A lesson in social movements, protests and polarization

Social movements – and the protests they give rise to – have happened on American soil since before the country’s establishment as an independent nation. On Dec. 16, 1773, American colonists demonstrated their dissatisfaction with British tax policies by dressing in disguise and dumping 342 chests – around 92,000 pounds – of valuable tea into Boston Harbor. Originally known as “the Destruction of the Tea,” the event was later nicknamed “the Boston Tea Party.”

In this century, we’ve seen part of that moniker repurposed by the tea party movement, a group interested in lower taxes and decreased government spending who staged protests in over 750 U.S. cities on April 15, 2009 – Tax Day.

Social injustices, environmental issues and political concerns are just a few of myriad reasons people have organized protests over the course of history. David S. Meyer, UC Irvine professor of sociology, political science, and urban planning and public policy, is one of the nation’s top scholars on social movements. In this episode of The UC Irvine Podcast, Meyer leans on years of study to put today’s realities into historical perspective, analyze the current state of polarization and share what he’s learned about how action can spark change.

“Downpour,” the music for this episode, was provided by Patiño via the audio library in YouTube Studio.

To get the latest episodes of The UC Irvine Podcast delivered automatically, subscribe at Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

TRANSCRIPT

The UC Irvine Podcast/Cara Capuano:

From the University of California Irvine, I’m Cara Capuano. Thank you for listening to The UC Irvine podcast.

Our guest today is David S. Meyer, UC Irvine professor of sociology, who’s also affiliated with the Departments of Political Science, and Urban Planning and Public Policy. UC Irvine’s School of Social Sciences Dean Bill Maurer recently described Professor Meyer as a “world-renowned scholar of social movements and their role in political change.”

Thank you for taking the time to chat with us today, Professor Meyer.

David Meyer:

Glad to be with you, Cara.

Capuano:

Let’s start with why you study what you study: social movements, democracy and public policy. What led you down that path?

Meyer:

Oh, it starts at 13 or 14 when I read the Thoreau’s essay on civil disobedience, which knocked me out. The argument in the essay was that if there’s injustice in the world, you have to do whatever you can to remedy it, to change the world. And it just changed the way I thought about everything.

And so, when I went to college, I resolved to study that – and I thought the place to study it was the English department. And so, I majored in English and wrote a senior thesis on Shelley and Thoreau and late one night – reading terrible poems by Shelley – I started thinking maybe the poets are unacknowledged because they’re not the legislators of the world. Maybe it makes sense to see what matters, like, “What changes the world?” And as penance for that, I got a Ph.D. in political science. So, that was how I started doing the work.

And I made a decision when I went to graduate school – because someone told me that people agonized about finding a dissertation topic – I made a decision that I would study whatever the biggest movement of the moment was. And, at that moment, it was a nuclear freeze movement. So, I learned about nuclear weapons, and I learned about the history of campaigns against nuclear weapons. And I went to demonstrations, and I interviewed people, and that was my dissertation and my first book. And since that time, I’ve moved on to study and write about all kinds of other social movements, mostly in the United States, but in other parts of the world as well.

Capuano:

That is such a great backstory. Thank you for sharing.

You were recently named to the 2025 class of Andrew Carnegie Fellows, receiving a $200,000 grant for research that is aimed at “understanding and addressing political polarization in the United States.” How would you describe the project that you plan to investigate with that funding?

Meyer:

I chose a dissonant strategy. So, they want to ameliorate polarization. Well, polarization is the stuff that makes social movements go.

You can listen to an old labor song in a minor key – “Which Side Are You On?” – which is all about getting people to take sides and creating enemies on the other side. Or you can listen to Martin Luther King’s comments on the liberals and forcing them to take sides and stand out. Or you could go to the encampments here and see the opponents of whatever side you’re on villainized. Polarization is the game. But if you want to make policy and change the world, ultimately you have to find a way of making peace, or at least politics, with people you disagree with.

And so, my proposal started with polarization, and the question is, “How do movements that use polarization wind up accommodating and making policy over the longer haul?” And I’m going to study movements of the past looking specifically for that question, looking at, “Why did the Civil Rights Movement get things done in the fifties and sixties and part of the seventies even while it was polarizing? And I’m looking forward to doing that work.

Capuano:

We can’t wait to see what you find out from that work. You keep bringing up political polarization. How does what we’re seeing now in America compare to what has been seen has historically?

Meyer:

There has always been a long and contested politics of polarization in America. Historically, however, elected officials have sold out the movements that animated them and kept the peace – or a kind of peace – most of the time as a result of doing that, giving movements less than what they demand, but still making political progress.

At this point, however, even in government, there’s no interest – at least on one side of the political spectrum – in doing that. So, Barack Obama and George W. Bush and George H.W. Bush, all claimed to want to bring the country together. And they weren’t particularly successful in doing it, but I think they tried. And I don’t think that’s where we are right now. And so that’s the challenge of the moment.

The second challenge of the moment is the media universe we live in means that you can find what you agree with all the time without ever confronting information that you don’t like. And that’s dangerous. So, you have to be willing to have somebody who can give you news you don’t like, who can give you bad news.

I was thinking about this: when I go to the dentist, if he tells me there’s trouble in the back of your mouth and there’s going to be drilling, I’m not happy about that. But I trust my dentist and I’m glad that he tells me the truth. I don’t go find a citizen dentist who will tell me, “Everything’s fine. Don’t worry about it. Trust yourself.” And that’s evaporating in American life, and I think that’s something we need to work on also.

Capuano:

That’s an excellent point. I love the metaphor of the dentist.

You’ve been the author or editor of nine books – you already mentioned the topic of your first one – well over a hundred articles, book reviews, and reports that have shaped perspectives on social movements and contentious politics. It’s time now to lean on your historical knowledge. You studied this for your dissertation. Is there a protest that you would say had the greatest impact on bringing social change in our country?

Meyer:

That’s the key question, and I think it’s the wrong question.

Capuano:

Okay.

Meyer:

The key question is always like, “Well, is this event going to make a difference? Is the Women’s March going to change something? Was the March on Washington the most critical event in our history? And in real life, those marches – those dramatic events, those confrontations – are always in the stories because they’re so dramatic, but there’s lots of stuff going on around them. And the impact of any movement historically is about the work that’s going on around it – the other things that people are doing that are not necessarily newsworthy.

So, one of my students was telling me, “You know, change takes place around kitchen tables – where you talk to people who you agree with, or you disagree with, about an event you’re planning.” So, the events are part of the story – they’re the exclamation points – but there’s a lot of work that goes into making social change that involves more than the dramatic march or the dramatic speech.

Capuano:

Social movements have been in the news for most of my life. As you basically just mentioned, it sounds like it’s always been that way.

Meyer:

Oh yeah. There’s not a peaceful time in American history. We look back and we say, “Oh, geez, well, how come it’s such a volatile time now?” But every time is a volatile time, and there are always interesting social movements going on, and sometimes they win and sometimes they seem to evaporate, but a lot of it is not new.

The debate about fluoride that we’re seeing now in water. In the 1950s, conservative activists organized against fluoridating the water. They said it was a “communist plot.” That was a social movement – that was part of what we saw.

The antebellum period in American history was when we saw the beginning of a feminist movement in 1848 and the beginning of what we would now call the Civil Rights Movement focused on abolition. There’s always stuff going on and you just have to be willing to look for it.

Capuano:

Which ones are you currently tracking?

Meyer:

I’m trying to pay attention to the battle about inclusion in America – and that includes the people now in government, who are desperately trying to shut down efforts to make a bigger, more diverse country. Also, I’m tracking the resistance to those efforts.

So, this morning I was thinking about the battle for higher education, which we’re in the middle of, and the cuts to research in the United States, which are going to have long-term damage, and how that battle plays out in the United States and on campuses. I’m very curious what happens here. We’re slated to lose about $120 million in overhead if the Trump administration continues doing what it’s doing. In my world, $120 million is a lot of money. It’s going to make a difference. Are students going to be engaged with that? I don’t know. I’m paying attention to that.

Capuano:

The $120 million, is that higher ed in general? The University of California? What’s that number? Because all we’re hearing right now in the news are numbers.

Meyer:

The $120 million is my back of the envelope calculation of what UC Irvine loses in medical research from the National Institutes of Health.

Capuano:

Thank you for clarifying.

Meyer:

That’s a lot of money.

Capuano:

That’s a ton of money.

Meyer:

Right. And the people on the other end of campus who need money to do their work are in desperate straits right now. Now, is there something America’s losing when we shut down science? I’m biased. I like education. I like facts. I’m going to, like, confess up to that, but that’s a scary moment for us.

Capuano:

Your most recent book is titled How Protest (Sometimes) Matters. So, how protest sometimes matters, did you come up with an answer?

