Rachel O’Leary Carmona on the Women’s March on the RNC

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2024/07/14

Rachel O’Leary Carmona is the Executive Director of Women’s March and Women’s March Network that form the backbone of the largest political home for women and most effective base building organization on the left. Rachel served as the Chief Operating Officer of Women’s March from 2018, transitioning to the Executive Director role in 2019. She oversaw building the infrastructure of Women’s March as an organization from a series of record-breaking mobilizations. Rachel oversaw the incorporation of Women’s March Network, the sister organization of Women’s March, and founded Women’s March WIN, a Super PAC that builds and mobilizes the political power of women.  Under Rachel’s leadership, Women’s March drove record turnout in 2018, playing a key role in defeating Trump in 2020; anchored 4,500 nationwide actions in the United States, mobilizing tens of millions in 2022; and mobilized women in a pivotal 2023 Supreme Court race in Wisconsin, a race that was called the most important of the year by the New York Times. Rachel has been quoted and featured in The New York Times, The Washington Post, USA Today, The Guardian, CNN online, Rewire, Fox Online, and the Journal of Transformational Work and many other national and local outlets. She is a frequent media contributor and is regularly featured on outlets including MSNBC, CNN, CBS, NBC, Reuters, NPR, and other broadcast news and radio stations.  Rachel earned her Associate’s degree from Madison Area Technical College. She went on to earn her Bachelor’s degree in African American Studies from the University of Wisconsin and her Masters in Public Policy from the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, where she focused on leadership development and non-profit management. She sits on the advisory boards of the Wisconsin Union, and the 22nd Century Initiative. She lives in Amarillo, Texas. 

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What is your name and title?

Rachel O’Leary Carmona: My name is Rachel O’Leary Carmona, and I am the Executive Director of Women’s March.

Jacobsen: Regarding the Women’s March, what was its purpose?

Carmona: Which one?

Jacobsen: The Women’s March aimed at opposing anti-abortion extremism, which included traversing around the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee.

Carmona: There are a few, yes. There is also one concerning SCOTUS. I was curious. The purpose of drawing attention to the Republican National Convention is to help people understand the stakes, especially as the Republican Party increasingly recognizes its agenda as an electoral loser. There is a schism in their base between the career Republicans who have cravenly hitched their wagons to a base of people with extreme political goals and to those extremists themselves. The Republican platform has become so extreme that it is out of touch with the Republican base, which is always a dangerous place to be. They are trying to walk that back, claiming they were never for a national abortion ban. You see the softening of Trump and the distancing of the Trump campaign from Project 2025. It is crucial for us to not only inform people of the stakes but also to draw attention to what the Republicans plan to do and let people know they are lying. There is no daylight between the Trump campaign and Project 2025. Sixteen people inside the Trump campaign played leadership roles in its assembly. So, we will ensure all of those objectives are met over the weekend.

Jacobsen: What was your major moment, or one of the significant moments, of political consciousness about the threats to either American democracy or fundamental reproductive rights for women that catalyzed your evolution into activism?

Carmona: For me personally, or key points for the movement itself?

Jacobsen: For you, we will discuss the movement itself.

Carmona: I have been an activist for almost my whole life. I was arrested and detained at my first protest when I was 15. I have been involved in activism in some way ever since. I studied social movements for my undergraduate degree and have only ever worked in social justice. For me, it was my family. I went to vote with my grandfather for the first time when I was four years old and grew up in a household where politics were a significant part of dinner table discussions. After high school, I did not go to college for a few years. I worked as a domestic worker. Nothing will radicalize you like cleaning rich people’s homes on your hands and knees for three years. The confluence of all of these experiences led me to where I am today. 

Jacobsen: How about the movement itself? These movements can stem back centuries or decades in terms of how they evolve, splinter, re-emerge, etc. Regarding this particular movement, we are talking about longer periods, but for the actions of this particular march or these marches, what were some of the important catalyzing moments collectively?

Carmona: In terms of Women’s March –this current iteration or this corner of the movement –obviously the election of Donald Trump, but not just his election –the defeat of Hillary Clinton. For many people, especially women of a certain age who were told a woman could become president, seeing a woman who many believed was more qualified than Donald Trump lose was a significant moment. Many people do not agree with Hillary Clinton’s particular politics, but very few believe that Donald Trump was the more qualified candidate.

Carmona: No matter your feelings about her stances on any particular policy or campaign proposal, seeing a competent woman, who had been the heir apparent for so long, defeated by a failed reality show host, someone who is not a good businessman, who is not a good host, and who has now been found guilty of sexual assaults, was shocking. Just an all-around bad person, known neither for professional integrity nor personal decency, being elected over a qualified woman was a catalyzing moment for many women in this country. It revealed the depth of systemic sexism and misogyny in this country.

Then, over and over again, there were significant developments throughout Donald Trump’s four years in office, but also in the long tail of his influence, particularly in the judiciary. These judicial appointments were particularly successful, leading to the overturning of Roe v. Wade, for which Trump openly takes credit. The attacks on mifepristone, for example, were carried out by one of his barely competent judges who obtained his position through the Trump administration’s corrupt power grabs. There have been numerous spikes in political activism, such as during Kavanaugh’s appointment and certainly with Amy Coney Barrett. These judicial appointments are critical moments since these individuals are not up for re-election in two years; they are on the bench for life and are relatively young, meaning we now face a generation of their corrupt and politicized influence on our judicial processes.

We have also seen spikes in activism around immigration, the border, and the Muslim ban. Different issues politicize different people. Women, who come from various racial and class identities and include both parents and non-parents, experience these issues differently. However, the larger impact is that women have been increasingly entering the movement, participating in activism, taking on leadership roles, running for office, and voting for candidates in record numbers since Donald Trump’s election in 2016.

Jacobsen: Looking at this from the outside, as a Canadian, I see that there seems to be significantly more political and social polarization in the United States. Even though there is a shrinking middle of fence-sitters, what would be your message to those who, at least for this march, should get off the fence and participate?

Carmona: When discussing the extremism of the Republican Party, there is sometimes a tendency to compare the Republican platform with the Democratic platform, as if both sides are equally extreme. People might say, “The Republicans do this, but the Democrats do that.” I have my critiques of the Democrats. I want to see our party fight harder and develop a sharper analysis around class, gender, and other issues. However, what should motivate people to get active—those who are undecided, on the fence, independent, or among the vast majority who do not vote—is that one party is advocating for a political platform while the other is advocating to roll back democracy itself. Everything in the Republican platform is designed to make democracy less possible. American democracy has always been aspirational; we have never fully realized its potential as articulated. But what we had not experienced until the Dobbs decision was the stripping away of constitutional rights. The Republicans have clarified that this is just one of many items on their wish list.

The Supreme Court has discussed interracial marriage, birthright citizenship, and marriage equality for LGBTQ individuals. It has also made broad attacks on the trans community. We are discussing banning books, banning critical race theory, and banning diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. The total of these actions is a government that wants to control who you love, when and how you have children, what you can read, and where you can read it. These are not the ideals of a party that advocates for small government. These are the ideals of a party that advocates for authoritarianism and is pushing the country towards vast government overreach and Christian nationalism.

For this reason alone, everyone should stand up and reject these actions. This country once had an identity rooted in fighting fascism. When you think about Captain America, he is a comic book character who fought fascists. That was his career. It is interesting that the right commonly smears Antifa as the boogeyman when Antifa is short for anti-fascist, revealing their true intentions. They still throw rocks and hide their hands around certain parts of their agenda, but I believe they would prefer to stop hiding their hands. They are no longer trying to conceal their actions towards women. They aim to push their full agenda openly, which should alarm us all.

Jacobsen: Concerning the march, why is Milwaukee one of the current hot zones with the RNC?

Carmona: The RNC is there. Wisconsin is a swing state that has always played a crucial role in the outcome of the presidency and the presidential election. It’s swingy. However, as someone from Wisconsin and Milwaukee, I know it’s more swingy than it seems. Instead, it has been an experimental lab for the Koch brothers for decades, with significant money and conservative movement astroturfed there. Milwaukee has also elected two socialist mayors, which is part of what has drawn the extremist thought laboratory to Wisconsin. We are working specifically in places that swing in the outer rings of the suburbs surrounding Milwaukee County, known as the Wow counties, to help drive home the message to women voters, the largest voting bloc in those counties, about what the stakes are and what the Republicans are planning. Despite their sleight-of-hand tactics, we reveal their plans and impact on everyday women in those areas. This intervention will be the starting point for a nationwide decentralized campaign for several months.

Jacobsen: Significant human rights organizations are very clear on reproductive rights. I recall a quote from the Rights Watch that states, “…equitable access to safe abortion services is first and foremost a human right.” When you ban abortion, deaths go up. Abortion rates go down when abortion is legal, and the number of safe abortions goes up. Women will seek abortions regardless. So you would want to get them in a safe context. In a way, it’s been a gift to pro-life people. If that’s your orientation, if you want fewer abortions, then empirically, you should be adopting pro-choice policies and plans of action and implementing those. When it comes to the aftermath of these types of policies, people might think you are fearmongering around Project 2025 and Christian nationalism. How does this American phenomenon of Christian nationalism differentiate itself from other versions of Christianity in other countries or within the United States? How does it culminate in Project 2025 to be acutely problematic for democratic processes and equality movements?

Carmona: So, to be clear, how is this similar or dissimilar to other uprisings of authoritarianism in other countries? Please clarify the second part of the question about Project 2025.

Jacobsen: Yes, the short version: differentiate Christian nationalism from people who view Christianity as a private belief rather than politicizing it. Then, we see how this has evolved into the very open proposal of this playbook called Project 2025.

Carmona: One of the interesting things about 2024 is that other countries are having major presidential elections. Half of the countries in the world are having elections this year, as we see  a broad rise of authoritarianism across the globe. We saw the outcome in France recently, where, in the first round, it looked like they were going off the deep end. Then, people organized in weeks and had a stunning upset, which gave me much hope. We see a rise in authoritarianism when everyday people experience such turbulence and difficulty in their lives that they look to someone who has the answer because they don’t have one. It’s a frightening prospect. Many people are living with frightening prospects right now, particularly concerning the impacts on the global economy and climate crisis. Several issues are far-reaching in scope, and some are much more local.

All of this is to say that I don’t think people choose authoritarianism because they think it’s the right way. People choose authoritarianism because it’s something, a last gasp for help. It’s a call for help. We need to recognize that as a fundamental baseline before we get into the nuances. Sometimes, we think it’s disturbing because 50% of the country voted for Trump, pushed by this evangelical, white nationalist agenda. Some people identify as very deep conservatives and happen to be white. Some people are inside a politic that is a white nationalist politic. It’s very easy to understand anybody who votes for Trump or a Republican as a white nationalist. But we need to be rigorous about the difference.

Eighty-five percent of Americans, according to the data, express fear of the type of political violence associated with the white nationalist movement. This concern spans the political spectrum, affecting even conservatives. Currently residing in Amarillo, Texas, I witness a local struggle where extremists are attempting to implement a travel ban against people who need abortion care out-of-state. This ban would effectively make it illegal to drive through Amarillo to seek an abortion, a practice they term “abortion trafficking.”The city council, who voted down the ordinance, now faces pressure from radical conservatives – including some advocates who don’t even live in Amarillo – for not being sufficiently anti-abortion. 

It is imperative to understand that white nationalism and Christian nationalism are essentially the same. They represent a particularly toxic form of authoritarianism. The rise of authoritarianism in our country must be viewed as a symptom of a severely broken economic system, where the rich have become exceedingly wealthy while the poor have grown poorer.

Many people still need help comprehending how $100 spent at the grocery store results in only two bags of goods. The wealth gap continues to widen. This situation is not unprecedented; it is cyclical. It is essential to recognize the interconnectedness of these issues.

