Musing on Sign-Waving

This is something I’m writing to myself, of two minds, about being part of our protests, thinking about protests, and about future demonstrations.  It’s a response to stray comments from someone outside our group and from someone inside the group, guiding us preparing for a demonstration.  This is not to move toward a judgement, but just thinking.

A group protest with us waving signs is a type of demonstration.  Mentioning this because I want to think ahead to demonstrations with positive rather than negative focus—so protests, but not only protests.

Think about our context:  Where we are in Texas, who is our audience, and what results we hope to achieve.

Direct vs. Indirect Impact

If we were in Austin or in Washington, D.C., our audience might be decision makers, and/or their advisors and related workers.  In that case, direct message protests and signage is appropriate and relevant for sure.  We put our message directly to those people.

Here, where we are, the effect we can expect from our effort is likely indirect:

1. We want our audience to write their representatives conveying our message.
2. It is possible we would reach major donors or local leaders who have more sway with our representatives and convey our message more strongly.
3. In cases in which questions will be voted on by our local people, we may have a direct effect.

Visibility, Votes, or Both

What results are we aiming for here?  Mostly, we aim for votes.  In some cases we hope to sway local opinion…leading to votes down the line.  In some cases we support a candidate or a position on a referendum….votes.  In some cases our visibility may be the main thing.  Is that enough?  Maybe it leads to more membership in our group.   With the “No Kings” protest, we added to the nationwide count, and that in itself was a worthy contribution.  In that way, we participated in a big effort to sway some opinion or votes.  In some cases, our demonstration may give moral support to a public defender, a candidate, Quixote, a victim.

One Big Message? Or a Sampling of the All-Out Assault on Democracy?

What is our message?  (What are our messages?)

If “the medium is the message”, it is us, our presence and our behavior, that is important.

“Stay on message.”  I’m of two minds—and context is important.

I want to agree and disagree with the point of view that we should be united in the message we deliver in protests and demonstrations.

On the one hand, you see our detractors posting something like “Look at all those people waving the same signs….HMMM, this is obviously orchestrated by outside agitators.”
   
At the same time, when our signs follow what is shown or talked about on news media, then our effort amplifies the message.  That should make real, here, what the average mind might otherwise dismiss as being something eastern or urban, not relevant here.  So staying with a national or statewide theme is good.

On the other hand, in the case where the news shows pictures of a varied bunch of signs protesting administration attacks on a range of policies and institutions, our detractors say how we democrats are so scattered, we can’t get our act together.
    
At the same time, we are reminding our audience of the breath of the assault against us.  Also, while some people turn away from appeals to respect the rights of gay or foreign or poor or non-white people; they may take in the appeal to stop the theft of public lands.  They may be indifferent to attacks on public broadcasting, but take in, with fleeting glance, signs protesting cuts to Social Security or the Veterans Administration.  It would be a win to lodge a thought in an otherwise uninformed or apathetic viewer.

I know that our signage for our demonstrations doesn’t really match one or the other end points.  We have creativity.  People have fun crafting interesting signs.  Even when we try to stay on-message, viewers see a variety of points and a variety of formats.  So, why am I arguing the contrast?

Looking Forward to 2026

I hope we have a full slate of Texas candidates.  I think it helps get any message across when it is delivered as an input to a choice our audience can make on the Texas scene.  ..in the context of deciding among candidates.

Our protests at the courthouse gave local news sources something to report on (however imperfectly) and may have been the only reason some people were informed that there is something going on that their neighbors object to.

But going forward, does it work waving signs to advertise reasons to vote Democratic?   Maybe it works to advertise a “campaign rally” at the courthouse, even without the presence of the candidate.  A rally is an excuse to have signage in front of people promoting our causes, in addition to promoting a candidate.

Who knows?  Maybe the new Texas Democratic Leadership will give us something to work with here.

And then again we may have the question: how close do we stick to a central (TX DEM HQ) message.

David A. Brock

David is a retired scientist/naturalist who would like to be spending more time with his books, binoculars, water garden, and wildflowers.  He is from South Dakota, with stops in Montana; Austin; Elgin, TX; central Kansas; and now Dublin, TX.