What do you think?
Rate this book
How to Read a Protest: The Art of Organizing and Resistance
"Explores protesting as an act of faith . . . How to Read a Protest argues that the women's marches of 2017 didn't just help shape and fuel a moment—they actually created one."—Masha Gessen, The New Yorker O, the Oprah Magazine’s “14 Best Political Books to Read Before the 2018 Midterm Election”"A fascinating and detailed history of American mass demonstrations."—Publishers Weekly When millions of people took to the streets for the 2017 Women’s Marches, there was an unmistakable air of uprising, a sense that these marches were launching a powerful new movement to resist a dangerous presidency. But the work that protests do often can’t be seen in the moment. It feels empowering to march, and record numbers of Americans have joined anti-Trump demonstrations, but when and why does marching matter? What exactly do protests do, and how do they help movements win? In this original and richly illustrated account, organizer and journalist L.A. Kauffman delves into the history of America’s major demonstrations, beginning with the legendary 1963 March on Washington, to reveal the ways protests work and how their character has shifted over time. Using the signs that demonstrators carry as clues to how protests are organized, Kauffman explores the nuanced relationship between the way movements are made and the impact they have. How to Read a Protest sheds new light on the catalytic power of collective action and the decentralized, bottom-up, women-led model for organizing that has transformed what movements look like and what they can accomplish.
153 pages, Kindle Edition
Published October 30, 2018
5 people are currently reading
285 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
December 18, 2023
Wow - a must read for everyone; even as polarization continues to make this more and more the choice of focused frustration - read this before you go to any protest! There will be more movements taking to the streets in the future; and the way they influence society will have both positive and negative ramifications for society as a whole.
May 23, 2019
This book is exceptional at what it does, but disappointing in what it does not do. What Kauffman does in this book is take a quick but deep dive into the messaging, both implicit and explicit, of protests, utilizing the 1963 March on Washington and the 2017 Women's March as primary case studies. However, with the notable exception of two phenomenal paragraphs that express the power of protests, the book fails to live up to its subtitle: "The Art of Organizing and Resistance." In reality, the scope of the book is much more narrow, paying particular attention to the employment of signs at protests and what such messaging tells us about the movement itself. I would love to see Kauffmann flesh this book out into a more lengthy (this book is only a little over 100 pages) tome on the nature and efficacy of protests.
June 27, 2021
So much has happened since this book was published in 2018; I hope the author writes an updated version. Can protests ever be the same after things like the violent repression of anti-police violence protests? Can matches on Washington go back to “normal” after than Jan 6 insurrection? This book was an interesting look inside the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom and the 2017 Women’s March on Washington, with attention paid to the impact of race and gender on mass mobilization. It answers the question “what good do marches do” with thoughtful consideration. It just feels like this book comes from a different, simpler time, and requires an update.
August 2, 2019
I learned a lot about the history of protest movements from this book. I had the chance to talk with L.A. about it for a podcast I produce about democracy: https://www.democracyworkspodcast.com...
June 22, 2020
Really short, but useful information
January 24, 2019
At its core, this is an extended compare-and-contrast essay on the '63 March on Washington and the '17 Women's March. Many fascinating insights.
September 17, 2024
I was so impressed by L.A. Kauffman’s research and writing in Direct Action that I picked up a copy of this short book of hers as well.
Kauffman begins this book thus: “Protests work—just not, perhaps, the way you think.” The 100 pages of text that follow that statement seek to explain how it is that protests work. The book looks predominantly at two major demonstrations: the 1963 March on Washington and the 2017 Women’s March on Washington. In looking at each protest, she uses the signs at appeared at each as a lens to analyze how the demonstrations were put together and managed. It’s a clever and fun way to “read a protest,” and I enjoyed the approach.
In the first half of the book, she takes on the myth of the 1963 March on Washington, which has come to be held up as the example of protesting at its finest. Every large demonstration is in some way or another compared (and found wanting in the comparison) to that march. She looks at all the compromises that were made to make the march happen, and how it was blunted and defanged, corralled and made non-threatening by organizers and by the US Government. She discusses what the march was meant to accomplish, what it actually accomplished, what spurned it to life, and what happened in its wake. It’s a succinct but thorough look.
In the second half of the book, she looks at the 2017 Women’s March on Washington and compares all of its elements to its predecessor. Kauffman uses the differences to talk about all the ways that organizing and demonstrating has evolved in the intervening 55 years. Along the way she looks at the other large demonstrations in the U.S. and what they did and didn’t accomplish.
Kauffman’s thesis comes between pages 78 and 89:
“One reason big protest marches so quickly became a standard feature of American political life is that people viewed them as a powerful way to exercise political pressure, thanks in part to how they understood the 1963 March on Washington. This, it turns out, was its own myth: Mass marches simply haven't worked very well as a pressure tactic. . . .
"The fact that mass marches haven't worked very well as a pressure tactic is of course one reason why skeptics question whether protests work at all. . . .
"The mass mobilization, over time, became most important not for leveraging power, but for building movements, solidifying the commitment of participants and helping movements gain the followers and recognition they need to create change in the longer term. Mass demonstrations give participants a palpable sense of belonging to something bigger than themselves; they provide validation of a movement's existence and persistence. . . . Mass protests, as they have been used in the United States, don't so much harness power as galvanize the hope upon which organizing depends, opening up political space for further, and more targeted, action. . . . Their mild character invites broad participation, making everyone from elders to families with small children feel safe attending. Ideally, as Cagan puts it, they 'serve as an on-ramp for people who have never stepped out or stepped up in a public way.' . . . [T]he longer-term impact of a large-scale protest lies in what other actions it inspires. Movement work is almost always a marathon, and mass demonstrations help keep movements going. . . .
"There's an academic study of the Tea Party that has become famous among social movement scholars for the way it illuminates the lasting impact a single protest gathering can have. . . . The researchers looked closely at weather and attendance during a coordinated nationwide day of Tea Party rallies on Tax Day in 2009. There were about five hundred of these events nationwide . . . . Some happened under fair skies and enjoyed good-sized attendance, while rain kept people away from others. Using sophisticated data analysis, the studies' authors were able to show that in places where the whether didn't interfere, the local Tea Party movement was stronger and more influential over time than in places where the Tax Day rallies were rained out, with significant impacts on everything from how their representatives voted on pending legislation to voter turnout in subsequent elections. The study confirms something many organizers intuitively know but have been hard-pressed to prove concretely: The way that a single protest event unfolds can affect the whole shape and power of a movement going forward."
It's worth reading the book even beyond this summary because there is a lot to learn along the way.
Kauffman begins this book thus: “Protests work—just not, perhaps, the way you think.” The 100 pages of text that follow that statement seek to explain how it is that protests work. The book looks predominantly at two major demonstrations: the 1963 March on Washington and the 2017 Women’s March on Washington. In looking at each protest, she uses the signs at appeared at each as a lens to analyze how the demonstrations were put together and managed. It’s a clever and fun way to “read a protest,” and I enjoyed the approach.
In the first half of the book, she takes on the myth of the 1963 March on Washington, which has come to be held up as the example of protesting at its finest. Every large demonstration is in some way or another compared (and found wanting in the comparison) to that march. She looks at all the compromises that were made to make the march happen, and how it was blunted and defanged, corralled and made non-threatening by organizers and by the US Government. She discusses what the march was meant to accomplish, what it actually accomplished, what spurned it to life, and what happened in its wake. It’s a succinct but thorough look.
In the second half of the book, she looks at the 2017 Women’s March on Washington and compares all of its elements to its predecessor. Kauffman uses the differences to talk about all the ways that organizing and demonstrating has evolved in the intervening 55 years. Along the way she looks at the other large demonstrations in the U.S. and what they did and didn’t accomplish.
Kauffman’s thesis comes between pages 78 and 89:
“One reason big protest marches so quickly became a standard feature of American political life is that people viewed them as a powerful way to exercise political pressure, thanks in part to how they understood the 1963 March on Washington. This, it turns out, was its own myth: Mass marches simply haven't worked very well as a pressure tactic. . . .
"The fact that mass marches haven't worked very well as a pressure tactic is of course one reason why skeptics question whether protests work at all. . . .
"The mass mobilization, over time, became most important not for leveraging power, but for building movements, solidifying the commitment of participants and helping movements gain the followers and recognition they need to create change in the longer term. Mass demonstrations give participants a palpable sense of belonging to something bigger than themselves; they provide validation of a movement's existence and persistence. . . . Mass protests, as they have been used in the United States, don't so much harness power as galvanize the hope upon which organizing depends, opening up political space for further, and more targeted, action. . . . Their mild character invites broad participation, making everyone from elders to families with small children feel safe attending. Ideally, as Cagan puts it, they 'serve as an on-ramp for people who have never stepped out or stepped up in a public way.' . . . [T]he longer-term impact of a large-scale protest lies in what other actions it inspires. Movement work is almost always a marathon, and mass demonstrations help keep movements going. . . .
"There's an academic study of the Tea Party that has become famous among social movement scholars for the way it illuminates the lasting impact a single protest gathering can have. . . . The researchers looked closely at weather and attendance during a coordinated nationwide day of Tea Party rallies on Tax Day in 2009. There were about five hundred of these events nationwide . . . . Some happened under fair skies and enjoyed good-sized attendance, while rain kept people away from others. Using sophisticated data analysis, the studies' authors were able to show that in places where the whether didn't interfere, the local Tea Party movement was stronger and more influential over time than in places where the Tax Day rallies were rained out, with significant impacts on everything from how their representatives voted on pending legislation to voter turnout in subsequent elections. The study confirms something many organizers intuitively know but have been hard-pressed to prove concretely: The way that a single protest event unfolds can affect the whole shape and power of a movement going forward."
It's worth reading the book even beyond this summary because there is a lot to learn along the way.
March 28, 2022
I liked that this book focused on the optics of protests compared to the organizing and impact of protests (despite the fact that it's really hard to decisively say what impacts one tactic like a protest has on policy or other social change.) It's really interesting to consider choices like signage at protests as part of a movement's power and strategy--it makes total sense but this was a new idea for me, and I thought this book explored it well with the 1963 March on Washington, as well as with the 2017 Women's Marches.
I thought the first part of the book (on the 1963 March on Washington) did an okay job exploring some of the problems with the lack of inclusivity among the march organizers. I loved the quote "men led but women organized," from Charles Payne about how women were sidelined during the decision making around the march. Certainly entire books have been written on those dynamics, but I thought they at least received due recognition in this book.
But my biggest issue with this book was the way that the lack of inclusion within the Women's March was acknowledged. I feel like even initially there was a lot of coverage about how these marches emphasized problematic white feminism. This book did not really dig into that--it touched on how more lead organizers were added early on, and that the initial name of the march had to be changed because it was the same as an earlier march led by black women. But even a cursory glance at news articles shows that many organizations led by black, indigenous, and women of color indicates that their needs were not centered in this march and the aftermath. That's the main reason I gave this book 3 stars--it felt like a glaring gap.
One other interesting point that I really appreciated was "There is only one march in American history that can be unambiguously described as having successfully worked as an immediate pressure tactic, and it's the one that didn't happen: the 1941 march planned by A. Philip Randolph, which represented such a powerful threat to the wartime administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt that is pushed him to issue his landmark order barring racial discrimination in defense industries." It's always tricky to attribute impact to any one tactic, and this book explores that a bit.
Overall I thought this offered a new lens to explore protests--a few new nuggets in here, even for social movement scholars. Worth a read despite the gaps, it's a short and enjoyable read.
I thought the first part of the book (on the 1963 March on Washington) did an okay job exploring some of the problems with the lack of inclusivity among the march organizers. I loved the quote "men led but women organized," from Charles Payne about how women were sidelined during the decision making around the march. Certainly entire books have been written on those dynamics, but I thought they at least received due recognition in this book.
But my biggest issue with this book was the way that the lack of inclusion within the Women's March was acknowledged. I feel like even initially there was a lot of coverage about how these marches emphasized problematic white feminism. This book did not really dig into that--it touched on how more lead organizers were added early on, and that the initial name of the march had to be changed because it was the same as an earlier march led by black women. But even a cursory glance at news articles shows that many organizations led by black, indigenous, and women of color indicates that their needs were not centered in this march and the aftermath. That's the main reason I gave this book 3 stars--it felt like a glaring gap.
One other interesting point that I really appreciated was "There is only one march in American history that can be unambiguously described as having successfully worked as an immediate pressure tactic, and it's the one that didn't happen: the 1941 march planned by A. Philip Randolph, which represented such a powerful threat to the wartime administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt that is pushed him to issue his landmark order barring racial discrimination in defense industries." It's always tricky to attribute impact to any one tactic, and this book explores that a bit.
Overall I thought this offered a new lens to explore protests--a few new nuggets in here, even for social movement scholars. Worth a read despite the gaps, it's a short and enjoyable read.
April 12, 2021
An interesting read, to be sure, with some interesting information about the 1963 March on Washington (MOW). Unfortunately, the book fails to truly deliver on its premise, and it offers little understanding or analysis of "protest." To begin, the book is not about protest in the broader sense (boycotts, sit-ins, direct actions, civil disobedience) but instead focuses exclusively on mass demonstrations, and one in. particular, the '63 MOW. This greatly limits the scope of the book, and it proved quite disappointing to me, as I was reading the book for background on a writing project. There's also very little instruction in precisely how to "read" or analyze a mass demonstration. Curiously, much of the "book" (with full page black and white photos in abundance, the actual number of pages with text is maybe 60 pages...) focuses on protest signs and whether they are professionally printed, hand-made, or absent altogether. I still am unclear as to why this matters so much other than it clues one in on whether the rally is more grassroots or organized by large NGOs.
All of this being said, the book IS interesting and clearly written. And despite being disappointed that it didn't fully deliver, I did find myself underlining some key passages. The last few pages do a good job of inspiring the reader and reminding him/her/them that one must view rallies/demonstrations as events that create a sense of belonging, hopefully to eliminate feelings of isolation during tough times (e.g., early LGBT marches created community at a time when coming out was still new). This sense of community will then (hopefully) inspire additional action. I also found the idea that some riots have proven significant purveyors of change (e.g. Stonewall) quite insightful.
Not bad, just now what I was hoping for....
All of this being said, the book IS interesting and clearly written. And despite being disappointed that it didn't fully deliver, I did find myself underlining some key passages. The last few pages do a good job of inspiring the reader and reminding him/her/them that one must view rallies/demonstrations as events that create a sense of belonging, hopefully to eliminate feelings of isolation during tough times (e.g., early LGBT marches created community at a time when coming out was still new). This sense of community will then (hopefully) inspire additional action. I also found the idea that some riots have proven significant purveyors of change (e.g. Stonewall) quite insightful.
Not bad, just now what I was hoping for....
January 19, 2023
"A crucial challenge for organizers in the wake of any big mobilization is how to absorb the new political energy and the new movement participants into some ongoing effort. Ideally, people should go home from a major demonstration not only with a feeling that they have played a role in something larger than themselves, but with a commitment to continued action and a clear sense of how they might contribute."
Have you ever felt useless? But not in a personal way, but in the grand scheme of things.
