A Winning Strategy: Defending Democracy with Civil Resistance, with Maria Stephan

This transcript was automatically generated and may contain minor errors.

[00:00:00] Sound on Tape: This podcast is presented by Convergence, a magazine for radical insights. 

[00:00:07] Maria Stephan: The attack on the Capitol, on our democracy, as is being reframed in many circles as a patriotic act. And that those who like wage the insurrection are freedom fighters political prisoners. And so being able to reframe and tell a different story that no, these were not freedom fighters.

[00:00:27] These were not patriots. And These were folks who were acting fundamentally antithetical to democracy, they were undermining democracy and they were enabled by key parts of the authoritarian system. So that reframe of the story is so important.

[00:00:58] Scot Nakagawa: Welcome to the anti authoritarian podcast, a project of the 22nd Century Initiative. I’m Scott Nakagawa, one of your hosts. 

[00:01:06] Sue Hyde: Hello friends. I’m co-host Sue Hyde Scott and I first joined forces about 30 years ago to help defeat anti L-G-B-T-Q ballot measures proposed by Christian authoritarian groups. 

[00:01:19] Scot Nakagawa: It was as true then as it is now that those of us who believe in democracy make up a supermajority of people in this country.

[00:01:27] The challenge is, how do we go from being the majority to acting like the majority? 

[00:01:31] Sue Hyde: We dig into strategy questions like these and prescriptions for change. We talk with expert guests and commentators whose scholarship, political activism, and organizing Define the cutting edge of anti authoritarian resistance.

[00:01:47] Thank you for joining us.

[00:01:54] Scot Nakagawa: Democracy is a system that requires broad popular participation and good faith representation, negotiation, and compromise in our leadership. Threats of violence stand in direct opposition to these basic requirements. Yet, since the Capitol insurgency in 2021, violent incidents and threats of violence are on the rise.

[00:02:14] With upticks in all the major indicators of political violence, virtually no one is exempt from being targeted. Threats are directed at non partisan election officials, elected officials of both parties, professionals in schools, health care professionals, librarians, clergy, journalists, members of the judiciary, even members of law enforcement, and certainly leaders of non profit organizations and their staff and members.

[00:02:39] Given all of this it seems to me that we have a crisis on our hands. And in a crisis, we need an offense and a defense. I think we all know what the defensive maneuvers are that we need to take. We need to hold the state accountable to making sure that these threats of violence do not turn into violent incidents and to prosecute the violence incidents when they occur.

[00:02:58] But there’s a whole bunch more that could happen. We have to go on the offense and to address these threats and acts of political violence in order to maximize this backfire. Defections and extract costs on perpetrators. Defense alone will not cut it. 

[00:03:15] Sue Hyde: We’re joined by Maria Stefan, co-lead and chief organizer at the Horizons Project.

[00:03:22] She’ll talk with us about how we can maximize backfire from threats and acts of political violence. Maria is an award winning author and organizer whose work in academic, public service, and non profit sectors has focused on the role of non violent action and peace building to advance human rights, democracy, and sustainable peace in the United States and around the world.

[00:03:50] She is the co author with Erika Chenoweth of Why Civil Resistance Works, The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. Maria has a lot more publications and accomplishments to her name, but more importantly, Maria and Horizons are close collaborators with us at the 22nd Century. initiative on a range of projects.

[00:04:14] Welcome to the anti authoritarian podcast, Maria. 

[00:04:19] Sound on Tape: Thank you so much, Sue and Scott. It’s a pleasure to be with you. 

[00:04:22] Scot Nakagawa: At the Pro Horizons Project, your work on the pillars of support framework is a powerful way for people to understand how democracy flows upward from pillars of society, such as small businesses, faith institutions, communities, and more.

[00:04:36] Could you explain this framework for us? I think it would be helpful to start our conversation about political violence by talking about this framework. Help listeners understand how these pillars work to uphold democracy in their communities. 

[00:04:48] Maria Stephan: Sure. This is the anti authoritarian podcast we’ll start by talking a little bit about authoritarianism.

[00:04:54] We understand authoritarianism at the Horizons Project. And I thought I think a lot of research has examined the roles played by different organizations and institutions in holding up authoritarian systems. So the idea here is that, no organization, Autocrat can maintain power or expand power without the support, the political support, the financial support, the social, the cultural, the moral support of organizations and institutions in society that support.

[00:05:28] Provide them with those things. So you think about religious organizations and institutions that provide moral legitimacy, that provide institutional support, infrastructure. You think about businesses that provide campaign donations, that provide other forms of publicity platforms. You think about professional associations that provide critical skills and expertise.

[00:05:54] You think about civil servants that provide, really important forms of services and skills to make governments function. You think about security forces, police and the military that provide critical forms, of military and coercive support for autocrats. So the idea is that with Out the support of these organizations and institutions and autocrat is like an emperor with no clothes.

[00:06:21] The authoritarian system loses its power when it doesn’t have the support of these institutions. But another insight is that these pillars of support, these organizations and institutions are not monolithic. They’re, they’re heterogeneous. They’re made up of people whose loyalties. To an authoritarian system very so some may be staunch supporters, some may be less supportive.

[00:06:48] And one of the key attributes of successful movements for democracy are those that are able to shift the loyalties of people within those pillars so that they move support away from an autocratic or authoritarian system and towards a more A pro democracy movement. So you know, for example, you think of the classic examples of the Catholic church in the Philippines during the people power revolution there when the Catholic church removed its support from the Marcos regime and you had faith leaders and nuns in the streets with protesters and then all of a sudden they were confronting security forces.

[00:07:29] Soldiers who then defected. So then the Marcos regime could no longer rely on the security forces, which was key to the success of the pro-democracy movement. Or you think about the anti-apartheid struggle when, white business owners who were key pillars of support for the apartheid regime were faced with mass consumer boycotts led by the United Democratic front.

[00:07:53] So all of a sudden they were feeling the pressure, so they were forced to negotiate. The business owners put pressure on the de Klerk regime, which was forced to negotiate with the ANC, which ushered in a democratic transition. Similarly, you think about the civil rights campaign in this country, where businesses that were firmly supporting Jim Crow racial apartheid in the South were on the receiving end of consumer boycotts, strikes, civil disobedience, lunch counter sit ins, and that shifted their incentives.

[00:08:24] They felt it on their bottom line which caused them to then put pressure on politicians to change the policies that were upholding the Jim Crow system. So that’s why, being able to. Think about strategically how to both engage and pressure pillars of support is a really critical component of successful pro democracy organizing.

[00:08:47] Sue Hyde: Maria, I’m so glad you mentioned some important successes around the world that involved nonviolent resistance. And you believe in that. You’re a. Practitioner of strategic nonviolence. Can you tell us what makes nonviolence strategic, especially in the times of rising authoritarianism? 

[00:09:13] Maria Stephan: Sure. So just, when we’re talking about strategic nonviolent action or nonviolent resistance or civil resistance, whatever your preferred terminology, what we’re referring to is a methodology for waging struggle.

[00:09:28] Prosecuting conflict without the threat or use of physical violence. So non violent resistance involves the coordinated use of non violent direct action tactics like protests, boycott, strikes, sit ins, walk outs. The full kind of gamut of direct action tactics, whose purpose is to shift power and imposed costs, but without the threat or use of violence.

[00:09:56] So you referenced in the introduction, some of my research with Erica Chenoweth. So we studied hundreds of different campaigns. Challenging authoritarian regimes around the world, and some of these were armed movements, and some of these were nonviolent resistance movements. And, so we looked at hundreds of cases from 1900 to, over the course of a century, and we found that, first of all, the nonviolent resistance campaigns.

[00:10:26] Were twice as effective as the armed insurgencies at achieving their major political goals, meaning forcing the removal of an incumbent regime or forcing the withdrawal of a military occupation. So the nonviolent resistance campaign succeeded about 52 percent of the time compared to about 26 percent of the time for the armed insurgencies.

[00:10:49] What we found was the reason why the nonviolent resistance campaigns. We’re so much more successful was that on average, they attracted a significantly larger base of participants compared to armed struggles. So you know, movements that were able to galvanize mass diverse support. So drawing on the participation of people from different segments of a population, different sectors, races, ideologies tended to be those that were most effective.

