Speaker 1: Welcome to How the Citizen with Baritune Day, a show
Speaker 1: where we reimagine the word citizen as a verb and
Speaker 1: remind ourselves how to wield our collective power. I'm Baritone Day.
Speaker 1: There is a lot of stress in the United States
Speaker 1: right now, and it feels like it could explode at
Speaker 1: any moment. In fact, it already has. Our president has
Speaker 1: refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power if
Speaker 1: he loses the upcoming election. Members of the current administration
Speaker 1: have celebrated and encouraged political violence beyond the context of
Speaker 1: an election. We've had armed skirmishes in our streets, violence
Speaker 1: directed by and at law enforcement. Citizens have killed their
Speaker 1: fellow citizens at protests. Personally, I've never known so many
Speaker 1: self described liberals to talk so openly about taking up arms.
Speaker 1: This feels scary. We don't bring guns to ballot boxes.
Speaker 1: It's the opposite of patriotism and the undermining of democracy.
Speaker 1: There is a better way to do this. Years ago,
Speaker 1: I had the opportunity to host a PBS television series
Speaker 1: comprised entirely of ted talks, and one of those speakers
Speaker 1: stuck with me four years. She spoke passionately about non
Speaker 1: violence as a force more powerful than violence from making change.
Speaker 1: She referenced a hundred methods, an oddly specific number, methods
Speaker 1: of non violent strategic action that could bring down authoritarian
Speaker 1: regimes or prevent them from rising. Given the current situation
Speaker 1: in my beloved United States, I knew I needed to
Speaker 1: speak with her. This is my conversation with Jamila Rakib,
Speaker 1: executive director of the Albert Einstein Institution and a sort
Speaker 1: of coach to non violent activists around the world. I'm
Speaker 1: Jamila Rakkeib, and I'm an oppressor's first nightmare that was
Speaker 1: the sound of bombs being dropped. Y'all, all right, we'll
Speaker 1: keep it. We'll keep it. I'd love for you to
Speaker 1: start us off, Jamila, with a brief history of strategic
Speaker 1: nonviolent resistance or action. What is it? How is it
Speaker 1: formalized into a field of study of practice? Yeah, So,
Speaker 1: I think when we think about strategic non violent action,
Speaker 1: we tend to think of many different things at the
Speaker 1: same time, and it sort of loses meaning, right. I
Speaker 1: think the popular conception is that nonviolent action is somehow
Speaker 1: about reject violence, that it's about, you know, what you
Speaker 1: don't do rather than what you do instead. But what
Speaker 1: we study right, is distilled from thousands of years of
Speaker 1: history of cases where people have used not violence, but
Speaker 1: other means social political, economic, acts of non cooperation, different
Speaker 1: types of protests, non violent intervention. You talked about the
Speaker 1: one methods. These are a collection of all the kind
Speaker 1: of catalog of the types of actions people have taken.
Speaker 1: And so strategic non violent action really refers to groups
Speaker 1: throughout history using these means for particular objectives. And what
Speaker 1: Jean Sharp, my mentor and colleague, did was look at
Speaker 1: these cases and say, you know, we usually equate this
Speaker 1: type of action with Gandhi or King, but actually there's
Speaker 1: this rich history and the idea is, you know, people
Speaker 1: have been using it in an improvised way without a
Speaker 1: lot of knowledge or access to resources. What might be
Speaker 1: done if we actually looked at this type of action,
Speaker 1: study it to figure out what makes it succeed, what
Speaker 1: are the factors that contribute to failure, and how can
Speaker 1: those lessons really be used by social political movements today
Speaker 1: to make what they're doing more powerful and more effective.
Speaker 1: And so it's a body of work, it's a research field,
Speaker 1: and it's also a type of action that people are
Speaker 1: doing around the world. You know, every day you are
Speaker 1: the executive director of a place known as the Albert
Speaker 1: Einstein Institute. When I hear that, I imagine particle accelerators
Speaker 1: and time travel research. What's the connection between Albert Einstein
Speaker 1: and the study of strategic use of non violent resistance.
Speaker 1: It's a great question, and it's a question that we
Speaker 1: get a lot. Unsurprisingly, it can be for some like
Speaker 1: a bit of a confusing name, and we get lots
Speaker 1: of emails and phone calls asking about scientific theories that
Speaker 1: we don't understand. So there's a couple of ways to
Speaker 1: answer that, and I think that the one that's really
Speaker 1: key here is that Jean Sharp, our founder in his twenties,
Speaker 1: was a conscientious objector to the Korean War, and he
Speaker 1: also was at the time studying the Indian independence movement
Speaker 1: and what Gandhi had done. So he wrote his master's
Speaker 1: thesis on the book about Gandhi. And he was also
Speaker 1: at the same time facing a prison term for his
Speaker 1: conscientious objection, and so he reached out to Albert Einstein
Speaker 1: and said, you know, I'm about to go to prison
Speaker 1: and I've also written a book. And that was during
Speaker 1: the McCarthy era, and Einstein was you know, sort of
Speaker 1: a mentor to a lot of people who were, you know,
Speaker 1: refusing to cooperate with the draft board or with the
Speaker 1: stuff going on with McCarthy um. And so they formed
Speaker 1: this sort of pen pal relationship. And this is also
Speaker 1: sort of a nod to Einstein's views at the end
Speaker 1: of his life, during this time where he was having
Speaker 1: this correspondence with Jean Sharpe where he said, you know,
Speaker 1: Gandhi is a brilliant political strategist. This theory and type
Speaker 1: of action is the best hope we have to deal
Speaker 1: with these very very serious political questions of our time.
Speaker 1: And so really at the end of his life he
Speaker 1: thought non Band of Resistance really offered humanity a very
Speaker 1: powerful tool for social justice and political justice. And so yeah,
Speaker 1: that's where the name comes from. Albert Einstein's pen Pal
Speaker 1: is a great title of a story I want to
Speaker 1: consume in any medium. What's your story with this, Jimmie,
Speaker 1: How did you get connected to this work? Why does
Speaker 1: it matter to you? Yeah? I wish there was like
Speaker 1: a great story to it. But really I applied for
Speaker 1: a job, a job that I thought was a one
Speaker 1: year position. I had just finished school. But before that,
Speaker 1: of course, I my own history is that I was
Speaker 1: born in Afghanistan during the Soviet War, and so you know,
Speaker 1: I grew up with really the war as a backdrop
Speaker 1: to my childhood. Uh. We became refugees in the US,
Speaker 1: but even as we lived in the US, in Maine,
Speaker 1: of all places, we had our eye to the country
Speaker 1: we were from, and really disturbed by the level of
Speaker 1: suffering going on there, but also really in tune with
Speaker 1: the fact that, you know, people were waging this holy war,
Speaker 1: this war for the defense of their homeland, and so
Speaker 1: really this idea that war was necessary, that it was
Speaker 1: you know, a just war. And so I grew up
Speaker 1: with really, you know, that kind of backdrop, really thinking
Speaker 1: about war and violence and conflict, knowing that there's a
Speaker 1: terrible cost to war, but that is something that we
Speaker 1: have to use sometimes for so called good purposes. So
Speaker 1: that was really my thinking until I found this work,
Speaker 1: until I got you know, kind of connected with the
Speaker 1: Albert Einstein Institution, where I came to it as a skeptic.
Speaker 1: I thought this was about people in the US telling
Speaker 1: other people from a place of privilege that violence was
Speaker 1: morally wrong, that they shouldn't do it, you know, not
Speaker 1: really connected with the level of suffering that goes on
Speaker 1: and and how are people to you know, fight against oppression.
Speaker 1: And so I learned very quickly that this isn't a
Speaker 1: moralistic condemnation of war and violence. It's really about offering
Speaker 1: an alternative that is actually powerful, as powerful as as
Speaker 1: war and violence, if not more. And so that is
Speaker 1: hugely appealing. And I think it's that connection that I
Speaker 1: think a lot of people make to the work, you know,
Speaker 1: when they find out that this is a centuries old,
Speaker 1: it's something very human, doesn't require us to be good
Speaker 1: morally good requires us to be stubborn, and that we
Speaker 1: know humans are really good at. And so it was
Speaker 1: this idea that wow, this is like totally accessible, right,
Speaker 1: It's not something that Amahatma Gandhi does, It's something I
Speaker 1: can do. And so I think that's the big attraction
Speaker 1: to the work, as it was for me as well.
Speaker 1: So the one your position turned into, well, it's continues
Speaker 1: until today, this idea that non violence is more powerful
Speaker 1: than violence. I think we'll meet some skeptical minds when
Speaker 1: they hear it. And I've heard you say before that
Speaker 1: you have this image that we have that non violence
Speaker 1: is some moral attempt two change the heart of the oppressor.
Speaker 1: It is a false understanding of its power. Can you
Speaker 1: ground us in the source of the power of non
Speaker 1: island civil resistance and action? So I think at the
Speaker 1: root of it is an understanding of power. Right, It's
Speaker 1: absolutely at the heart of it. I think that we
Speaker 1: understand power as if somehow it's inherent to our political leaders. Right,
Speaker 1: it's actually in according to establish political theory, right, as
Speaker 1: well as our understanding of the world, not and how
Speaker 1: it we want it to be, but in fact how
Speaker 1: it is, and that is that we give our institutions
Speaker 1: and our leaders and our political systems power through what
Speaker 1: we do or what we refuse to do. And so
Speaker 1: that's at the heart of it, right, is the theory
Speaker 1: of consent of power. And so you know, we think
Speaker 1: that you know, even in the most authoritarian systems, that
Speaker 1: people and institutions provide various types of skills and assistance
Speaker 1: and obedience and cooperation. That cooperation and assistant allows those
Speaker 1: systems to function. And so it's that cooperation and obedience
Speaker 1: and those skills are either kind of restricted or in
Speaker 1: severe cases, if it's completely withdrawn, then powerholders are left
Speaker 1: with none of the power that they need in order
Speaker 1: to survive. And so in extreme cases you could see
Speaker 1: like a disintegration, right, which is a complete overthrow of
Speaker 1: an oppressive government. And then at other stages, it could be,
Speaker 1: you know, a type of by exerting this power, you
Speaker 1: could create a situation where you get an accommodation or
Speaker 1: a coercion. But it's not about asking for something right,
Speaker 1: it's about understanding that actually, again, you hold power by
Speaker 1: what you do and what you refuse to do, and
Speaker 1: if you do that in a collective then it can
Speaker 1: be greatly destabilizing to the power of an oppressive system.
Speaker 1: There's an additional powerful notion that I came across in
Speaker 1: some other interview did with a different podcaster, But I
Speaker 1: loved it so much because it was breaking down this
Speaker 1: false idea that you're trying to ask an oppressor to
Speaker 1: be nice to you, to just come around to morally
Speaker 1: see the error of their ways, and actually that strategic
Speaker 1: nonviolence is about the oppressed people finding their power, right.
Speaker 1: It's actually it's not about appealing to the oppressor. It's
Speaker 1: appealing to yourself and seeing yourself as a source of power.
Speaker 1: When you combine with other people, and that is not
Speaker 1: an obvious interpretation when I hear nonviolence, and so I
Speaker 1: think it's a really powerful, no pun intended point. And
Speaker 1: thank you for kind of breathing some life into that
Speaker 1: a bit with us here. Yeah, that's really key. I
Speaker 1: think there's an amazing quote where this like sociologists, this
Speaker 1: Indian sociologist says he's sick and tired of people saying
Speaker 1: that we need to melt the heart of the opponent. Right.
Speaker 1: What we need to do, he said, is melt the
Speaker 1: heart of the oppressed, right, to change the heart of
Speaker 1: the oppress so that they see their own power. And
Speaker 1: so he was he was talking about the Indian independence movement,
Speaker 1: but also more generally, really about this kind of the
Speaker 1: conditions that allow oppressive systems to function, and that it's
Speaker 1: deeply rooted to people's own unders standing of their own power.
Speaker 1: And I think this is so connected to our world
Speaker 1: today and then to our country today, because I think
Speaker 1: when we think about power, we tend to think that,
Speaker 1: you know, places of dictatorship or authoritarianism or these severe
Speaker 1: places that's where people feel apathy. But in fact, our
Speaker 1: own society also has a lot of trouble with this,
Speaker 1: you know, the sense of kind of inertia, our apathy,
Speaker 1: which is not that people don't care, right, people definitely care.
Speaker 1: They know that there's huge stakes here, but it's really
Speaker 1: about feeling helpless and and in the face of those forces,
Speaker 1: you know. And that's why I think, you know, having
Speaker 1: tools and understanding and basic literacy and civil resistance that
Speaker 1: that you talked about earlier is really so key. And
Speaker 1: I think it's you know, it's really that engaged citizen
Speaker 1: rate that prevents these types of violations from happening. I
Speaker 1: understand all of this sounds very theoretical, but we're gonna
Speaker 1: get practical. We're gonna bust open that toolbox right now
Speaker 1: because you and your institute have a list a hundred
Speaker 1: methods of non violence. So for those on the violence
Speaker 1: side of the ledger, there's an armory and there are
Speaker 1: small arms, and there are tanks and their aircraft and
Speaker 1: the carriers thereof. But you've got a methods. Can you
Speaker 1: describe how you've organized the tools and methods of nonviolence
Speaker 1: and give us some examples of how different they might
Speaker 1: be and how they're being used. Yeah, I think the
Speaker 1: list of methods is something it goes back to like
Speaker 1: nineteen seventy three, so it's before my time, but you know,
Speaker 1: Jean Sharp started collecting these. He realized that there was
Speaker 1: this massive diversity of things people had done. That it
Speaker 1: wasn't just simply about protest, right, It wasn't simply about
Speaker 1: dissatisfaction with an existing system or policy or a set
Speaker 1: of rulers. Right. It was actually this whole range of
Speaker 1: things people had done, and that actually it was useful
Speaker 1: to think about them in categories, right, to think about
Speaker 1: them in the sense that there's the first batch or
Speaker 1: group of methods that are really symbolic right there about
Speaker 1: kind of expressing dissatisfaction, and what they do is con
Speaker 1: a to the society, to third parties, and to the
Speaker 1: opponent that people, you know, disagree with a particular policy
Speaker 1: or function of the government. And then you move into
Speaker 1: again a more powerful category, which is the methods of
Speaker 1: non cooperation. These are ones we might have heard of,
Speaker 1: like boycotts and economic non cooperation. Different types of strikes.
Speaker 1: Strikes are very very diverse. We generally tend to think
Speaker 1: of a general strike you just shut down the whole
Speaker 1: country for you know, indefinite period of time, But they
Speaker 1: are sometimes limited, limited in terms of types of industries
Speaker 1: or what they're intended to do, or for particular periods
Speaker 1: of time. You have strikes that are a day long
Speaker 1: or whatever. So there's these kinds of non cooperation that
Speaker 1: are economic or political, like withdrawal of political systems, refusal
Speaker 1: to carry out certain functions in the government, and so
Speaker 1: they really are looking at society where does power lie
Speaker 1: and who has historically withdrawn it for a particular effect.
Speaker 1: And lastly, we have what we consider the most powerful methods.
Speaker 1: These are the methods of nonviolent intervention. So I think
Speaker 1: that you know, generally a lot of people sort of
Speaker 1: equate nonviolent action to kind of undermining systems. Right. These
Speaker 1: are the methods that are actually the creation of institutions,
Speaker 1: the building of society. The ones that are actually quite subversive,
Speaker 1: because what it means is that you're creating the new,
Speaker 1: you know, before you get rid of the old, and
Speaker 1: that actually you're making that old obsolete because of the
Speaker 1: creative They include things like creation of again alternative institutions,
Speaker 1: alternative media, civil disobediences is in there, and creation of
Speaker 1: shadow institutions, shadow governments. We saw like a rogue ep
Speaker 1: A group spring up, you know, this would be an
Speaker 1: example of non violent intervention. How do you know what
Speaker 1: tool is right for what circumstances? People are facing a
Speaker 1: variety of levels of legitimacy to their government, levels of
Speaker 1: protests or or disagreement with what their governments are doing.
Speaker 1: And I have a far fetched example in mind, like
Speaker 1: let's say your head of state refuses to leave office.
Speaker 1: What are the tools that might be a populous disposal
Speaker 1: in that super hypothetical situation. So this is not necessarily
Speaker 1: something that can provide sort of like a formula for this, right,
Speaker 1: But when I know, right, there's no shortcuts in this stuff.
Speaker 1: But here's what we know. A lot of the kind
Speaker 1: of trends and conditions that we see in this hypothetical
Speaker 1: situation you point out, we've seen before, right, So we
Speaker 1: do know that there's a way in which kind of
Speaker 1: illegal or executive usurpations or cruise if you want to
Speaker 1: call it, that happen, and there's ways in which those
Speaker 1: have found historically defeated. Looking at those lessons that those
Speaker 1: kind of cases provide, you know that there's sort of
Speaker 1: general categories of methods that have been really useful. The
Speaker 1: idea of Defeating a coup or illegal and constitutional action
Speaker 1: by an executive is something that requires a couple of things.
Speaker 1: One is a rejection, widespread rejection of the illegal action
Speaker 1: by as many people as possible, as quickly as possible,
Speaker 1: and the second is non cooperation with the coup. How
Speaker 1: do you pick methods? This is a great question because
Speaker 1: I think you know, the list of methods is exciting,
Speaker 1: but it's also in a way dangerous, right, because these
Speaker 1: methods are not meant to work on their own without
Speaker 1: an understanding of how they work together as part of
Speaker 1: a strategy. So a situation where you have a potential
Speaker 1: attack on the government, I mean this is something for
Speaker 1: which people should be prepared, right, People should be prepared
Speaker 1: in the sense of when we understand what democracy is,
Speaker 1: we should know that it's part of a process, a
Speaker 1: process where there could be attacks against it, whether internal
Speaker 1: or external, and so having a sort of so called
Speaker 1: civilian based defense policy, right, something that is prepared in
Speaker 1: advance for situations like this is super helpful. Now we
Speaker 1: find ourselves in the midst of a crisis. So what
Speaker 1: I'm saying is is not potentially helpful. Right, This is
Speaker 1: for the next time, But right, now we're in a
Speaker 1: crisis moment, right, and so I think what a lot
Speaker 1: of people are thinking about is how do you foster
Speaker 1: super decentralized action that is still effective and that feeds
Speaker 1: into a kind of larger strategy. Who is working on
Speaker 1: that strategy? So I think what we're seeing in our country,
Speaker 1: we're going to take it non hypothetical for a moment,
Speaker 1: is that people recognizing that we're facing this potential crisis
Speaker 1: that could bring a lot of harm to our communities
Speaker 1: and to our country, are figuring out what to do quickly.
Speaker 1: And so I think that you know, they're working on
Speaker 1: developing a response to various scenarios that experts are identifying,
Speaker 1: and they're figuring out what is the role of different
Speaker 1: people and institutions in our society. There are the people
Speaker 1: that are going to need to cooperate with illegal orders,
Speaker 1: and so those are going to be people within various institutions,
Speaker 1: you know, people that work in the electoral system, police
Speaker 1: and members of our government, elected officials and others. And
Speaker 1: then there's really the rest of us. So what do
Speaker 1: the rest of us do? The rest of us are
Speaker 1: still part of various groups. We're part of different associations.
