Parades, Protests and Patriotism

PART I

It was in 1994 that I attended my first, and last, military parade. I did so reluctantly because I was uncomfortable with all military display of power. But I was assigned to accompany the press corps traveling with President Bill Clinton on his Berlin visit on June 12, 1994. After a speech at the Brandenburg Gate, his entourage traveled to the McNair Barracks where Clinton was to attended a final ceremony to bid the Berlin Brigade farewell. 4,000 troops paraded and the Color Guard furled the Brigade colors in front of the President and hundreds of military family members. It was indeed a family affair that I was witnessing.

Crowds in the rafters were cheering on the Sergeant who was yelled at by his superior officer because he had missed his cue to pick up the President for a jeep ride around the military field. His ride with the President turned into a triumphant victory lap. We watched as the “Beast”, the armored Presidential limousine, was parked right in front of our rafter. The chauffeur overlooked a metal railing on his rear right side, and the huge black vehicle rose in the air upon hitting it. Needless to say, the “Beast” didn’t show a dent, but the maneuver drew cheers from the crowd.

That afternoon at the McNair Barracks was a teaching moment for me. Unlike the complicated attitude Germans have towards their own military, a topic which might deserve another blog (the Federal Republic of Germany was observing its very first Veterans’ Day this June) , Americans overall embrace their service members and veterans. This military parade in 1994 was one big party, cheerful and relaxed.

On June 14, Washington D.C. saw its first military parade since the end of the Gulf War in 1991. The parade was to celebrate the 250^th birthday of the U.S. military with 6,000 soldiers marching and heavy military equipment on display. The military’s celebration coincided with Flag Day and with President Trump’s 79^th birthday. It also coincided with protest marches in over 2,000 communities throughout the country (and abroad), largely under the “No Kings” banner.

Trump’s parade was projected by the administration to draw at least 200,000 spectators, but turnout was visibly lower on the Mall in Washington D.C. The overwhelmingly peaceful “No Kings” marches drew about 5.5 Million people, according to estimates by the organizers. While the first number is grossly exaggerated, the second seems underreported with even international media talking only of tens of thousands of marchers and focusing on a few violent protesters.

Historian Heather Cox-Richardson observed in her newsletter:
“The contrast between the protests and the military parade suggested an important shift in political culture. The momentum and the joy, as well as the American flags, were on the side of those protesting Trump’s growing authoritarianism. Trump looked weak and discouraged, and the crowds were clearly on the side of the protesters.”

Coverage of both events has been overshadowed by the brutal killings of a Democrat state legislator and her husband in Minnesota and the attempted murder of a second Democrat legislator and his spouse. While former President Biden and former Vice-President Harris attended the funeral, the current President considered it a waste of time to even call Governor Walz to express his condolences. News outlets have quickly moved on to cover Trump’s first military adventure: the bombing of nuclear sites in Iran. Any kind of criticism about the bombings the White House is spinning as a perceived critique of the military and accuses all critics to be unpatriotic. Events in June have truly been head-spinning.

We might have a momentum here, though. A friend from Texas just sent me a joyful assessment of the June 14 marches in her community in spite of ongoing intimidations. They are now preparing for July 4 when Americans traditionally celebrate Independence Day:

We are putting together a float for the 4th of July parade that says Stand Up for our community, and then we will all have posters and signs saying what we stand for….democracy, truth, peace, decency, love of our neighbors, protecting our environment and river, public education….all things that are hard to argue against. There is a large segment of Trumpers here, so we will see how they respond. We will be behind a marching band (of people aligned with us) and trailed by adorable show donkeys! Should be fun, and fulfilling.

Courage is contagious. The “No Kings” protesters might now be joined by the “No War” and even the “No to the Big Beautiful Bill” marchers to reclaim “We, the people. . . “.

PART II

I have asked Lecia Brooks, former Chief of Staff at the Southern Poverty Law Center in Alabama, and historian David Goldfield, Robert Lee Bailey Professor of History at the University of North Carolina, to comment on the events, specifically the protests we see picking up speed this summer.

MK: President Eisenhower responded to a question on showing off military might: “We are the pre-eminent power on Earth. For us to try and imitate what the Soviets are doing in Red Square would make us look weak.” While the White House is talking up the success of June 14^th military parade, YouTube videos capture sparse crowds and soldiers not in dress uniform but every-day fatigue apparently taking a walk down the mall rather than marching forcefully. The parade was neither a joyous nor an intimidating affair. What was it to you?

LB: Authoritarian regimes demand loyalty and conformity from their citizens. I am proudly part of the resistance. As soon as the self-aggrandizing charade was announced, I knew I would have no part in it. I methodically avoided news of its planning and instead challenged the administration’s misuse of public and private funds (estimated costs between $25 million and $45 million, with companies such as Amazon, Coinbase, and Palantir contributing as sponsors) by contacting my elected officials and posting on BlueSky to oppose it.
In my mind, it was always meant to be another grab for power, attention, and fealty from the 47^th president. Can’t say that I’m not pleased that any semblance of joy was snatched away from him and his hard-right supporters.

DG: My first thought was Teddy Roosevelt’s comment of “Walk Softly but Carry a Big Stick”. Your Eisenhower quote is very appropriate. When, in 1957, the Soviets launched Sputnik, a number of Congressmen and Senators wanted to ratchet up our rocket program and also develop defenses in outer space to counter any Soviet aggression in that environment. Senate Majority Leader, Lyndon B. Johnson was among those leaders demanding a strong US response. Eisenhower demurred, stating that he was less concerned with weaponizing the moon than in ensuring international peace and prosperity for the US. He obviously had significant military credentials, so the Congress deferred to him. Ultimately, the parade was more about Trump’s ego than American military might.

MK: The current administration accuses Democrats and American citizens critical of Trump of hating their country. Protesters around the country were waving flags and displayed other national symbols like the Statue of Liberty. Protest organizers, an extensive group of progressive civil organizations, intentionally shifted attention away from the capital. They stressed that they did not want to protest the military’s birthday anniversary, but President Trump taking advantage of it. Are the “No Kings” protests a way to reclaim patriotism and to broaden their reach?

LB: First, let’s be clear, protest is patriotic. Protests have played a critical role in advancing social change in the U.S. A healthy democracy requires citizen participation and sometimes that involves a critique of government. History shows us that nothing changes, without demand. I was thrilled to participate in a local “No Kings” protest here in deep red rural Alabama. This group was a lot more comfortable than I was with the outward displays of patriotism. Organizers distributed American flags, and lyrics to patriotic songs, and the protestors were all too happy to show how proud they are to be American. These displays will broaden the appeal for some, but I fear it will cause others to turn away.

DG: I heard the same arguments from southern segregationists in the 1960s: that Martin Luther King, Jr. and the civil rights movement generally were fueling anti-American sentiment abroad, particularly in the midst of the Cold War with the Soviet Union. Of course, civil rights advocates believed exactly the opposite – that their support for constitutional government, for fairness and equality, represented the best version of the Constitution and American history. So it was with the “No Kings” protest.

MK: Most people in Europe do not understand that Trump still has approval ratings domestically of 38% (poll from Quinnipiac University conducted June 5 to 9). They do not have much faith in either Congress nor people in the streets pushing back on unpopular policy. How do you evaluate these nation-wide protests? Are intimidation, anti-immigration policy, aggressive deportations and the “Big Beautiful Bill” that includes cuts to social services a tipping point for the Trump administration’s approval domestically?

LB: It feels like the show of resistance to the ICE raids in Los Angeles has sparked something in people. The videos taken by bystanders offer a clear witness to the abuse of power, the flouting of the Constitution and the targeting of marginalized community members. And now the administration has openly stated its intent to wreak havoc in blue states. The tipping point for Trump is overplaying his hand.

DG: Let’s face it: Both Congress and the Biden administration did a poor job on immigration policy and a mediocre performance on economic policy. But President Trump’s crusades have weakened rather than strengthened the economy and his cuts to federal agencies and federal programs will hurt the middle class and, particularly, the working-class population the most. The latter in particular, have generally been strong supporters of Trump’s policies. Most important, as former presidential advisor James Carville noted about what Americans consider the most important issue: “It’s the economy, stupid.” And, while current indications do not necessarily portend a recession, the budget cuts, particularly for social programs, and the ballooning federal deficit generate justifiable concern. My students, some of whom have just graduated from my university, are finding it more difficult than previous classes to snag preferred jobs or prestigious graduate program positions. That can have a ripple effect.

MK: The Women’s March on January 22, 2017, one day after Donald Trump’s first inauguration, and the protests after the killing of George Floyd 2018 drew record crowds, but both have not been able to keep up the pressure on the government and law enforcement. The “No Kings” marches reached similar numbers, if not more. What are the factors that make a civic and civil protest movement successful? Are we seeing the beginnings of a new civil rights movement?

LB: Civic protest is not the only way to gauge resistance. Turning out record numbers for any given protest requires the development and implementation of strategies that not only spread their messages but ensure that these messages reach different groups of people. Real movement work requires the participation of diverse groups of people to be sustainable. From those directly impacted by the injustice you’re pushing back against to moveable elected and civic leaders with access to the levers of power. This is long-haul work, not simply responding to the latest atrocity.
We need the greatest legal minds challenging and not acquiescing to outrageous and largely unconstitutional executive orders. We need small communities coming together with large cities to challenge policies that will hurt them both. We need young people, older people, engaged and disengaged. Queer, trans, and straight, standing shoulder to shoulder against medical policies (and cuts) that could literally kill them.
We need you, Martina, and other writers who remind us that this is not normal, and that there is a better way.

