits are threatened. Trump and Elon Musk may be able to dismantle much of the federal government and\u00a0ignore court orders<\/a>, but it\u2019s much harder for them to ignore major economic disruption.<\/p>\n

While big marches can raise public consciousness and help activists connect, by themselves they will not block Trump and Musk. For that, the movement will need more disruptive forms of pressure. Building the capacity for that disruption will require sustained organizing in workplaces and communities.\"The<\/p>\n

Kevin A. Young<\/a>, Associate Professor of History,\u00a0UMass Amherst<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

This article is republished from\u00a0The Conversation<\/a>\u00a0under a Creative Commons license. Read the\u00a0original article<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This article first appeared in\u00a0The Conversation. I offer it here with permission because now, more than ever, we need hope. Hope and belief in our power to resist and ultimately defeat a tyrant. Social movements constrained Trump in his first term \u2013 more than people\u00a0realize Kevin A. Young,\u00a0UMass AmherstDonald Trump\u2019s first term as president saw […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[17],"tags":[1012,537,88,648],"class_list":["post-3908","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-rants","tag-civil-resistance","tag-political-activism","tag-politics","tag-protests"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/treehousewriters.com\/wp53\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3908","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/treehousewriters.com\/wp53\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/treehousewriters.com\/wp53\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/treehousewriters.com\/wp53\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/treehousewriters.com\/wp53\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3908"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/treehousewriters.com\/wp53\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3908\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3911,"href":"https:\/\/treehousewriters.com\/wp53\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3908\/revisions\/3911"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/treehousewriters.com\/wp53\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3908"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/treehousewriters.com\/wp53\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3908"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/treehousewriters.com\/wp53\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3908"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}