Speaker 1: We are individuals, but we're also workers, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: we have different types of leverage, and so figuring out
Speaker 1: what groups we belong to and how those groups could
Speaker 1: be mobilized again to do those two things. The rejection,
Speaker 1: you know, the rejection of the coup as loudly and
Speaker 1: clearly as possible, in whatever ways we have to communicate
Speaker 1: that to make sure it's understood that this is not acceptable.
Speaker 1: And also the non cooperation in what ways can we
Speaker 1: refuse to cooperate and do certain things or refused to
Speaker 1: do other things that can really block certain things from
Speaker 1: happening at the community level. But do that in accordance
Speaker 1: with a common vision, some common goals, and I think
Speaker 1: people are working on those principles. They're working on rolling
Speaker 1: out like tactical recommendations to people. There's a number of groups,
Speaker 1: maybe some people on our call today are familiar with those.
Speaker 1: So there's the creation of new groups that are thinking
Speaker 1: about this, and then there's also the strengthening of existing groups.
Speaker 1: And that's the two things we need to be doing.
Speaker 1: Do you feel like your work has become more relevant
Speaker 1: in the United States over the past four years and
Speaker 1: are you particularly worried or increasingly worried about what you've
Speaker 1: seen play out in the US over the past four years. Yeah, definitely,
Speaker 1: I think your first question it is definitely increasingly relevant.
Speaker 1: I know that from the number of inquiries we're getting
Speaker 1: from the access to our website, tapping into resources and material,
Speaker 1: people ordering books. It's hard to keep things in stock
Speaker 1: these days, anti dictatorship material. I think that, you know,
Speaker 1: people sort of fear the worst, and I think the
Speaker 1: best antidote to that is to prepare. And so you know,
Speaker 1: if we develop these capacities and then the worst doesn't happen,
Speaker 1: then there's no harm there. But the idea that we
Speaker 1: would have this kind of thinking through of what what
Speaker 1: has been done historically to fight against authoritarianism, I think
Speaker 1: is really the smart move. So it's a busy time
Speaker 1: for people working in civil resistance, for sure. What have
Speaker 1: you seen on the non violence side of strategic use
Speaker 1: of this over the past few years that has made
Speaker 1: you feel good, something worth celebrating, a novel deployment of
Speaker 1: one of these methods or several, you know, I think
Speaker 1: it's the creation of networks and new groups that are
Speaker 1: thinking about this, that are thinking of you know, these
Speaker 1: sort of incremental violations that we've been seeing in our
Speaker 1: country and figuring out how to respond to it at
Speaker 1: a community level. Clearly a lot, you know, more needs
Speaker 1: to be done. I think we're in a moment of opportunity,
Speaker 1: a moment of responsibility to figure out, you know, how
Speaker 1: to use what we've been paying attention to, what we've
Speaker 1: been learning, what we've been preparing for, to really mobilize
Speaker 1: in this moment. But you know, I think that some
Speaker 1: of the best stuff that I've seen really around climate
Speaker 1: defense and really about a lot of the stuff that
Speaker 1: we've seen in the progressive movement. Young people coming together,
Speaker 1: young people doing like tons of trainings and you know,
Speaker 1: trying to develop the skills and the knowledge and the
Speaker 1: sort of plans needed so that, you know, in a
Speaker 1: moment of crisis they could act effectively. So it may
Speaker 1: be that the best stuff that I've seen is really
Speaker 1: the behind the scenes stuff. You know, we've seen huge mobilizations,
Speaker 1: right we saw the biggest protests in our country's history
Speaker 1: were over the summer, the racial justice protests, and that's
Speaker 1: an enormous show of power and it's great. Right people
Speaker 1: who have been marginalized are taking power where they can
Speaker 1: how they can and winning incremental successes. Have they done
Speaker 1: everything that they set out to do? Clearly not, because
Speaker 1: these systems are very well entrenched and that that takes time.
Speaker 1: So there is the kind of street level action that
Speaker 1: we've seen with the Women's March, you know, with the
Speaker 1: young people on gun reform, immigration reform, all of this.
Speaker 1: It's really heartening, right, but it is the first step.
Speaker 1: There's got to be the next phase of this, and
Speaker 1: that has to go beyond simply you know, again sort
Speaker 1: of bringing attention to injustice to actually shifting things, shifting
Speaker 1: power in our country. It feels like we have an
Speaker 1: increasing amount of political violence in the United States, or
Speaker 1: the threat of it, but certainly the actual user. We
Speaker 1: have skirmishes in the streets. People have actually been murdered
Speaker 1: over the course of the past several years at protests
Speaker 1: which have been largely pful. How do you think about
Speaker 1: that rise, at least as I'm characterizing it, And how
Speaker 1: do you think about the presence of violence in and
Speaker 1: among largely non violent gatherings. Where is that coming from?
Speaker 1: The huge rhetorical arguments. Are these peaceful protests? Are there
Speaker 1: a John provocateurs what's your read on how we should
Speaker 1: read this rising tide. First of all, I think we
Speaker 1: need to figure out how to interpret that violence, right.
Speaker 1: I think that there's been a narrative that somehow these
Speaker 1: were violent protests. In fact, the data doesn't back that up.
Speaker 1: They were largely non violent, something like ninety seven percent
Speaker 1: or more. And so the cases where either violence was
Speaker 1: used against against the police or against others is very
Speaker 1: very limited. And in cases where violence was used, it
Speaker 1: was usually from the police or from counter protesters. So
Speaker 1: that's one I think we need to be careful about
Speaker 1: kind of characterizing this. Then there's I think the question
Speaker 1: about the future. I mean, there's so much to it, right,
Speaker 1: I think there's been a narrative that somehow there's this
Speaker 1: sort of law and order narrative that somehow protests gets
Speaker 1: delegitimized because of the actions of a few people. There's
Speaker 1: a strategic question there in terms of how to prepare
Speaker 1: for it, because we find ourselves in this situation where,
Speaker 1: you know, experts are saying that we're facing a period
Speaker 1: of time that is likely to be characterized by quite
Speaker 1: a lot of chaos and potential political violence. So as
Speaker 1: a society, how do we prepare for that, How do
Speaker 1: we prepare to withstand it? How do we make sure
Speaker 1: that it's not used by our people we agree with,
Speaker 1: you know, our our movement. How how do we make
Speaker 1: sure that our movements demands that are legitimate are carried
Speaker 1: out non violently. Right, So, I think the strategic thing
Speaker 1: is to understand that violence is counterproductive, that in fact,
Speaker 1: it carries a cost that we're not going to be
Speaker 1: willing to pay in our society, That justifying limited acts
Speaker 1: of violence is very dangerous. You know, I have a
Speaker 1: colleague that says that, you know, the use of violence
Speaker 1: and a movement is sort of inevitable. Right, You're gonna
Speaker 1: have little bits of violence any time you're getting a
Speaker 1: mobilization of potentially millions of people. The ideas to figure
Speaker 1: out how do you identify it and isolate it, and
Speaker 1: how do you take steps at a strategic level to
Speaker 1: anticipate it and to you know, try to prepare for
Speaker 1: it at that level, but also tactically, what do you
Speaker 1: do in the midst of a protest with you know,
Speaker 1: all the emotion in that moment, especially groups that are
Speaker 1: being met with repression. How do you make sure your
Speaker 1: movement doesn't turn to violence, because he says that violence,
Speaker 1: even defensive violence in a movement is like moisture in
Speaker 1: the engine of your car. You know a little bit
Speaker 1: of moisture and maybe it's okay, and the engine will sputter,
Speaker 1: but you get to a point where you know it's
Speaker 1: very difficult to control it will be if you add
Speaker 1: more and more of this moisture, this contaminant, then it
Speaker 1: will make the system malfunction. So the movement does potentially collapse.
Speaker 1: So I think under standing violence as being counterproductive is
Speaker 1: something that we need to really really promote in our society.
Speaker 1: Not that it's morally wrong, which we may think it
Speaker 1: is or it's not, but the justification piece is really
Speaker 1: has to be a pragmatic one, right that this is
Speaker 1: unwanted in our society. That has to be very very clear.
Speaker 1: And so yeah, I am worried right now about some
Speaker 1: of the conversation about what types of action is allowable,
Speaker 1: and so I think we need to be prepared for
Speaker 1: that in terms of, you know, what we need to
Speaker 1: be doing at a tactical level. I think we should
Speaker 1: be prepared for groups that are willing and have the
Speaker 1: capacity to use violence. We've already seen that in our streets,
Speaker 1: and so there's a variety of ways in which we
Speaker 1: can reduce that risk to communities. There's a bunch of
Speaker 1: tools like the development of peacekeeping teams. These are groups
Speaker 1: of people that are especially trained to identify violence and
Speaker 1: to isolated to make sure it's not being used by
Speaker 1: the movement. That's something that's worked around the world. It
Speaker 1: was used in the Indian independence movement. It was also
Speaker 1: used in the civil rights movement. You know, the use
Speaker 1: of marshals that participate in demonstrations to again make sure
Speaker 1: that people don't use violence and to isolate them when
Speaker 1: they do. Besides that, you know, some of the best
Speaker 1: examples are ways in which groups have used humor and
Speaker 1: actually deflated right wing groups or armed groups. There's some
Speaker 1: cool examples where you know, people have heard that there
Speaker 1: was going to be a right wing rally and basically
Speaker 1: flooded that public square with like clowns. And I found
Speaker 1: this an incredible example and happened in North Carolina where
Speaker 1: they said that these groups showed up one by one,
Speaker 1: you know, these individuals that had showed up for this
Speaker 1: right wing rally, they found the square filled with clowns,
Speaker 1: and they really didn't know what to do in response
Speaker 1: to it, so they kind of left. So I find
Speaker 1: that celebration of joy and love and music and culture
Speaker 1: and art in our community as being an amazing, amazing
Speaker 1: sort of antidote to right wing violence. What comes next
Speaker 1: in your studies after pro test movements? You mentioned the
Speaker 1: largest protests in at least some definition of history that
Speaker 1: we've just been through in the United States. How do
Speaker 1: you sustain that energy but morph it into different tactics
Speaker 1: to achieve the goals, which is never just to protest?
Speaker 1: What have what have you seen? Do you have any
Speaker 1: studied advice for the next steps for protest movement to grow?
Speaker 1: I think it's such a great question, and I think
Speaker 1: that there's no clear answer right now. What we're seeing
Speaker 1: is that, you know, there was this massive mobilization of
Speaker 1: groups that I think that the danger there is that
Speaker 1: if people think that you know, structural major change for
Speaker 1: you know, centuries old system can be overturned by that
Speaker 1: type of in the streets demonstrations, that that can actually
Speaker 1: lead to a sense of kind of helplessness. And so
Speaker 1: I think we need to celebrate the victories we have
Speaker 1: achieved so far in the racial justice movement, and there
Speaker 1: have been a lot of important incremental winds and and
Speaker 1: to not lose sight of the fact that there's an
Speaker 1: endgame here because a vision of the kind of society
Speaker 1: that we want. And so I would say back to
Speaker 1: the drawing board. This is where strategy is so important.
Speaker 1: Figuring out what are the tools at our disposal, what
Speaker 1: power have we created, and how can we kind of
Speaker 1: escalates right non violently, and how can we grow our demands?
Speaker 1: And I think that means that we see this as
Speaker 1: a process. Right. These events can't be one off, They
Speaker 1: have to be part of long term vision and I
Speaker 1: think we're seeing that in the racial justice movement a
Speaker 1: lot of the kind of strength created that doesn't just
Speaker 1: go away, right. Those are groups that now have developed
Speaker 1: a level of trust, that have actually achieved some big
Speaker 1: wins together. That level of confidence is something that is
Speaker 1: hugely empowering, and I would say communities are going to
Speaker 1: be drawing from that well of power when they go
Speaker 1: on to demand. At the next thing, I'm thinking about
Speaker 1: the crisis that we spoke of earlier, this sort of
Speaker 1: hypothetical with our current head of state, should the election
Speaker 1: and legitimately go not in his favor. What happens when
Speaker 1: the object of such public ire does move on, but
Speaker 1: the systems that have been corrupted remain. Have you witnessed
Speaker 1: collapses or how have movements sustained themselves after the person
Speaker 1: many people perceive of as the villain has formally left
Speaker 1: the stage? You know? I think that the best example
Speaker 1: of this is some of the uprisings of the Arab Spring,
Speaker 1: in which people wage these massive struggles against these entrenched
Speaker 1: opponents that were successful at least in the short term, right.
Speaker 1: I think the problem that we face globally is that
Speaker 1: we tend to kind of almost personalized oppression in the
Speaker 1: sense that we tend to think that individuals are responsible
Speaker 1: for it. And so in the case of some of
Speaker 1: the uprisings of the Arab springs, you know, specifically the
Speaker 1: the Egyptian struggle, I think that there needs to be
Speaker 1: a plan for what comes next, and not just about
Speaker 1: how do you undermine and overthrow the oppressive system or
Speaker 1: the oppressive opponent, but how do you understand that actually
Speaker 1: there were conditions that brought them to power and there
Speaker 1: are also deep structural institutions that are very invested in
Speaker 1: the status quo that are going to make sure that
Speaker 1: they survive, you know, a revolution or uprising or whatever
Speaker 1: the case may be. So I'm thinking about that for
Speaker 1: our own society, right And this is where I think
Speaker 1: it helps to think long term, to understand that we're
Speaker 1: here at this juncture for a number of reasons, and
Speaker 1: also there's gonna be things to do. Even if we're
Speaker 1: successful in the short term, we're gonna have a very
Speaker 1: broken country in which a lot of our institutions have
Speaker 1: been undermined. Authoritarians are in the business of undermining institutions,
Speaker 1: not strengthening them, And so we need to be thinking
Speaker 1: about how do we develop the networks and capacities in
Speaker 1: our communities and at a state level, at a federal
Speaker 1: level that can make sure that this is a transition
Speaker 1: that we all survive, because the idea is not to
Speaker 1: kind of get rid of one potential authoritarian for another,
Speaker 1: and societies are very vulnerable, and so you know, I
Speaker 1: have no clear answer except for we must think about
Speaker 1: not just how to win in the short term, but
Speaker 1: really how to defend that win. And I think that's
Speaker 1: what democracy is. I want to push you on that
Speaker 1: because I love where you're going. This is not about
Speaker 1: the short term. It is about the long term. And
Speaker 1: we've often interpreted democracy as an Olympic effort every four years.
Speaker 1: But even those Olympic athletes are not working every four years.
Speaker 1: They're working every day, their training every day. And that's
Speaker 1: how you get to the Olympics as you work hard
Speaker 1: every day. So, in terms of going past the vote,
Speaker 1: in terms of restoring trust or faith in our institutions,
Speaker 1: what do you want us to do to make this
Speaker 1: long term? What's your vision for how we sustain our
Speaker 1: energy here? I think that a lot of what's happened
Speaker 1: in our country has been deliberate or sort of by design.
Speaker 1: I think, uh, there's a level of divisiveness that is
Speaker 1: really really harmful and dangerous that I think has really
Speaker 1: contributed to where we are today. So I'd say to
Speaker 1: resist that, to resist that in whatever ways that we can.
Speaker 1: I observe something in the United States that I've seen
Speaker 1: elsewhere and that I think students of history have seen elsewhere,
Speaker 1: and it is this sort of isolation and atomization, this
Speaker 1: kind of fragmentation of society, and that is something that
Speaker 1: is as a condition of generally authoritarian systems. Right, This
Speaker 1: idea that individuals are these individual units, and that really
Speaker 1: works to the benefit of power holders, right, because individual
Speaker 1: units are not very good at collective action. So I
Speaker 1: think again, building networks, building networks of trust, maybe with
Speaker 1: people you don't agree with on everything, maybe not necessarily
Speaker 1: politic coal organizations, but networks of people that come together
Speaker 1: to do various things. And so I think that's really
Speaker 1: key for the long term. What resources would you recommend
Speaker 1: for people who have had their appetites weddened by this moment,
Speaker 1: who want to learn more. Well, I think that there's
Speaker 1: a really rich history of non violent resistance that people
Speaker 1: have been studying that we can draw from. I think
Speaker 1: that our education system doesn't really teach us to be
Speaker 1: good citizens. I think we tend to highlight history of
Speaker 1: war and violence as having achieved the changes that we value.
Speaker 1: And I think again, educating ourselves is key. Clearly, change
Speaker 1: of our education system is important, but in the meantime,
Speaker 1: we can practively educate ourselves, and there are groups that
Speaker 1: have been working on developing those resources and tools. My
Speaker 1: organization is just one of them. We have a website
Speaker 1: with a wealth of information. There's some things that are
Speaker 1: nine page books, but then there are things of varying
Speaker 1: length in detail, and some of it is theory, a
Speaker 1: lot of it is, you know, against stories. I think
Speaker 1: these stories are so important, right Our history is filled
Speaker 1: with them, but we just haven't done a good job
Speaker 1: paying attention. I think drawing from them as sources of
Speaker 1: inspiration is key, but also as sources of insight to
Speaker 1: figure out what we ourselves can do, right. I mean,
Speaker 1: just as the conditions we're facing right now are not
Speaker 1: happening for the first time, they're happening in different parts
Speaker 1: of the world, and they've happened throughout history, so they're
Speaker 1: not new, which is actually good news, right because it
Speaker 1: means that we have a set of tools on on
Speaker 1: how to respond to them. So again, the Albert Einstein
Speaker 1: Institution has a lot of resources. There's also other centers
Speaker 1: like International Center of Non Violent Conflict Nonviolence International. There's
Speaker 1: a website called Waging Nonviolence which collects these stories as
Speaker 1: they're sort of happening, and I think that's also a
Speaker 1: great resource to get more information. We ask all of
Speaker 1: our guests this question. Our show believes that the word
Speaker 1: citizens should better be interpreted as a verb as action,
Speaker 1: rather than a strictly a legal status given that interpretation,
Speaker 1: How do you, Jamila, define what it means to citizens?
Speaker 1: That's a wonderful question and I really appreciate the approach
Speaker 1: of this conversation and the definition that you've just offered.
Speaker 1: I think that again I would look to the civil
Speaker 1: resistance field and our understanding of history on how to
Speaker 1: be a good citizen, and I think that really requires
Speaker 1: us to figure out how to be engaged, how to
Speaker 1: understand the issues again, to be educated and informed, to
Speaker 1: know our rights right, but also to know what to
Speaker 1: do if those rights are violated, and again speaks to
Speaker 1: this issue of resisting apathy and inertia. I think it's
Speaker 1: just a mass for feeling helpless, accessing tools, figuring out
Speaker 1: how to connect with others, how to work with others,
Speaker 1: including again people who we may not agree with, to
Speaker 1: have a basic sort of literacy, and how change happens.
Speaker 1: So I would say the educational piece is really really key,
Speaker 1: and I think again it is an important moment right now.
Speaker 1: This moment of crisis is a moment of opportunity. Uh.
Speaker 1: And it may be that it's this moment, this crisis,
Speaker 1: that gives us all sort of a crash course and
Speaker 1: how to citizen I like that a lot, Jamala or Key,
Speaker 1: thank you for this formal one on one time. I
Speaker 1: have an observation which is thinking about the imbalance of
Speaker 1: education on these techniques and these strategies. We have the
Speaker 1: Naval College, we have West Point for violence, you know,
Speaker 1: for war, um, we don't have the equivalent for peace.
Speaker 1: And have just occurred to me like, if we invested
Speaker 1: as much in the education of these tactics, lot of
Speaker 1: the changes that have happened have not been at the
Speaker 1: end of a gun or a bandet or sword, but
Speaker 1: at the end of an idea or a word or
Speaker 1: a person standing in the street. So thank you for
Speaker 1: opening me up a little bit to that. I'm going
Speaker 1: to open up to our live studio Zumio audience. First up, Adrian,
Speaker 1: Hi Barrattende. Thank you so much for your expertise. Jamila.
Speaker 1: I'm Adrian. I'm calling in from Memope, California, but I'm
Speaker 1: an educator, so I really appreciate you bringing in the
Speaker 1: education piece to this. One of the things that has
Speaker 1: been on my mind as we kind of see social
Speaker 1: media and the media both manipulated and both a tool
Speaker 1: for us in the non violence movement. How have you
Speaker 1: seen the disinformation aspects of that used against these movements,
Speaker 1: and what are some successes that you've seen in organizers
Speaker 1: combating that and maybe some challenges that we have yet
Speaker 1: to overcome. Yeah, I think it's a real problem. I
Speaker 1: think it's one that we're seeing is highly relevant in
Speaker 1: this moment. I think there's awareness of it is a
Speaker 1: good first step. I think being more critical about where
Speaker 1: we get our information. I think that the technology companies,
Speaker 1: of social media companies do need to be pressured to
Speaker 1: combat this. But then at the end of the day,
Speaker 1: I think we need to be very critical about what
Speaker 1: we're hearing and what the motivation for that might be.
Speaker 1: We're seeing some really really dangerous signs of this. So
Speaker 1: I think right now, as far as people working on
Speaker 1: the response to election unrest, are trying to develop alternative
Speaker 1: media places where people can get information on reporting about
Speaker 1: both what people are doing, what civil society groups are doing,
Speaker 1: you know, organizations and movement people, but also you know
Speaker 1: what we're seeing in terms of the use of violence,
Speaker 1: police repression, so that people can access good information and
Speaker 1: respond appropriately, because developing tactics and strat g without good
Speaker 1: information is obviously really, really dangerous so I think it's
Speaker 1: the creation of alternative media. I think the good news
Speaker 1: is that people are being trained as sort of citizen journalists.
Speaker 1: We see this around the world in cases where you
Speaker 1: have misinformation or you have media controlled by the state,
Speaker 1: regular people can act as journalists and figure out, you know,
Speaker 1: how to filter that information to law enforcement or to
Speaker 1: you know, government officials, or to movement people to the
Speaker 1: general public. And I think that is something that people
Speaker 1: are working on and which is really important. When coming
Speaker 1: next to ned Ames, Ned I'm calling in from Madison, Wisconsin,
Speaker 1: and my question is you mentioned before about needing to
Speaker 1: focus on what comes next as part of a successful movement.
Speaker 1: Is there a complementary work that you or the Etin
Speaker 1: Institute is that are pursuing that emphasizes the building what
Speaker 1: comes next part of that equation. There's some books that
Speaker 1: are focused on there's some studies that are focused specific
Speaker 1: be on how to strengthen institutions and legislative bodies and
Speaker 1: other agencies of the government that can serve as sort
Speaker 1: of protective mechanism. And those are books like Civilian based
Speaker 1: Defense is one of them, the Anti Coup is another one,
Speaker 1: and then there's other organizations that deal with that, that
Speaker 1: set up truth and reconciliation committees that deal with how
Speaker 1: do you kind of recover from harm, recover from violent society.
Speaker 1: So I think there are there are organizations that deal
Speaker 1: on the what comes after, But I think the key
Speaker 1: is that in the development of a strategy for undermining
Speaker 1: a system or for defending a system, that it really
Speaker 1: needs to be about the immediate need, but also the
Speaker 1: longer term one, and that needs to be sort of
Speaker 1: at the front end, sort of central to leadership thinking.
Speaker 1: We have another live question, Vanetta. It is with your question.
Speaker 1: I am Vanetta. I'm from Springfield, Massachusetts. My question is
Speaker 1: more about really preparing people or the everyday person to
Speaker 1: participate in the act of non violent protests, because I
Speaker 1: think you know, people are going out, it's all about
Speaker 1: protest protests, protests, and it's supposed to be peaceful, and
Speaker 1: then you get there and now you're hit with tear gas,
Speaker 1: people actually getting injured or shot and things like that,
Speaker 1: And so I'm wondering if the institute has any resources
Speaker 1: that really prepare folks for what they're getting into, prepares
Speaker 1: them for if things, for whatever reason go sideways, and
Speaker 1: then what does that do to you as the person
Speaker 1: who wanted to go out and do good and now
Speaker 1: you know you're traumatized because you witness these things that
Speaker 1: we're supposed to be positive turn negative. So I'm just
Speaker 1: wondering if there's any preparation and or resources, if you
Speaker 1: all provide for that. Yeah, so we mainly are collecting
Speaker 1: those resources. We don't deal with that ourselves because a
Speaker 1: lot of groups are very good at that. So there
Speaker 1: are a lot of trainings, there's quite a number of
Speaker 1: them right now about how to participate effectively in a protest,
Speaker 1: and how to prepare for violence, how to again marginalize
Speaker 1: it if it if it does or isolated if it
Speaker 1: does break out, and how to prepare for things like
Speaker 1: tear gas, you know, for potentially water cannons. We're seeing
Speaker 1: a huge spite and the purchase of crowd control supposedly
Speaker 1: non lethal equipment, heavily militarized equipment by our federal governments.
Speaker 1: And we have a lot of historical and global president
Speaker 1: to this right and so we have a lot of
Speaker 1: learnings from other movements on how people have prepared for that.
Speaker 1: And you may have seen the umbrella movements in Hong
Speaker 1: kong Uh and I think they are incredibly savvy with
Speaker 1: the way in which they deal with some of the
Speaker 1: equipment that's been used against them, and so they've actually
Speaker 1: provided a lot of insight too. I think it is
Speaker 1: really important for a movement to think of that and
Speaker 1: to make those resources available. Right, you talked about what
Speaker 1: it means to go participate and what perhaps you think
Speaker 1: is a non violent pro tests only to be hit
Speaker 1: with tear gas. Tear gas is extremely painful, so is
Speaker 1: a lot of this other equipment, and it's hugely radicalizing. Right.
Speaker 1: I think that's one thing that it actually escalates a conflict,
Speaker 1: and so it's really not in the best interest of
Speaker 1: anyone to be using this against citizens that are non violent.
