It was toward the end of her seventh decade when Connie Burkhart attended her first protest march. The journey on an icy day from her small, rural community of Hope, Idaho (population 86), to Sandpoint, the city where the Women’s March was being held, was not easy.
As she gritted her driveway, she told the friend accompanying her that the Republicans should be scared by the effort they were prepared to make.
Idaho is a Republican state — “very red,” Burkhart said — but the numbers attending the Sandpoint rally, held at a theater, spilled over on to the street.
Illustration: Mountain People
The atmosphere was emotional, she said, because for the first time since Donald Trump won the US presidential election in November last year, people realized they were not alone.
This is the most dramatic era Burkhart, 68, has lived through. She is a Democrat, but has voted Republican in the past, “because I vote for the person who I think is best.”
“My first thought when the president was elected — I can’t say his name — was that, for the first time in my life, I have no respect for the president of the United States,” she said.
As a result, she has been organizing. She attended a meeting of the Sandpoint Indivisible group and knows of two other such groups in the area.
Indivisible is a guide to resisting Trump’s agenda, put together by about 30 congressional staffers. The guide went viral when it was published online in December last year.
By the time I spoke to Burkhart in the middle of last month, the guide has been downloaded more than 1 million times and there are thousands of local groups registered on the Indivisible Web site, determined to “resist Trump’s agenda, focus on local, defensive congressional advocacy and embrace progressive values.”
Taking a leaf from the conservative Tea Party movement, to which many trace the start of Trump’s rise, the guide advises people to react to the Washington agenda — bombarding their elected congressional members with their objections, whether in person, by letter or telephone (making those same politicians worry, in turn, about their chances of re-election).
Burkhart has been busy. A retired school administrator, she objected strongly by letter, for instance, to the nomination of Betsy DeVos as US secretary of education (DeVos is a long-term advocate of publicly funding private schools).
When we spoke, she was about to attend an organizing meeting with a group she has formed with 15 other women, and said she recently attended a Democratic function, where a state congressman was speaking.
“He said the first time he came to the pizza and politics event in Sandpoint, in 2013, five people showed up, and one left,” she said. “At this event, 160 people showed up. So something’s happening.”
She paused.
“Something’s happening,” she said.
Before the Women’s Marches took place, the day after Trump’s inauguration, there were suggestions they would be pointless and ineffective — nothing more than a nice day out.
On Jan. 21, women and men marched on all seven continents (in Antarctica, a placard proclaimed “Penguins march for peace”). With almost 700 marches across the world and an estimated 4.5 million protesters in all, this was among the biggest human rights demonstrations in history.
In Palmer, Alaska — another red state — Burkhart’s cousin, retired nurse Kay Bush, 65, went on her second-ever protest (the first was in support of the Roe versus Wade abortion rights ruling in the early 1970s). In the snow, she marched alongside people dressed as suffragettes and orange-faced parodies of Trump.
There was a surprisingly high turnout in general, she said, but she was particularly struck by the number from the city of Wasilla, where former Alaska governor, US vice presidential candidate and Tea Party favorite Sarah Palin was once mayor.
Women at many of the marches — including the one I attended in London, alongside an estimated 100,000 others — found themselves in an unusual state of enthusiastic stasis, a sea of people, many in pink “pussy” hats, stretching out around us.
National Center for Lesbian Rights executive director Kate Kendell, who attended the main march in Washington, said it was one of the most exhilarating days of her life.
“It was also a day of standing for an hour-and-a-half in total human gridlock,” she said.
Kendell said she heard the same story of overwhelming crowds from a friend in Boise, Idaho; her sister in Park City, Utah; and her family who marched in San Francisco, California.
“Everyone reported three main things. The marches were far larger than anything they imagined. There was a level of camaraderie and hail-fellow-well-met kind of attitude — we were all family together, And there was just ferocity that we will not allow hate and degradation to triumph,” she said.
Carmen Perez, one of the four co-chairs of the Washington march alongside Tamika D Mallory, Linda Sarsour and Bob Bland, said the protests were grounded in the non-violent ideology of the civil-rights movement. Extraordinarily, there was not a single incident of violence on any of the marches, worldwide.
Perhaps the reason the central event in Washington attracted such global support is that Trump seems the face of a broader backlash against women’s rights.
It has been two years since the Women’s Equality Party (WEP) formed in the UK and its leader, Sophie Walker, told me that in the past six months she had seen a significant shift backwards. Whereas, at first, people would challenge her to make the case for why a party for women’s equality was necessary, she now finds herself being challenged to make the case for why women’s equality itself is necessary.
“There is this extreme language of division and hate and racism and sexism and misogyny that is being normalized by Trump and by elements of right-wing populism in our own country,” she said.
This has happened since the Brexit referendum, “but increasingly so since Trump, because that has emboldened those similar elements in this country,” she added.
The backlash has prompted a backlash of its own. The WEP saw a jump in membership after the Brexit result, a jump after Trump’s win and the four days following the women’s march brought a spike of about 1,000 new members.
“I’ve had so many conversations with people who say: ‘Oh, up until now I would sit and say, Oh God, someone should really do something about this And now I’ve realized it’s me. I have to do something about this,’” Walker said.
The march has inspired a wave of action around the world.
Vivienne Mayer, a spokeswoman for the Women’s March Global, tells me of the network of local grassroots teams that have formed to enforce the child marriage ban in Malawi, combat female genital mutilation in Ghana and fight for women to walk the streets safely in India.
In Frankfurt, Germany, the Women’s March organizers have developed eight pillars of resistance, including rapid-response actions.
In London, on Valentine’s Day, the Women’s March responded to a call for people to send letters to local lawmakers and councils, asking them to support the so-called Dubs amendment, which had been expected to enable about 3,000 unaccompanied refugee children to settle in the UK until the government suddenly announced it would be stopping at just 350 children.
Ten actions are being issued by the central Women’s March over the course of 100 days, the second of which was a call for groups to meet up in “huddles” and organize. By the middle of last month, more than 5,000 huddles had been set up around the world, from Mexico to Madagascar, Morocco to Japan. At the one I attended in London, organized by feminist group Fourth Wave, there was discussion of upcoming protests before they set to work making placards.
Jade Moulds and Sophie Yates, both 28, and members of Fourth Wave since it was set up two years ago, tell me about the work they have been doing in supporting feminists fighting for reproductive rights in Poland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. They are keen to work with Russian activists around the recent decriminalization of some forms of domestic violence in the country and are determined Trump’s win will not deprive UK issues of oxygen.
“People were really active around austerity and it hasn’t finished, and nothing’s changed,” Moulds said. “If anything, the cuts are getting harsher and people are distracted.”
Yates said they would also fight for the right of Europeans to remain in the UK post-Brexit.
“That isn’t directly a feminist issue,” she said.
“Well, 50 percent of the people who will be affected will be women, so that’s why we want to be a voice,” Moulds said.
That January day seems to have been the start of a new era of street resistance.
Perez said many who attended the women’s marches had never protested before, but after Trump signed the travel ban into effect, they came to airports across the US, “to show their solidarity and support for the refugees coming to this country, and didn’t leave until the refugees were actually released.”
In London, the demonstration against the travel ban outside Downing Street was estimated at 30,000 people and had a similar atmosphere to the Women’s March — dominated by homemade signs and a slight lack of confidence when it came to chanting; a crowd apparently new to protest, but committed and enthusiastic.
For International Women’s Day on Wednesday, the Women’s March and the International Women’s Strike urged women to go on strike in a major action against economic inequality, male violence and attacks on reproductive rights.
On that same day, National Domestic Workers Alliance in the US director Ai-jen Poo said there was going to be a march on the US Department of Labor then, in the week of April 10 — spring break for many US schools — families will be taking action together, with plans for a caravan of children to travel from Florida to Washington to deliver letters to the administration.
Walker is organizing a Women’s Day Off for next year to coincide with the centenary of women first being given the vote in the UK. There are also tax marches planned across the US on April 15 and three upcoming marches in Washington: the March for Science on April 22; the People’s Climate March on April 29; and an Immigrants March on May 6.
Hebh Jamal, 17, has been involved in organizing two student walkouts in New York City so far, one just after Trump’s election and one last month.
The second involved about 700 children walking out of 20 schools at midday and marching to the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement building, she said.
DeVos was confirmed as US secretary of education as they marched, and so their message was about the importance of education, and “also about the Muslim ban, the treatment of African Americans in this country and of LGBTQ [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer] people,” she said.
I ask if she was fearful about the next four years with Trump in office.
“Of course,” she said. “My younger brother has autism and I have a lot of friends who are immigrants... For me, personally, going to college soon and just being a Muslim in general in this era it goes two ways. I’m not necessarily as scared for myself as I am for people around me — I mean I am a citizen, I am American.”
However, she said that as a visible Muslim, there is a genuine fear that she could be targeted with violence.
She is creating a student coalition, a platform where high-school students across New York City can convene and be a force for political influence.
“The idea, and the hopeful goal, is that there can’t be any policy passed without the consent of younger people and hopefully it could perpetuate coalitions across the country,” she said.
This is inspired by the civil rights movement, with the sit-ins staged at segregated restaurants, commitment to non-violence and determination to stand firm until laws changed.
“I look to those examples to see that we have leverage — there’s a little risk, but potentially great gains,” she said.
Signs of resistance are arising everywhere. Kate Kendell is a lawyer and was recently involved in the training of 1,200 lawyers in San Francisco, including Muslim advocates as well as immigrant rights, reproductive justice and queer organizations giving information about what worries them most (for her, it is the rollback of trans rights and the rights of LGBTQ asylum seekers).
“At the end of the day, the lawyers could sign up with the different organizations they wanted to provide pro bono assistance to. It was jam packed and, from my perspective, a wild success,” she said.
There are more training sessions planned in other cities.
The Trump administration has threatened to defund reproductive healthcare provider Planned Parenthood, and Dayle Steinberg, chief executive officer of the organization’s southeastern Pennsylvania chapter, said the local support has been extraordinary.
The week before Trump’s election, the organization had 45 visits to its Web page; the week after, 800.
“In the week before the election, six people completed volunteer applications; the week after, 135. Right now, more than 700 volunteer applications have been completed ... and the donations, both locally and nationally, have been pretty much unprecedented,” she said.
US Vice President Mike Pence has long opposed Planned Parenthood and, last year, a wave of donations started streaming in in his name — by the end of January, there had been 83,450. For each, Pence will have received a thank-you note.
Finally, there has been a rush of women pledging to run for office. Between election day in November last year and the middle of last month, Emily’s List, which helps pro-choice Democratic women get into office, heard from more than 6,500 women — nearly seven times the number in contact in the 22 months before Trump’s victory.
VoteRunLead, which encourages women to run for office, recently had 5,500 women sign up for its online course.
On the day after the Women’s March, 500 women gathered at the Grand Hyatt hotel in Washington for a training session organized by Emily’s List, in conjunction with six other groups, including Higher Heights, which works to support black women’s leadership at all levels. The session was fully booked a week in advance, with 500 more women on the waiting list.
Dana Vickers Shelley, 59, a black woman from Baltimore County, Maryland, was in attendance. A communications specialist, Shelley campaigned for US Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton, and has worked in and around politics for years. She always laughed off the idea of running herself, but the weekend after Trump’s victory, she resolved to do so.
“The one positive thing, for me, about Hillary losing is that all of these women now believe they can make a difference,” Shelley said.
“Maybe if she had won, people would have said: ‘Yes, if she can do it, I can do it too,’ but let’s put it this way, there wouldn’t have been 500 women in a room on Jan. 22 learning about how they could run for office,” Shelley added.
In other words, there is an urgency now, she said.
She recently went to a rally in her state capital, Annapolis; Maryland has a Republican governor and she said he has made no comment, “on anything that 45 has done.”
(Trump is the 45th president — like Burkhart, Shelley prefers not to refer to him by name.)
“So we were there saying: ‘No ban, no wall, make the call,’ and the point is that there were all these people who would have been at the mall, or watching TV, or reading books on a Saturday, if Hillary had won,” she said.
Now, at rallies, at town halls, in huddles all over the US and beyond, they are organizing, protesting and continuing the great march forward.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with