Well I read this book to understand why and how protests are started and what they hope to achieve. It was certainly an easy read. This book mainly focuses on the 1963 March on Washington and gives detailed facts and reviews of what was right and what could have been better. Unfortunately, I had bigger hopes for this book because of it's screaming title, and I feel like it failed to deliver on its premise and gives the reader a very shallow analysis of a protest. The scope of this book is greatly limited to the US and especially the 1963 MOW. There is a very little information on how to actually "read" a protest or analyze a mass demonstration. Most of this book is focused on protest sings and if they were professionally made, printed or absent. (which, like... does it even matter?)
This book was NOT what I hoped for, but at the same time, I am glad I read it. Although for me it was disappointing, don't let my silly review discourage you from picking this book up. But one of the most important things I got from this book was the fact that protests should and must have a "leader" or a directive force/person capable of leading the protest into a continued action or contribution.
I still feel like going on a one-day protest or letting your anger out for one single day at a mass rally is wrong and not even efficient.
Have you ever felt useless? But not in a personal way, but in the grand scheme of things.
Well I read this book to understand why and how protests are started and what they hope to achieve. It was certainly an easy read. This book mainly focuses on the 1963 March on Washington and gives detailed facts and reviews of what was right and what could have been better. Unfortunately, I had bigger hopes for this book because of it's screaming title, and I feel like it failed to deliver on its premise and gives the reader a very shallow analysis of a protest. The scope of this book is greatly limited to the US and especially the 1963 MOW. There is a very little information on how to actually "read" a protest or analyze a mass demonstration. Most of this book is focused on protest sings and if they were professionally made, printed or absent. (which, like... does it even matter?)
This book was NOT what I hoped for, but at the same time, I am glad I read it. Although for me it was disappointing, don't let my silly review discourage you from picking this book up. But one of the most important things I got from this book was the fact that protests should and must have a "leader" or a directive force/person capable of leading the protest into a continued action or contribution.
I still feel like going on a one-day protest or letting your anger out for one single day at a mass rally is wrong and not even efficient.
December 26, 2021
[3 stars] A brief analysis of large-scale protest as a form of nonviolent direct action. Although the title and back cover reviews for this book were intriguing, the implementation was uneven and unfocused. After reading, I'm not exactly sure what the author was trying to accomplish. She started the book by saying that the importance of large-scale protests gets inflated in historical consideration and wonders if protests are actually as effective as the numbers they're measured by then uses the less than 150 pages of content to focus primarily on two large-scale protests (The March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom and The Women's March) while peppering charts of other protests (listed by size of attendees) along the way. And although there was extensive critique (often warranted) of the sexism and centralization of The March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, the author didn't give the same level of critique to The Women's March, which she roundly praised for its representational diversity and supposedly decentralized model. I wouldn't recommend this book to others, as there are numerous others (including some I've shelved here under "Good for Organizers" or "History/Politics") on NVDA, protest, and contemporary movement building.
Goodreads Challenge: 65/60
Goodreads Challenge: 65/60
July 29, 2022
There were some really good insights into the 1963 March on Washington and the 2017 Women’s marches after Trump.
What was missing was greater comparison between these and smaller protests as well as right-wing Tea Party protests. These were touched upon but greater examination would help highlight protest as one-off action against movement building.
A lot more has happened since the book was published so I hope there is an update in the works focused on the connection (and potential lack of) protest, movements and elections.
Enjoy!
What was missing was greater comparison between these and smaller protests as well as right-wing Tea Party protests. These were touched upon but greater examination would help highlight protest as one-off action against movement building.
A lot more has happened since the book was published so I hope there is an update in the works focused on the connection (and potential lack of) protest, movements and elections.
Enjoy!
July 23, 2022
Short but important work, by comparing the March on Washington with the recent Women’s March, Kauffman analyses what role protest marches play in social change, both in short and long term timelines.
January 5, 2025
Title is misleading, it's quite literally just a history book of American protests instead of an actual reading guide, with almost half of it filled with the civil rights movement
Read
December 14, 2018303.48409 K211 2018
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews