According to the often-cited 3.5% rule, if 3.5% of a population protests against a regime, the regime will fail. Developed by political scientists Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan, who researched civil resistance campaigns from 1900 to 2006, the rule has seen renewed interest in leftist circles recently, especially with No Kings protests attracting historic numbers.
…
This shows the outsize impact a single protester can have, the study’s authors say. That’s because having one more attender at a demonstration rallies more support for a political cause than acquiring one more vote during an election does.
…
In the context of civil rights, the movement’s ability to elicit violence from its opponents – such as in 1965, when armed police violently attacked peaceful protesters crossing the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama – only strengthened public support for the cause. “When the state is perceived as engaging in excess use of force, that tends to generate very sympathetic coverage, and that drives concern,” explained Wasow.
Sure, but what if awareness already exists? Basically any progressive platform is supported by the vast majority of Americans and has been for years if not decades, yet invariably nothing happens, or minor victories are made which are almost immediately overturned when conservatives take power. About Trump specifically, there’s no shortage of opposition to Trump and GOP fascism, and frankly anybody who is going to oppose him already is unless things get much, much worse economically. If protests are meant to raise awareness, then they’ve already fulfilled their purpose a long time ago.