Speaker 1: And I think this is really dangerous, I think for
Speaker 1: what we may see coming, because there's this concept of
Speaker 1: political jiu jitsu. Right. This is like a term Jean
Speaker 1: Sharp came up with. It's that repression backfires. Right. Repression
Speaker 1: is designed to make groups stop what they're doing, to
Speaker 1: make them abandon their activities. But actually what happens globally,
Speaker 1: we've seen this in countless cases. It actually creates a
Speaker 1: stronger resistance. It recruits people to the movement. It actually
Speaker 1: creates fractures among the police, among the security forces, among
Speaker 1: the government. So it's in all of our best interests
Speaker 1: to de escalate and to keep things non violent, and
Speaker 1: to make sure people are prepared for these equipment and
Speaker 1: tools to be used against them. Jamila, having you on
Speaker 1: any kind of show has been a dream of mine
Speaker 1: since we met five years ago and I saw you
Speaker 1: do your ted talk for the ted PPS program. Thank
Speaker 1: you for making the time to be with us. We
Speaker 1: have learned a lot. We're gonna make sure to get
Speaker 1: this out to way more people. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: It's been so great to be with you. Just look
Speaker 1: around your community, do some searches, figure out who is
Speaker 1: sort of preparing a response, who is thinking about these issues,
Speaker 1: and then connect with them, connect with each other, connect
Speaker 1: with the available resources. It can get scary to look
Speaker 1: out at what feels like a dark world, but we
Speaker 1: obviously have to retain hope and do what we can
Speaker 1: to prevent that dark future. And I think there's a
Speaker 1: lot we can do. So yeah, it's great to be
Speaker 1: part of this conversation, and thank you all. This moment
Speaker 1: of crisis is a moment of opportunity. And it may
Speaker 1: be that it's this moment, this crisis, that gives us
Speaker 1: all a sort of crash course in how to Citizen,
Speaker 1: thank you to Mila Rakied for helping me reimagine this
Speaker 1: moment of crisis as an opportunity. I hope she has
Speaker 1: done the same for you. Follow Jamila on Twitter at
Speaker 1: Jamila Rakiev that's j A m I L A R
Speaker 1: A q I B. And you can learn more about
Speaker 1: the Albert Einstein Institution at a Einstein dot org. As always,
Speaker 1: we will post this episode of transcript and show notes
Speaker 1: plus more at how to citizen dot com. But now
Speaker 1: for the goodie bag, the calls to action the things
Speaker 1: you can do to citizen along with this episode. First up,
Speaker 1: a couple of internal actions, things that are more calls
Speaker 1: for reflection. Things you can do alone. Give your energy
Speaker 1: and attention to the things you want for your country.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna repeat that one for you. Give your energy
Speaker 1: and attention to what you want for your country, not
Speaker 1: as much what you fear. If you journal, or pray,
Speaker 1: or meditate or yoga or do all those at the
Speaker 1: same time, use those practices between now in the election
Speaker 1: to center yourself on what you want to have happened.
Speaker 1: With that clear picture, you will be in a better
Speaker 1: position emotionally and psychologically to prepare your response if things
Speaker 1: don't go the way you want. Walk that fine line
Speaker 1: with me, but do not fall over the edge into
Speaker 1: the abyss of fear and despair and panic. Hang on
Speaker 1: as a powerful visioning example out there a tangible thing.
Speaker 1: The Brooklyn Public Library, where I still serve as a
Speaker 1: member of the board of trustees, did a borrow wide
Speaker 1: exercise crafting amendment to the Constitution, a proposed amendment. It
Speaker 1: is so inspiring to see that we can still extend
Speaker 1: and create this democracy. Check it out over at the
Speaker 1: Brooklyn Public Library website. It's under amendment. The other internal
Speaker 1: action is to go to a Einstein dot org and
Speaker 1: look through the hun methods that they've accumulated around strategic
Speaker 1: nonviolent action. Look through that list. It takes just a
Speaker 1: few minutes. But then I want you to do something.
Speaker 1: I want you to identify the things on that list
Speaker 1: that you've already employed at some point in your life.
Speaker 1: Then congratulate yourself for being an active, non violent participating
Speaker 1: in our democracy. Well done. See you're already there. On
Speaker 1: the external front. I want you to continue building our
Speaker 1: collective civil resistant muscle through some actions right here. Waging
Speaker 1: Nonviolence dot org. It's a website Jamila told us about.
Speaker 1: Go to the site, share it posted on your socials.
Speaker 1: Email it be that forwarding email, uncle or Auntie. This
Speaker 1: is good spam. This is the good stuff. Waging Nonviolence
Speaker 1: dot org. There's another side I want you to check out,
Speaker 1: Choose Democracy dot us. Go to that site, take the
Speaker 1: pledge to defend democracy. Check out the action centers. Look
Speaker 1: at a training, in particular a workshop called how to
Speaker 1: defeat an election related power graph. This is part of
Speaker 1: that preparation for things we don't want to see happen,
Speaker 1: but let's be prepared. And lastly, a site called hold
Speaker 1: the Line guide dot com. Now, I'm gonna be real.
Speaker 1: This is a long documents fifty five pages. I don't
Speaker 1: expect every listener to read every page, but check out
Speaker 1: the site and check out this volunteer led effort to
Speaker 1: prepare us for the situation that we're in right now.
Speaker 1: They've got guys to setting up election protection efforts in
Speaker 1: your community. They've got workshops on non violent resistance, and
Speaker 1: they've got ways to get your elected officials, police and
Speaker 1: military personnel to commit to upholding democracy. We do this together.
Speaker 1: We cannot citizen alone. We cannot defend democracy alone. And
Speaker 1: I also don't want anyone out there living totally in fear.
Speaker 1: Prepare for things that we don't want to have happened,
Speaker 1: but dream for the things we do want to see
Speaker 1: unless invest in those dreams. As always, if you take
Speaker 1: any of these actions, let us know action how to
Speaker 1: citizen dot com throw it up on the socials under
Speaker 1: the hashtag how to citizen and give us general feedback, ideas, suggestions,
Speaker 1: comments at how to citizen dot com. You can find
Speaker 1: me a Baritone day dot com on the socials at
Speaker 1: barratuone day on Patreon at baritone Day, and you can
Speaker 1: text me to go to eight and four eight A
Speaker 1: four four. The texters get the first invites to the
Speaker 1: next live show tape, How to Citizen with barrattun Days
Speaker 1: production of I Heart Radio podcast executive produced by Miles Gray,
Speaker 1: Nick Stump, Elizabeth Stewart and Baritune Day Thurston. Produced by
Speaker 1: Joel Smith, Edited by Justin Smith. Powered by you