[00:11:22] you think about it, when you have lots of people from diverse parts of society that gives a movement, a lot of legitimacy, a lot of leverage and a lot of power. Some movements succeed when they have mass diverse participation. We also found that movements that were able to expand the repertoire of nonviolent tactics tended to be more successful.

[00:11:45] So meaning those that alternated between. Concentrated methods like protests, marches, demonstrations, and those that used dispersed tactics like boycotts, walkouts, go slow tactics, stay aways, because those movements were harder to repress, they were harder to predict, and they brought in a lot more people who had different skill sets.

[00:12:10] Not everybody was going to be out on the streets. Confronting security forces, you needed professionals doing certain things. You needed workers doing certain things. So having mass diverse participation, having a broad range of nonviolent tactics, and then, as I mentioned earlier, the campaigns that were able to prompt defections and loyalty shifts.

[00:12:33] in key pillars of support were those that tended to be more successful. Because again, when they, when the regimes could no longer rely on businesses, could no longer rely on faith institutions, on workers, collectives, on media outlets they, they weren’t able to they were forced to leave power essentially.

[00:12:53] So mass diverse participation, tactical innovation prompting defections and loyalty shifts and key pillars of support, and then crucially being able to maintain discipline and resilience in the face of rising repression, which gets at the heart of our conversation today about political violence. So we found that campaigns that were able to invest in infrastructure to maintain resilience.

[00:13:19] So that could be the form of the solidarity movement in Poland that organized underground that had underground printing presses during the first Palestinian intifada. You had the nonviolent resistance doing victory gardens, underground schools and clinics. So being able to develop alternative structures and institutions has helped some movements maintain resilience, also those that were prepared for violence, so meaning they knew it was coming, because one thing we know from the research is that movements that seek to bring about You’re welcome.

[00:13:52] Significant social and political change almost inevitably face political violence. It’s like a law of movements. And so something like 90 percent of the campaigns, the major campaigns that we studied, faced some form of governmental repression and political violence. However, those movements that were prepared, that were organized, that had trained in how to maintain discipline in the face of violence, how, as we will discuss, to make violence backfire, how to develop codes of conduct, how to develop marshals, these groups that really invested in kind of the nuts and bolts of maintaining discipline and resilience We’re able to withstand increases in repression and violence and prevail.

[00:14:37] So that was what some of the research has demonstrated on, when and why nonviolent resistance campaigns succeed. Although I would note that Erica Chenoweth has been documenting a precipitous decline In the overall effectiveness of nonviolent resistance campaigns over the past decade.

[00:14:57] So they’re at the success rate is at the lowest point it’s been in decades. And we think that probably has to do with authoritarians learning from each other. So like swapping notes about tactics, sharing surveillance, other forms of repressive technologies. We think that movements are maybe not adapting as quickly.

[00:15:17] So movements tend to be smaller today. You tend to have more radical flanks. You tend to have a little bit less nonviolent discipline. So all these things I think have contributed to this global trend of declining efficacy of civil resistance campaigns. 

[00:15:35] Sue Hyde: Maria if I recall correctly in your work studying strategic nonviolence that you also found something important about women’s leadership, is that right?

[00:15:49] Maria Stephan: Yeah and this is, Erica Chenoweth, and their colleague Zoe Marks have done subsequent research on the role of women’s participation in nonviolent movements and they found, and we certainly found this anecdotally through the case studies in our research, that women’s active, front line participation in nonviolent campaigns strongly correlates with their success.

[00:16:13] because women’s active participation in leadership tends to enhance movement discipline, which results in an increase in participation and is more likely to make violence coming from the state or from police, others backfire against the movement. So yeah, that was a very important and striking finding.

[00:16:35] Finding which is why, again women’s leadership roles in movements in this country, in places like Poland most recently in the Philippines. I’m thinking about Sudan, the nonviolent ouster of Bashir a few years ago, women were like the leaders of that movement. So it’s a very important dynamic for sure.

[00:16:54] Scot Nakagawa: Maria, I’m going to get to that project that we’re working on together, 22nd Century Initiative and Horizons Project, to address the rise of political threats and violence. But I also just wanted to put in a plug for that book that you just spoke about that body of research. When I first encountered that book I was resigned to the idea that real change would require violence.

[00:17:18] And that was a result of my having been taught that by people who are looking at particular instances in which violent campaigns win. But so to all of you, I would recommend you read this book, and I would recommend you take a moment to consider how much things have changed in terms of our ability to gather data and analyze data at scale.

[00:17:36] Scale and ask yourself the question, are the justifications for violent campaigns based upon a minority of the incidents in which people are successful? Because I pretty much think that they’re, they are, right. If we’re playing the odds here, that’s something to look at as a resource.

[00:17:54] And the link to the book is in our show notes. Getting to that project though. that we’re working on together, Maria 22nd Century Initiative and Horizons Project together, along with many allied organizations to make political violence backfire. So let’s talk about it. Let’s start at the beginning.

[00:18:11] What is political violence and why are threats and acts of political violence so corrosive to multiracial democracy? 

[00:18:20] Maria Stephan: So political violence there are many different definitions, and of course, political violence can intersect with other types of violence, like domestic violence hate fueled violence terrorism, but the definition that we’re using, and this is a definition that Hardy Merriman has used in the guide on making political violence a crime.

[00:18:39] Backfire that is underpinning the training initiative that we’ll be talking about. So the definition that he uses comes from Jennifer Dresder and Ben Rattersdorf and they define political violence as force or violence, including threats and intimidation used with political motivation to achieve a political goal, to assert political power over another, or to disseminate a political message to an outside audience.

[00:19:08] So the key thing is, it is violence guided by a political motive seeking to change kind of political dynamics. So that’s that’s the definition we’re using. 

[00:19:18] Scot Nakagawa: Alright, and how is political violence a threat to democracy? I know that seems like a simple question, but let’s go there. 

[00:19:24] Maria Stephan: No, it’s a really important question, and I think, a starting point for answering it is that political violence, has been with us since the very beginning, and, when we think about the long history of authoritarianism in this country.

[00:19:39] Because sadly we do have a long history of authoritarianism. Political violence has always been the grease in the wheels, if you will. So it’s been a really critical enabling factor. And we know if we think about the most kind of blatant example of an authoritarian system in the United States I’m going to start off by saying that in the United States, which was Jim Crow in the South and single party authoritarian rule, like political violence targeting black Americans, the threats, the lynchings, the terrorism, all was intended to promote fear and to restrict political voice, to prevent people from voting, to exercising their freedom Fundamental political civil rights.

[00:20:18] And political violence has been has been targeted at many different groups in the United States who have sought to assert their political voice, to participate meaningfully. And so there is a long history. And it’s so dangerous. Because it does diminish participation. It is discouraging people from becoming actively involved, as citizens or as active participants in our democratic system.

[00:20:45] So if they’re fearful of voting, that affects obviously their voice in the electoral system. If if local election officials and other officials Are fearing violence targeting themselves or their families or their children. They will walk away and many have, we know that there is a significant kind of uptick in threats, intimidation and violence targeting election officials.

[00:21:09] Something that organizations like bridging divides initiative have been documenting. And we know that people are leaving their posts. Good politicians are leaving election officials are leaving. Meanwhile, you have targeted attacks. of LGBTQ black Americans, immigrants, and other minorities, which is discouraging meaningful civic and political participation.

[00:21:32] It encourages censorship. So people are not saying and doing things that they normally would out of fear that they’re going to be attacked or their loved ones are going to be attacked. So in so many different ways, it’s having a corrosive effect on our democracy. And we don’t even need to be in a civil war for political violence to have kind of a negative effect on our political system.

[00:21:58] Sound on Tape: Hello, I’m Marcy Ryan, and I’m the print editor for Convergence. If you’re enjoying this show like I am, I hope you’ll consider subscribing to Convergence. We’re a small, independent operation and rely heavily on our readers and listeners like you to support our work. You can become a subscriber at convergencemag.

[00:22:16] com slash donate. You’ll find a direct link in the show notes. Subscriptions start at just 10 a month, or you can make a one time donation of any amount. At any donation level, know that you’re helping to build a better media system, one that supports people’s movements and fights fascism. But at 10 monthly and above, you’ll have access to exclusive content and events.

[00:22:37] If you can’t afford anything right now, don’t worry. Our shows and print content will continue to be free for you to enjoy. You can also help by leaving us a positive review or sharing this episode with a comrade, a friend, or a family member. Thank you so much for listening.

[00:22:58] Sue Hyde: So Maria, you worked at the U. S. Institute of Peace and before that at the U. S. State Department’s Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations. Very big phrase there, but what you were doing was supporting peace builders and social movements in their struggles to advance peace. More just, peaceful, and democratic societies.

[00:23:21] And now, through Horizons, and the 22nd Century Initiative, and the leadership of Hardy Merriman, and a core team of support organizations, you’re leading a project to offer training and support To both organizations and the public to maximize backfire from threats and acts of political violence. Why do we need this right now in the United States?

[00:23:49] Maria Stephan: We need effective responses. To threats, attacks, intimidation and political violence because it’s undermining the very underpinnings of our democracy and it always has. And and we need effective responses to be able to go on offense. So obviously we need to continue to support the survivors of political violence.

[00:24:14] We need to be able to, go after social media platforms that are promulgating mis and disinformation. We need legal outlets, but we need a ways for ordinary people to get involved, organize and respond effectively to the rising threats and acts of political violence. And, a key idea here with backfire is that one of the reasons why we see upticks in threats, attacks, intimidation, is that they are relatively cheap.

[00:24:47] People can get a big effect from them without paying a price. And so the idea here is that unless you change the underlying calculus of the perpetrators and inciters of political violence, unless you shift their incentive structures so that it becomes costly socially costly, politically costly, financially costly, they will continue to engage in acts of violence.

[00:25:14] and threats of political violence. So we need strategies and approaches that will make it less costly to be involved in pro democracy organizing and to participate meaningfully and more costly for those who are perpetrating political violence, threats, attacks, and intimidation. So that’s the central idea guiding this work on political violence and how to make political violence backfire.

[00:25:43] Sue Hyde: And as far as I’m aware, the project that you’re working on with 22CI and Hardy Merriman has not been done before. Is that correct? 

[00:25:56] Maria Stephan: We spent a lot of time with 22CI having one on one interviews with Really amazing organizers, movement leaders across the country who are doing community safety and security training, who are doing de escalation training, who are doing conflict resolution, who are doing movement organizing and civil resistance.

[00:26:18] And they’re all playing critical roles right now in developing the skills, knowledge, and know how about responding to authoritarianism, responding to the rise in political violence. What we heard from them, and certainly as part of this project, we’re drawing on their tools and their frameworks and their insights.

[00:26:37] What we heard from them is that this notion of going on offense and drawing on community organizing and mobilization to make political violence more costly to the perpetrators. Was something that was missing. And so this idea of how to operationalize backfire was an additive element with what they were doing.

[00:27:01] And so that’s why we proceeded with this. We wanted to be able to complement the work and the training that’s already happening while offering new insight into kind of how to make violence and injustice backfire so that those who are being attacked actually gain support and their cause gain support and those that are responsible for the political violence lose support.

[00:27:27] So that’s the idea. 

[00:27:29] Scot Nakagawa: Okay toward that end Professor Brian Martin has laid out five principles for maximizing backfire and we’re drawing upon them as we develop this curriculum. Those five principles are reveal, Redeem, reframe, redirect, and resist. These, contrast with the five ways that people who incite, threaten political violence try to stop victims and communities from effectively fighting back.

[00:27:56] Those five are to cover up, deny that injustice happened, or prevent word from spreading about it. Devaluation, try to lower the social standing of the target. Reinterpretation, or in other words, attempt to downplay the amount of damage caused by the injustice and portray the injustice as unavoidable or for the greater good and or deflect blame to others.

[00:28:21] The next one is official channels, set up inquiries and investigations that move slowly, limit public visibility or input, rely on technical rules and provide only the appearance of justice. And then finally, intimidation and rewards threaten people who may speak out against injustice and reward people for remaining silent.

[00:28:42] Can you describe how the five R’s are effective at both maximizing backfire and neutralizing the attempts by perpetrators to prevent backfire? 

[00:28:51] Maria Stephan: Yeah, and so you mentioned reveal, redeem, reframe, redirect and resist. The idea here is like, how to how to change the narrative and be prepared when threats, acts, political violence occur.

[00:29:08] And the idea, and this is, in so many cases, and I should say that Brian Martin’s research on Backfire draws on hundreds of people. if not thousands of examples of movements and movement actors who have faced political violence, including and up to genocide around the world. So he is drawing on a very broad spectrum of cases and campaigns that run the gamut from defamation attempts to delegitimize people to, attacks police.

[00:29:39] Brutality targeting peaceful protesters to acts of genocide. And so this methodology kind of applies to a wide range of repression and injustices. And so the idea is that, you want to be able to be organized and prepared so that when the threats and the violence happen, You can change public sentiment.

[00:30:04] And so being able to, the whole part of reveal exposing the injustice challenging cover up that requires an effective communication strategy. So you need trusted messengers. You need outlets that are prepared. You need to have relationships with outlets. So to communicate the true story of what happened, redeeming, the whole idea of validating deterrence The target.

[00:30:27] Think about how often protesters, pro democracy advocates are maligned. They’re ridiculed. They’re called, miscreants. Think about even the case, in Georgia of election workers, Shea Moss, Ruby Freeman, after, they were accused by Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani of attempting to overturn the election.

[00:30:47] They faced months of racist death threats and attacks, and they were called anti democrats. They were overturning the election, all the bad things. And part of the redeem was tell the story of these election workers who were doing their patriotic duty. These are patriotic, so reframing, the story around the victims or the survivors of political violence is really important.

[00:31:10] Reframing, being able January 6th, the attack on the Capitol on our democracy, as is being reframed in many circles as a patriotic act. And that those who like wage the insurrection are freedom fighters political prisoners. And so being able to reframe and tell a different story that no, these were not freedom fighters.

[00:31:33] These were not patriots. These were folks who were acting. Fundamentally antithetical to democracy, they were undermining democracy and they were enabled by key parts of the authoritarian system. So that reframe of the story is so important. The redirect, so this is what is so important to once you like are telling a different story.

[00:31:53] Story and communicating it and validating the victims, those who have been harmed by threats in political violence. You’ve gotta be able to organize people and mobilize people so that the message can get out so that people can speak out so that there’s organized activity and mobilization. So that part is, really important to make political violence backfire otherwise.

[00:32:14] Threats, attacks, intimidation happen every day in this country. If there is no organized action, mobilization it is the tree in the forest that didn’t fall because we didn’t hear it, kind of thing. And so that redirect and that mobilization is really important. And then resist. So many people are co opted or are bribed to be able to, in an attempt to.

[00:32:39] support the act of political violence or the threats. People are being intimidated. So how do you like stand up and resist? So for example, in this country, you have, moms for liberty, a far right group that is advocating book bands that is, supporting far local school board elections that are called.

[00:33:00] against any form of inclusion and inclusive activities. So you have these who are issuing threats to school board members. So you have moms for liberty. So then the resist is okay, a group called grandparents for truth steps up into the four and they present a counter image that actually we are here showing up at school board meetings to defend our children’s right to an education and to have access to books.

[00:33:26] So they organize, they use creative tactics. So these are all kind of part of the resist. So all told, it’s a way to make those acts of violence backfire and weaken ultimately those that are perpetrating it, all the while strengthening our pro democracy movement. Because if you get the five R’s right, All of those Rs are really important for our pro democracy organizing in general.

[00:33:54] So it’s a way to strengthen our movement as well. 

[00:33:58] Sue Hyde: Maria you have been studying. about communities that have successfully maximized backfire against political violence. And in particular you’ve oriented yourself not just to the United States, but also internationally. Can you share with us your favorite story and example that are, Relevant for the united states, but did not happen here happened somewhere else 

[00:34:31] Maria Stephan: One of my favorite examples, although I think u.

[00:34:35] s organizers and activists have riffed off it in many ways, but one of my favorite examples comes from germany from this town called wunsiedel where every year there’s been a neo nazi march to the grave of rudolf hess Who is who is a deputy of Adolf Hitler? Even though and this started in the early aughts.

[00:35:00] And even before the early aughts. And so even though the town officials in Wunsiedel exhumed this guy’s body. They removed the grave. Even though they did that, people, neo Nazis, kept marching. So one year, so this was in 2014, the town organized and they used humor, notably, to outmaneuver the neo Nazis.

[00:35:23] So what they did was they launched a campaign called Rex gegen Rex, which in German means right against the right. And they turned the annual neo nazi march into an involuntary walkathon. So what that meant was that for every meter the neo nazis marched, Local residents, officials, and businesses pledged to donate 10 euros to an organization that helps people exit far right neo Nazis groups.

[00:35:58] So they turned the march into an involuntary walk a thon. And then, at the end of the finish line, They thanked the marchers for their contribution through confetti, all that kind of stuff. So all that to say that there is a profound and powerful role for humor and creative tactics in making political violence particularly political violence coming from Non state actors like neo Nazi groups, paramilitary groups backfire.

[00:36:30] And we’ve seen, other groups have, used clowns. So even in the United States, how in places like Olympia, Washington and Nashville, Tennessee, you have like anti racist groups showing up having clowns at neo Nazi marches. So you have the Parasol Patrol in the United States which is trying to, provide a protection between.

[00:36:52] Kind of hate group members and families and children, whether it’s at drag hour or, other other events. So these sorts of activities have, have have definitely permeated. And I think U. S. organizers and activists, and there’s been a lot of inspiration across borders. But other, outside of the role of like humor and creativity.

[00:37:11] And I would say, another example of the role played by kind of humor in making political violence backfire comes from Serbia. In 2000, a youth led activist group called Opor, which means resistance in Serbian, Organized and mobilized the Serbian population to resist their authoritarian leader Slobodan Milosevic.

[00:37:34] And one of the tactics that they used which was later made into a film, a short film called Barrel of Laughs. So basically they put a barrel out in the town square in Belgrade and they had a slot to put money in. And so basically, People who are walking by the barrel were invited to put in coins to contribute to Slobodan Milosevic’s retirement fund.

[00:38:03] And if they didn’t have any coins because the economy was so bad because of Milosevic’s policies in the war he was waging in the Balkans, they were invited to hit the barrel with a stick. So that was the alternative. So you had people walking by, some putting in coins, some hitting the barrel with a stick, Now, the police came by and they weren’t quite sure what to do.

[00:38:26] Do they arrest the people hitting a barrel? Do they arrest people putting money in a barrel? So the activists took a film of the policemen hauling away the barrel. Because the barrel so they were, And the police were arresting the barrel apparently, because it was causing whatever, disruption, disrupting law and order, whatever.

[00:38:46] So it’s like the whole idea of how to lower barriers of fear. And bring people into a movement to bring some joy. Some creativity, some life affirming activity, I think is a through line in a lot of the effective backfire examples that we’ve seen around the country. And I would say around the world.

[00:39:09] And I would just, from a US case, I think we have Sometimes don’t fully appreciate the civil rights movement, which I can, I consider to be our greatest pro democracy movement. I think that we’ve had in our country’s history. There was such a significant level. of preparation and anticipation.

[00:39:30] Church basements served as, rallying points and training grounds. The role plays that happened because, think about the lunch counter sit ins. The sit in folks were facing the worst forms of abuse, racial slurs, spat at, punched, hit, and that could have gone very badly. However, the protestors, the movement activists were prepared, they knew how to respond, and then the movement leaders also knew how to tell the story of what was happening.

[00:40:00] So it was clear that these disciplined protestors were facing violence. from, white supremacists and white supremacist supporters. So I think the level of training, preparation, and all the elements of nonviolent discipline that went into that period, which continue to be critically important for the success of pro democracy organizing, particularly in the face of rising political violence.

[00:40:30] Scot Nakagawa: Maria, I have been in a couple of anti fascist demonstrations that included clowns, hordes of clowns, and it was amazing. It was amazing. It’s such a clever term. Tactic because it basically turns what is a counter protest into kind of a diversity celebration. And so even if the paramilitaries decide to rush the demonstration, which they did, the optics are really different, right?

[00:40:56] It’s paramilitaries basically rushing a diversity celebration of clowns, as opposed to what, we imagine in our heads, right? Of these forces facing off in paramilitary gear going forward in the fight. And so I would just. Clowns. Clowns are fun. So 

[00:41:16] Maria Stephan: Clowns may or may not be a good idea in certain contexts.

[00:41:20] Scot Nakagawa: Yes, exactly. I just had it occur to me sometimes clowns are a bad 

[00:41:23] Sound on Tape: idea.

[00:41:30] Scot Nakagawa: This podcast is presented by the 22nd Century Initiative, a hub for strategy and action for frontline activists, national leaders, and people like you. 

[00:41:40] Sue Hyde: At 22ci. org, you can sign up for our newsletter, you can learn from our anti authoritarian playbook, which includes resources. on how to block rising authoritarianism, bridge across the multiracial majority, and build an inclusive pro democracy movement in your community.

[00:42:00] Scot Nakagawa: Our listeners love analysis and stories, and we also know that they want to know what they can do. Could you share some resources that we’ve got to help folks deal with threats and acts of political violence, no matter where they are in the U. S.? 

[00:42:14] Maria Stephan: Sure. So I think, we certainly folks can access the materials on backfire.

[00:42:20] So the framework of backfire, the methodology, Brian Martin has put out a really helpful two page overview of what backfire is, how it can be operationalized. So resources like that I think are very helpful. The International Center on Nonviolent Conflict has a lot of terrific resources on strategic nonviolent actions, civil resistance they offer online trainings.

[00:42:44] So other groups, because we’re saying that the preparation and the strategic nonviolent action in the discipline is so important groups that are offering trainings in these not only ICNC, but groups like Beautiful Trouble, so Beautiful Trouble has a lot of resources on their website on nonviolent action, dilemma actions, making violence backfire.

[00:43:05] They even have a card deck, so how to make tactical choices as an activist, like how to choose tactics depending on different circumstances. So Beautiful Trouble is another, I think excellent resource. And then, groups that do de escalation. So Bridging Divides Initiative has been working with de escalation trainers all around the country, and they have a resource.

[00:43:25] on all the different trainings being offered related to violence deescalation. So that’s definitely a website that I can commend. And, very importantly, another resource that 22CI and Horizons have been collaborating on is the Democracy Resource Hub which is housed on the Commons Library.

[00:43:44] And I’m sure you all are going to be able to share some of these links. But the democracy hub contains most of the organizations and resources that I just mentioned. And then soon to be included in that is the guide that we mentioned earlier that Hardy Merriman has been working on with the support of horizons and 22 CI.

[00:44:05] Focused on making political violence backfire. And I should mention that the official name of the training initiative that Horizons and 22nd Century Initiative together with about 12 or 13 different core partner organizations so the official name of that initiative is HOPE PV, so Harnessing Our Power to End Political Violence, Harnessing so the training guide that Hardy is developing will soon be converted into a training curriculum that can be adapted for different community audiences across the country in different constituencies.

[00:44:41] So those materials will soon be available certainly in the democracy resource hub. Also, we’re developing a website specifically for that. For the HOPE TV initiative that folks will be able to access to learn more to be able to watch short videos with core concepts involving strategic nonviolent action and making political violence backfire.

[00:45:03] Those are a few of the resources that come immediately to mind. 

[00:45:08] Scot Nakagawa: The organizations and resources that Maria mentioned are all going to be in the show notes, so please dig in. 

[00:45:15] Sue Hyde: Maria, thank you for this great conversation, and much appreciation and gratitude for your work with 22CI, 22nd Century Initiative, and Hardy Merriman, and all of the other organizations.

[00:45:30] That are putting together a very hopeful Hope pv Program. Thank you. 

[00:45:38] Sound on Tape: Thank you so much stew and scott

[00:45:50] Sue Hyde: Hey, thanks again for listening Find more episodes of the Anti Authoritarian Podcast on all of your favorite platforms and also at 22ci. org and convergencemag. org. Direct links to these and other resources referenced in this episode can Are in the show notes.

[00:46:16] Sound on Tape: The Anti-Authoritarian Podcast is created by the 22nd Century Initiative and published by Conversions Magazine. Our theme music is After the Revolution by Cari Blanton and is licensed under creative common. The show is hosted by Scott Nawa and Sue Hyde. Executive producers are James, mom and Tony Esberg.

[00:46:35] Our producer is Josh Stro and Yong Chan Miller is our production assistant.