Meyer:

The key to protest mattering is it’s not just protest. Social movements matter when they connect up with mainstream politics. And there’s a lot of tension in that process but without a connection to mainstream politics, there’s no follow-through. Everything takes forever in changing the world. And the arguments you use to get somebody to come to a demonstration are not arguments that are based on patience. And so, one of the things we have to learn is you have to approach changing the world with a fierce urgency – that’s Obama’s phrase – at the same time, knowing that that fierce urgency has to carry you for a good long way.

Capuano:

So, let’s talk about a recent big protest. April 5^th: the “Hands Off!” rallies were held globally, especially here in the United States. They were seen at places like state capitols, federal buildings, congressional offices, city halls, parks, Social Security headquarters – they were all over. The rallies were described as “a day of action to protest the activities of the new presidential administration” that took over the Oval Office January 20th. Where does that land historically – April 5^th – compared to other protests held early in a president’s term?

Meyer:

Well, the obvious comparison is the inauguration of “Trump 1,” where you had the Women’s March, which was the largest single day demonstration in American history. It was overwhelming. It was massive. It was exciting and it inspired lots of people to continue doing work. And there were big demonstrations, a parade of parades, every weekend in Washington, D.C., and it mattered. It mattered instilling some initiatives. It mattered in slowing down the Trump administration, sort of putting friction in their political process.

What happened on April 5^th and the other demonstrations are a different strategy. There are lots more protest events now than there were eight years ago when Trump was inaugurated and they’re all over the United States and they’re smaller. And is that going to make more of a difference? I don’t know the answer to that. I’m really curious about figuring out the answer to that.

I think that if you organize a demonstration and 150 or 200 people come out, you’re pretty likely to get to talk to some of them and maybe build connections for a continued engagement in politics. But we’re going to have to see if that plays out or not.

More than that, the demonstrations that took place on April 5^th are signals to people in positions where they can resist or not, and politicians and political figures of all sorts are paying attention to those signals. There is no way the president of Harvard was not paying attention to the demonstrations in Cambridge and the feedback he was getting from Harvard funders before he made the decision to resist the Trump administration. That’s a signal and that matters.

The protests at Tesla dealerships are also a signal about people’s concern. And it affects the people who are there. They see other people who agree with them. There’s some encouragement that they’re not alone. That’s exciting. That can make a difference.

I have been paying very close attention to Don Bacon. Don Bacon is a normal Republican from Omaha, Nebraska. Kamala Harris carried his district. Don Bacon was a general in the Air Force before he became a politician, and he is looking for ways to break with Trump without sacrificing his connection to the Republican party. And the demonstrations in Omaha on April 5th are a signal to him that there’s support if he does that. That’s important.

Capuano:

I didn’t know the Don Bacon story.

Meyer:

Who’s paying attention to Don Bacon, except for me? (laughs)

Capuano:

But I love it when people share things that I haven’t paid attention to. I think that that’s important.

Meyer:

I have never been to Omaha, but the first place I was looking up pictures from the demonstration was, “what was it like in Omaha?” And the local papers in Omaha said there were about 5,000 people demonstrating against Trump. Bacon is committed, patriotic, smart, and very Republican, but skeptical about Trump. Where does he find the path forward? He is the first Republican to call for Pete Hegseth’s resignation. So, Don Bacon is worth watching.

Capuano:

Noted.

Meyer:

We’ve never met, by the way. (Both laugh.)

Capuano:

How did the protests of the last month or so compare with protests against Trump in 2017, the MAGA protests in support of Trump back in 2021?

Meyer:

In 2017 and 2021, there were big events that were dramatic. And particularly in 2021, there was a lot of violence. People came to the Capitol prepared to take over, and some of them were armed and people were killed. That’s a big difference between most of what we’ve seen so far.

The demonstrations were more frequent, more spread out and mostly smaller. Now it remains to be seen if that’s more sustainable or not.

Capuano:

Last spring, we saw large demonstrations and encampments about the war in Gaza on this campus and many other campuses nationwide. What do these protests say about student activism?

Meyer:

I think that students at UCI, as students at lots of other places, are hungry for meaning and are interested in entering into history and making the world better. And some of that was reflected in the protests. There were students who were already committed on the issue and were eager to get engaged. And there were long discussions that were going on in those encampments where a lot of other students learned stuff and learned about themselves, and that was good.

At the same time, the protests were a challenge to academic life and to administrators. The students certainly were capable of using polarizing rhetoric to get people out.

And in real life, the chancellor at UC Irvine, whatever his political positions are on anything, is not making decisions about who to sell weapons to. His job is something other than that. At the same time, finding a local target is a way to get people angry and engaged and sleeping outside.

There were 130 encampments at American universities. That’s a lot of encampments. Local administrators found different ways of dealing with them, having long discussions with students on some campuses, calling in the police on other campuses. I’m curious about the long-term effect of those choices, and that’s part of this project.

Capuano:

What do those student demonstrations and encampments say about polarization? You mentioned that there were conversations that were happening during these demonstrations.

Meyer:

The impression I got is most of the conversations were on one side or the other. And I think that’s a very good example of the kind of polarization that is useful for generating passion and action at an event and makes making policy very, very difficult. And, in my fantasy world, I imagine a university where leaders facilitate discussions between people who disagree vehemently with each other and still want to hear what the other side has to say. This is a very difficult issue to do that on, but that’s what free speech means.

Capuano:

What about the impact of those protests on policy or just protest on policy globally? Did you learn anything from those demonstrations?

Meyer:

I’m watching what happens after those demonstrations. I think one of the things I learned from studying this over a very long period of time is that impact plays out over a very, very, very long period of time.

So, the March on Washington in 1963, where Martin Luther King made that great, dramatic “I Have a Dream” speech, was first proposed 20 years earlier. Now in 1964, we got a Civil Rights Act. In 1965, we got a Voting Rights Act, for a movement that started 60, 80 years earlier. When do you want to start the story? If you start the story at the demonstration and the speech, then you’re missing a lot of what mattered.

So, short story, we don’t know the impact of the Gaza protests yet. We should be paying attention and seeing the way politics plays out over a longer period of time. Certainly, at this point, there’s no visible sign of reduced support from the American government for Israel, even as Israel has become more aggressive. And we haven’t seen anything approaching a plan to make peace in the Middle East. There’s a lot of contingencies. Would it have been different if Kamala Harris had won? I don’t know, but it’s certainly possible.

Capuano:

If I’m someone who’s considering attending a protest, how can I ensure that its intent will be fair and truthful and accurately align with my beliefs?

Meyer:

You cannot. Unlike a night at a bar, there’s nobody working a door at a demonstration. Anybody can show up. And I don’t think I’ve ever been to a large demonstration when there wasn’t somebody there who kind of creeped me out for some reason. People gravitate to demonstrations because they want to sell sodas, or they want to sell their ideas. There are all kinds of people who show up. The way you’re most likely to feel safe, and the way you’re most likely to project the ideas that you care about the most, is if you come with a couple of people who agree with you, and you make your own signs.

Capuano:

What have you learned about why some protests end up in violence?

Meyer:

Sometimes violence is the product of a miscalculation, often a miscalculation by police. So, violence doesn’t always start with demonstrators. Violence is sometimes part of the intention of a protest. There’s a long history in the United States – that January 6th continued – of trying to take to the streets when you lose at the polls. And organization is critical in reducing the risks of violence and it’s a lot of work.

The non-violent civil rights protests of the 1950s and 1960s required people who were going to break the law to go through a non-violence training. The anti-nuclear power movements gave non-violence training to all the people who showed up at their civil disobedience events. And they trained activists not to react when being provoked, not to react when being touched, how to cover their heads if they were attacked without fighting back. That’s a very hard thing to do. So, non-violence is work. And violence is sometimes an accident.

Capuano:

So, I’ve heard some of your advice: bring friends that are like-minded if you want to go to a protest and feel safe – I heard that. Be patient – social movements and protests are a long game. Is there anything that we didn’t talk about yet today that you wanted to share with the audience?

Meyer:

I think there’s something very dramatic and encouraging when you look at young people who are trying to build the world they want to live in. And mistakes are part of that process. But we should view the engagement of young people in protest action, in politics, with the optimism that Americans like to think we’re famous for.

Capuano:

Do you have optimism about what you’re seeing from young people?

Meyer:

I always try to remind myself to be optimistic. And every time I teach a large class, there are wonderful students in it who I try to focus on rather than the ones who miss the tests.

Capuano:

Professor Meyer, thank you so much for joining us today.

Meyer:

Thank you, Cara.

Capuano:

I’m Cara Capuano. Thank you for listening to our conversation. For the latest UC Irvine News, please visit news.uci.edu. The UC Irvine Podcast is production of Strategic Communications and Public Affairs at the University of California, Irvine. Please subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts.