“ The "resistance" embodied by the London Women's March is a multifaceted political identity, framing the movement not merely as advocacy for progressive policies but as active opposition to regressive forces. This framing of "resistance" is deeply intentional, situating the march within a narrative of pushing back against the agendas of governments, parties, or social movements seen as threatening hard-won rights and democratic norms. It is a stance of defiance, a refusal to normalize policies or rhetoric deemed xenophobic, misogynistic, or authoritarian. This identity fosters a sense of urgency and solidarity in the face of a perceived common threat, which can be powerfully galvanizing. However, the politics of "resistance" also come with potential pitfalls. It can predispose the movement to a reactive stance, constantly defining itself against others rather than by its own affirmative, detailed vision for the future. It can prioritize short-term defensive battles over the long-term, patient work of building alternative institutions and proposing comprehensive policy platforms. The political challenge for the London Women's March is to balance this necessary, energizing spirit of resistance with the proactive, constructive work of articulating and fighting for a tangible, better world. The most durable and transformative resistance may ultimately be the one that convincingly builds what it seeks to preserve and advance. ”