The Resistance to Trump Will Be Local

The Resistance to Trump Will Be Local

Strong community makes it harder to win by being a jerk and a bully.


Whenever progress is blocked in Washington, the pressure for progress always finds other outlets. During the George W. Bush administration, for instance, environmentalists looked to state and local governments for action on climate change, and the result was a slew of commitments that helped build the renewable-energy industry. The same thing is happening now—even more so. With the utter hostility to science on display in Washington, we’re all working hard to persuade cities and states to uphold the Paris climate accord by committing to 100 percent renewable energy. Pioneered by the Sierra Club and joined by groups like, this drive has had notable success: It’s not just the Berkeleys and the Madisons that have made the promise, but Salt Lake City and San Diego and Atlanta. The day Trump shamed the nation by withdrawing from the climate accord—proclaiming that he’d been elected to govern “Pittsburgh, not Paris”—the mayor of Pittsburgh announced that his city would go 100 percent renewable. That remains one of the high points of the year’s broad resistance.

But this move toward the local may turn out to be more than the usual tactical swing. The bizarreness of the president—the ugliness of his politics and the poison of his personality—may prompt many of us to start thinking about the problem of scale in our political life.

I live in Vermont. It’s one of the most rural states in the Union, and it’s as white as typing paper. So it should have been, statistically, a fairly Trumpish place: Indeed, New Hampshire just to the east and upstate New York just to the west tilted somewhat in that direction. But Vermont did not, and I think it has at least a little to do with the peculiar institution at the heart of our political life: the town meeting. On the first Tuesday in March, everyone in each town gets together in the church hall or the school gym, and there they jointly make the decisions necessary to govern the town for the year to come. Does the school roof have another 12 months left in it? How much should we set aside for plowing the roads next winter? (Occasionally, we also address national and global issues: The nuclear-freeze movement was largely born in Vermont town meetings).

One result of this remnant of Athenian democracy is that it’s hard to get away with being an absolute jerk. Were someone to appear at our town meeting using the language that our president uses daily in his tweets, he’d be listened to briefly and then ignored. Obviously, you can’t make a town work with that kind of bellicosity. In fact, I doubt there are many cities that would elect Trump as mayor, because vandalism is less funny when you have to look at the wall every day. But on a vast national scale, it’s perhaps easier for us to be irresponsible, to vote for “shaking things up” or for the sheer entertainment value of watching someone give it to our enemies.

And this is one reason why it’s so important to root the resistance in local places, to have City Council members as well as congresspeople and senators. We obviously can’t neglect Washington—global warming, above all, is a reminder that there are plenty of problems that need to be solved at as high a level as possible. But the canker in our political life, the ugly toxins that threaten to wreck us as a nation, may be more easily fought at the local level, where Twitter doesn’t mean much. A strong community is a useful bulwark against hate and stupidity. It’s not a guarantee that ugliness won’t flourish (look at Joe Arpaio in Arizona, a proto-Trump if ever there was one), but even when it does, the damage can be contained. If we’re going to reverse our dire situation, I imagine much of the impetus will come from gritty and real places.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy