The first is about Black Lives Matter, which has reportedly "entered a new phase — one more focused on policy than protest." With Trump now in office, activists are taking a different strategy moving from the streets to the halls of government. Quoting Stephen Zunes, the Post article elaborates on the importance of transitioning from formal to informal politics:
Black Lives Matter’s transition from street protests to policy is not unusual, said Stephen Zunes, a University of San Francisco professor who studies social movements. It’s through such work that a movement’s priorities — like mandatory use of officer body cameras — can become national standards, he said.
“That’s actually the way effective social movements often work or behave,” Zunes said, pointing to the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations in the wake of the financial crisis as a counterexample. “What the Occupy people did not learn, or by and large do, is go do the lobbying, the organizing to make change happen. They wound up fetishizing the ‘occupy’ part, and then, by and large, it fizzled.”
The second article focuses on Dana Fisher's (from U.Maryland) work on protests movements. Some of her findings on recent protests movement in DC: the women's march, march for science (see Michael Heaney's observations here), climate change include the following:
- They are overwhelmingly people who voted for Clinton in the last election
- Marchers are well educated with over 75% holding a bachelor's degree
- Many first time demonstrators were present, and many cited Facebook as a source for finding out about the protest
- The motive for coming out to protest are variegated (i.e. it's usually not a single issue area like labor, environment, peace etc...)
- Trump's victory is a motivator for showing up, even though protest organizers state protests are not anti-Trump events