DG: Major events these days have a relatively short shelf life. There are so many outlets for opinions, screeds, and protests that sustaining a movement becomes very difficult. The civil rights movement essentially occurred over three television channels in the late 1950s and 1960s. Prior to that, Americans received their news from newspapers, most of them local newspapers. Television circulation was much broader. Also, and many today forget this, the civil rights movement was an interracial movement. White protesters played key roles in the movement alongside Blacks. This was not only a movement to ensure equality for Black Americans, but also to underscore that white Americans had a major stake in racial equality as well. Forgive me for plugging one of my books – Black, White, and Southern, published by Louisiana State University Press more than thirty years ago – but that was a key interpretive point in my perspective on the civil rights movement, a point many chroniclers have not emphasized. In President Lyndon B. Johnson’s notable March 15, 1965 speech to a joint session of Congress, he emphasized the need for a Voting Rights Act, not only to bring Black Americans into the political process, but also to ensure that the political process remained free and open to everyone.
What we’re seeing today in the U.S., are successful attempts of more than half of the states (almost all Republican) to restrict or limit the franchise, whether through the requirement of producing several documents of citizenship and residence, reducing polling hours and voting days, and/or limiting the number of polling stations. Alas, the periodic protest movements highlight the difficulty of forming and sustaining political protests. However, there may come a tipping point – and I believe we are heading in that direction – that will generate a larger and more sustainable opposition to current conditions.

MK: According to a recent Pew poll (June 11, 2025), overall ratings of the United States have declined in 15 nations since last spring, including drops of 20 percentage points or more in Mexico, Sweden, Poland and Canada. 81 percent of Germans have no confidence in Donald Trump. Spain (80%), France (78%) and Canada (77%) are closely following. Disapproval numbers look very different from the perspective of Hungary (45%), Israel (29%), India (23%) and Nigeria (19%). We saw similar numbers for George W. Bush that improved dramatically with Barack Obama’s presidency.
What are the implications of these numbers internationally? Will trust in the U.S., economically, militarily and politically, be eroded in the long run?

LB: As global geopolitics move toward a more multipolar world characterized by increased competition, shifting alliances, and on-going conflicts, it is not surprising to witness the withdrawal of support for the U.S. Countries with which we’ve had strong alliances in the past, have every right to withhold their support in response to the Trump administration. Honestly, I think it helps to remind those in the U.S. of what is acceptable and unacceptable from a so-called democratic nation.

DG: I think trust in the US has already eroded across the world. The on-again, off-again war over tariffs, the snubs of European democracies – and here the meeting between Vice President Vance and the AfD offers just one example of the Trump administration’s cozying up to less democratic parties and regimes – has placed the US as an enabler of undemocratic regimes rather than as a shining example of democratic principles. Growing up, we were taught in school to look upon our country as a city on a hill, pointing the way for the rest of the world to follow our best instincts, support our fellow men and women, and provide for the next generation. At least one implication of that perspective was that the US had to be actively engaged in the world. Of course, we have periodically violated this vision. But, it was always an ideal to live up to rather than to tear down as we seem to be doing now. Concerning the disapproval numbers in Israel and India; in the former country, those numbers were much lower in previous years. One thing the media has missed is the growing peace movement in Israel and the reaction against the present government there. As for India, many there believe there is an existential danger from Pakistan (a nuclear power), hence the polling numbers. However, these opinions can change significantly depending on changes in US administrations and policy. While they are alarming, they are not permanent, I believe.

MK: Many of us are hoping that the United States will overcome this period of political chaos because the world needs a strong, unified, democratic, internationally oriented United States of America. David, as a historian, you can provide us with the long arch of history. Lecia, you have been an activist all your life. Is there a silver lining?

LB: Trump’s undoing of established democratic practice offers us a unique opportunity to rebuild and reshape the U.S. into a more inclusive democracy.

DG: Let me give you a few examples of prior division in American politics and society (I could go even further back and in much more detail). In the 1920s in particular, the U.S. withdrew into a more isolated international position as a result of our entry into World War I. The loss of civil liberties, the oppression of dissent, and the denigration of all things German, hardly represented our best motives as articulated in our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. So, it was not surprising, when trouble erupted again in Europe in the 1930s, that the America First committee was founded to oppose any engagement with Europe. The US entry into World War II in December 1941 – forced by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor – brought the nation together, which gives me some hope that we can regain that spirit in the near future, only without having to go to war to gain that.
In the 1960s, the civil rights movement divided the nation, but we had key leadership, especially with President Lyndon B. Johnson, who cast the movement as a benefit for all Americans, not just Black Americans. There is no doubt, though, that the Cold War with the Soviet Union played a significant role in promoting civil rights. In other words, racial equality was not only the right thing to pursue, but, also, a diplomatically advantageous movement internationally. In fact, these two elements – our domestic tradition of equality before the law, and our international reputation – have grounded a good deal of our public policy over the past century. The present difficulty is that the international perspective of our domestic policy has diminished considerably and, with that, our domestic policies have suffered accordingly. However, as an inveterate optimist, especially since the US has rebounded from such ill-advised withdrawals from global issues in the past – not without both political and social consequences – that grass-roots efforts combined with conscience-driven leadership can right the ship of America again.

Thank you, Lecia and David, for sharing your insights!

_______________________________________

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McNair_Barracks

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationaler_Veteranentag