There is nothing particularly new, smart, or innovative about the Christian nationalists in this country. Throughout history and across all countries, individuals have prioritized their interests and held extreme beliefs. This phenomenon is not unique to our nation. The current environment provides fertile ground for such movements, as many people are attempting to make sense of prolonged difficulties and a declining quality of life. For some communities, this includes a shorter life expectancy, lack of retirement, and challenges related to climate change, healthcare, and other issues.

In conclusion, authoritarianism is universal, irrespective of its manifestations, and the underlying reasons for its rise are also universal. If you compare their speeches, they all say the same thing, whether you are talking about Pinochet, Trump, or any other authoritarian leader. They are not unique. The way to combat authoritarianism is consistent and involves a mass movement, generally led by women, due to the historical connection between sexism, misogyny, and authoritarianism. Authoritarians, typically strong men, respond with a hyper-masculine politic that often targets women first.

Project 2025 is particularly concerning. While the political class discusses it frequently, ordinary people are largely unaware. Project 2025 is well-known among the political elite, and many would be surprised to learn that the average person does not know about it, although awareness is increasing as more influential figures discuss it publicly. Sometimes, we attribute more significance to these authoritarian movements than they deserve.

The primary concern about Project 2025 and Donald Trump is that Trump serves as a convenient puppet for a group that has been advancing its agenda for 50 years. Trump is merely a distraction, masking the efforts of those orchestrating the plan, raising funds, and mobilizing people to execute it. These individuals have been engaged in this endeavor for a long time. Defeating Donald Trump, as was done in 2020 or potentially in 2024, would eliminate the threat. However, the reality is that this is likely a 25-year struggle.

It took 50 years to undermine Roe v. Wade, and while we could potentially push back authoritarianism within 25 years, given that we have public opinion, cultural support, and the will of the people on our side, it will still take considerable time to undo the entrenched systems. Consider Supreme Court justices like Amy Coney Barrett, who is in her 50s, and Texas Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, who is in his 40s. These individuals will likely remain on the bench for another 30 to 40 years.

It will take a long time to progress toward a feminist future, advance our progressive agenda in various areas, and allow for setbacks and forward movements. This is the reality. Today’s social media culture declares each election the most important of our lives. This was said for the 2016, 2018, 2020, and 2022 elections. I have said it myself. Tragically, it has been true each time.

We are continually sliding further into authoritarianism. We must move away from the mindset that we will be saved in the next two years. This is not a movie; we will need more time to resolve this in the next installment. We must take on the task of building the future we envision, creating a place so irresistible that everyone wants to join. This is the only way to defeat authoritarianism. 

It’s easy; it involves building enough power with people who align with us. This does not mean agreeing politically on everything. We must construct this future alongside those with whom we have deep political disagreements as long as they believe that living in a democracy is better than not. This truth is evident only to a small group of very rich, very old individuals who seek to maintain power over everyone else, regardless of the cost to the country, democracy, the economy, or the planet.

This is a lengthy response to a complex question that could have been the sole topic of discussion for 20 minutes. However, there is nothing particularly unique about what these authoritarians are doing. They could be more exceptionally intelligent. They have a lot money and have been working on this for a long time. They may have been winning since 2022 or perhaps since 2016, but the reality is that they have been laying the groundwork for these developments for 50 years.

We must not lose sight of the fact that there are more of us than of them. Most Americans agree with our perspective. There is no way they can control us. They can outlaw abortion, but abortions will continue to happen. They will be facilitated by providers in safe harbor states or through medication abortions sent from outside the country. Unless they open every single piece of American mail, they will never be able to stop us.

The American people hold all the power. Our task is to spend time mustering and wielding this power. This is the timeline we need to follow. That’s my summary.

Jacobsen: We’re out of time.

License & Copyright

In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. ©Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use or duplication of material without express permission from Scott Douglas Jacobsen strictly prohibited, excerpts and links must use full credit to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with direction to the original content.