Library

Insights and warnings from the last time a demagogue upended the organs of US democracy unchecked. “What will it take to make the public see Trump’s anti-democratic strategies as wrong, distasteful, and not something they want to associate themselves with?” Kleinfeld suggest two steps, first: “create a ‘vibe’ in which disagreement and dislike can surface in socially acceptable ways. For example: ‘I like Trump but I wish he hadn’t done that.’ Such vibes allow people to feel they won’t be pariahs for their opinions;” and then: “impede a realignment if the Republican Party proves willing to enable widespread anti-democratic actions.” To achieve this, “there is no substitute for a ground game of mass organizing”, as MAGA have proved. “One key lesson is building more fun into such work: a little less MSNBC and spinach, a little more YouTube and funnel cakes.” Ultimately, “if history is any guide, the democracy field needs a vast increase in its communications infrastructure and acumen, from AI and influencers to local connections and camaraderie. And it needs it now.”

An overview of fringe theorist – dark enlightenment, neo-reactionary – Curtis Yarvin’s ‘RAGE’ (Retire All Government Employees) and ‘Butterfly Revolution’ ideas, which together form a companion to the Project 2025 strategy. Yarvin calls for a “systematic renewal of America’s institutions”, in which the new regime should “seize all points of power, without respect for paper protections,“ and “fire every single midlevel bureaucrat” to “replace them with our people” — what he calls a “de-woke-ification program,” which, it seems, extends well beyond the government. Duran encourages us to take these people at their word: “we are witnessing the methodical implementation of a long-planned strategy to transform American democracy into corporate autocracy. The playbook was written in plain sight and is now being followed step by step. Some dismiss the Yarvins of the world as unhinged nuts, but that's the point. These guys, with their bizarre and dangerous ideas, have gotten very far in 2025. Just look at the news.”

A piece co-written with an AI trained in a ‘meta-relational paradigm’, to “scaffold the process of metabolising polarisation – to move between hardened positions, loosen what has become rigid, and compost what no longer serves generative engagement.” They find that “if politics is primarily about securing entitlements for those deemed exceptionally deserving – whether due to ‘merit’ (in right-wing framings) or ‘historical or systemic disadvantage’ (in left-wing framings) – then the political field becomes an ongoing contest over who qualifies for the next distribution of privileges, protections, or reparations.” As this pendulum swings, “coercion breeds reaction. Suppression builds pressure. And every time the pendulum swings back, it does so with greater force, because the unresolved tensions of the previous cycle have only been deferred, not metabolized.” Instead, we are encouraged to “move beyond reaction and into recognition of our own implication in the very dynamics we seek to resist… toward a politics of entanglement… altering the conditions that make such conflicts inevitable.”

Part three of an investigation into life-serving resistance efforts in Columbia. We are encouraged to recognise the importance of local nuance, as things like ‘economics’ “lose their form when expanded into ideological constructs which blanket nations and discussion, bludgeoning idiosyncrasies into homogenous masses.” So perhaps “effective action can only happen at a small scale, that scaling up will always sacrifice the intimate knowledge from which love springs forth,” and that true freedom “is interdependence, not independence.” They find that “resistance is not merely an oppositional force. And thank god it isn’t, because we are not equal to the states and companies which seek to squeeze everything we have to give. The most important work of resistance happens underground, when we develop the root networks between ourselves that hold the ground steady when power tries to pull us out.”

Finding the space to reflect and connect is hard when, “like all autocrats, Trump and his oligarchic henchmen are trying to overwhelm, disorient and distract.” Crucial to resisting their efforts is “reclaiming agency in defining the terrain of struggle away from repressive control and towards individual and community empowerment.” There are many examples of this happening around the world, and one thing is clear from these experiences: “building the relational infrastructure for mass mobilisation and noncooperation is critically important”, because “doubling down on training and organising that is accessible for all parts of society to participate in creative nonviolent action, including mass noncooperation, will build strength, solidarity and harness the energy necessary to not only defeat authoritarianism but to reimagine beloved community for the next generation.”

A call for all “movement leaders, strategists, and communicators” to recognise that “we are in an ideological contest for the future” and must “define a compelling, materially grounded, future-oriented story – one that moves beyond resistance, sets the terms of what comes next, and distinguishes us from the broader political establishment”. We are asked to recognise the “false choice between pragmatism and radicalism, between incremental wins and transformative demands… Our task is not to water down our vision but to make it irresistible… We must do more than react to the moment; we must actively and radically shape the social norms and rules that govern our lives across all domains of power.” Our responsibility now is “shaping the narrative terrain, ensuring that our vision is not just a counterpoint to oppression but a rallying cry for the world we are building.”

A practical set of advice from a seasoned organiser: “History offers lessons from those who’ve faced – and defeated – authoritarian regimes. Their victories remind us that change is possible, even in the most oppressive circumstances.” They cite precedents from Serbia, Chile, Denmark, Philippines, Kenya, and US civil rights, drawing seven lessons for people coming together to resist. Crucial is the advice to “make space and time to assess the shifting terrain, avoid digging into our positions or getting distracted by the torrent of everyday assaults that we miss strategic adjustments that are needed,” and to “adopt a big bold positive vision of the future… that improves life for all of us.” As they see it, the core challenge “is to increase our people power – politically, culturally and in every way.” They reflect that “perhaps this time we are not just ‘the resistance,’ but rather the collaborators, the builders, the family and friends, the community of the future we want to see.”

A reflection on “the billionaires who've read our dystopias and mistaken them for business Plans,” and their belief that “there are ‘in-groups’ protected but not bound by law, and ‘out-groups’ bound but not protected by it." We might counter this by exposing how Musk flogs “Potemkin technologies” that don’t work “in order to suck in naive investors and to feed a hype cycle that is hostile to workers and human thriving.” Which means focusing “on the material reality of what he's delivering” and “the things that make him poorer and weaker, not the things that help him sell more nonsense." Beyond musk, we are encouraged to recognise the unprecedented concentration of power in ‘cloud fiefdoms’, which demands a response that is “very, very different to the standard New Deal, social democratic European Manner.”

A critique of ‘progressives’, who Hyman suggests “are to blame for Trump. We created him. We gave him, and other far-right populists, the space to manoeuvre and the mistakes to exploit.” Hyman encourages a departure from the “seven deadly sins” of “the sensible people”: that ‘we’ are (or are seen to be): “Patronising, Complacent, Abstract, Censorious, Gullible, Conservative and Bland.” He accuses us of “not listening hard enough”, needing more humility and reflection, and that we must create “our own robust edifice,” with “better ideas, better narratives, better policies and better communication. It needs all of them in a powerful brew – brought together with a confidence and a zest that connects with the public,” and through that we need to tell “a new narrative about the nation” so that we can “become the disruptors again. Not by aping the far right, but by being the agents of change, the builders of a better future.” Also listen here.

“Americans think the system is rigged – and we need effective ways of talking about it. This guide provides summarised guidance on how to talk about rigged systems in ways that inspire collective action, reduce exclusionary attitudes, and foster support for systemic change.” The three core framing elements are: “1. Appeal to values that centre collective power; 2. Explain HOW the system is rigged, not just WHO is rigging it; 3. Match the scale of the solution with the scale of the problem.” For more information on the research, a complete explanation of the System is Rigged mindset, and further recommendations on talking about rigged systems, read the full research report.

Hayes claims that we are now in “the attention age”, whose incentives “create a new model for public debate in which attention is its own end, to be grabbed by any means necessary”. It is a time when “amusement will outcompete information, and spectacle will outcompete arguments,” when democratic deliberation becomes “like trying to meditate in a strip club”. Trump is the master of this age, having hacked attention-age public discourse by “willing to court negative attention at the cost of persuasion.” So do we join in? “What good is persuasion if no one’s paying attention?” Do we have to accept that “you can be polite and civil and ignored, or you can fuck shit up and make people pay attention”?

An outline proposal for “a movement ecology, in the time of collapse and rising fascism,” which includes a detailed and compassionate reflection of the current context and its roots. We are encouraged to look “beyond frenetic action, which often targets, ineffectively, a multitude of symptoms, towards the possibility of enough collaboration and enough shared direction, focussed on addressing causes,” so that we might “sow seeds to support a profound transformation, over time.” This will involve developing community agency through preparation, recognising that “no one is going to save us, we need to prepare together”, and orienting toward a ‘third attractor’ – “a different and better way of being together”. Bradbrook offers ten suggestions of “what needs figuring out together” to build a “collective immune response”, and three opportunities to connect.