A Blueprint for Saving Democracy

Check Out My Other Newsletter

Hi folks, over at The Pushback, I have a new essay about how to save our democracy. I am reprinting it here because I feel like it’s pretty important. It’s long too, so thanks for hanging in there!

For weeks, I’ve wanted to write an essay pulling together all my thoughts and ideas about what “the Democrats” need to do to fight Trump and save democracy in this country. Every time I sit down to write it, though, another prominent Democratic party leader does something terrible. Gavin Newsom throwing trans kids under the bus. Chuck Schumer throwing us all under the bus. It’s disheartening that our leaders haven’t settled on praiseworthy tactics, much less a strategic vision for the way forward.

In reality, “the Democrats” will not save us. Or rather they alone will not save us. They play one part in the movement that will rescue this country from the fascist Russian puppet, but there is no one magical thing that will stop what is happening. Rather, there are a lot of things happening at once that will do that work, and I will try to describe as many as I can in this column.

Before I dive into that, I want to dispel further the idea that just one thing could bring an end to this insanity. Hillary Clinton, Robert Mueller, Joe Biden, Jack Smith, Kamala Harris – these are the leaders we’ve rallied behind in the belief that they would stop Trump. Neither their political campaigns nor their criminal investigations could derail Trump’s single-minded intent to rule this country for his own ends. Those five people share a few characteristics: they are all lawyers, they are all institutionalists, and they believed that shining a light on who Trump is would end his run. It was opposition by “But the Emperor has no clothes!” and it wasn’t enough.

Being a Californian makes me keenly aware of how big this country is. The size of our country and the number of regional/historic identities it has makes it hard to have one unifying message and a movement led by legalist institutionalists. That size and (dare I say it) diversity are an asset in some ways but make unity in the United States difficult.

In my view, there are three general categories where action needs to be taken, and there are not single actors in each category. There are multiple actors in each category who each play a role in stopping Trump and restoring democracy.

1. The Democrats

2. The Grassroots

3. The Disloyal Opposition

Here are my thoughts on each group.

The Democrats

First of all, we need to acknowledge that there isn’t a real single Democratic Party. The Dems are functionally a group of smaller parties united under a single political organization. These smaller ideological groups must align under one banner because we have a two-party system. Other democracies have ideological groups as freestanding parties that can create coalitions to govern. We don’t have that structure. Instead, our Democrats include Progressive democrats (Led by Bernie and AOC), institutional/moderate Democrats (House and Senate leaders), and farmer/labor Democrats (Midwestern Governors, e.g.). There are more (Greens, Business Dems) but those are the most high-profile of the Democratic Party constituencies.

Each constituency can have a different set of tactics and policies, but they need to share a single vision that they articulate every time they talk about anything. In an interview with Jon Favreau on Pod Save America, Alastair Campbell explained how Tony Blair resurrected the Labour Party after 18 years of Thatcherism. It was to live and breathe the slogan “New Labour, New Life for Britain,” and if that vision could not be worked into a message, there was no reason to be having that particular conversation. If you can't speak to the vision, don't say anything at all.

The Democrats’ weakness on vision was on full display at Trump’s fake State of the Union speech. Their dumb little paddles didn’t even say the same thing! The better tactic for the Dems would have been to absent themselves individually unless they believed their own constituents would be made angry by their absence. When they can’t share a single vision, they shouldn’t be “speaking,” either through blue/yellow ties, pink dresses, or ping pong paddles.

I am going to propose a hypothetical vision statement and use it for instructive purposes. I don’t know if it’s any good but it’ll make things easier to explain. My slogan is: “We can build a better ____ together.” You can sub in other words, but the vision needs to be include a strong verb and a sense of unity.

To clarify my definitions, a vision is a unifying principle that helps shape message, policy, and decisions. The strategy is the plan for implementing that vision. The strategy relies on tactics. Tactics are specific actions and messages that a part of the strategy which reinforce the vision. Leaders are responsible for implementing the vision and the tactics, but they do not supercede the vision. If one leader is out, the vision and strategy remain.

Once Dems have a shared vision, they can employ a whole range of tactics suitable to their sub-party. Tactics include:

Messaging

Here's how the message would implement my vision: “Build a stronger democracy together” or “Build a better healthcare system together” or “Build more housing together.”

Leaders who can speak with authority on policy issues need to be trained to share their knowledge in the language of the vision statement, and need to be given maximum exposure in the Media. But it’s important to note that policies and expertise do not win elections. The media training must be focused on messages that symbolize the larger problem, like “Musk is closing NASA to get a bigger Space X contract.” This takes something people like (NASA) and contrasts it with something they don’t like (cronies getting big government contracts). The way to frame this in vision speak: “We know how to make NASA better for all Americans, and it doesn’t involve giving Musk more money to blow up Space X rockets on our dime.”

Media

Messengers need to be maximizing their exposure to outlets that are not governed by access journalists. Not everyone needs to be on Tik Tok. In fact, almost none of the Dem leaders should be on Tik Tok. They should be on other podcasts, calling into local news stations and connecting with supposedly neutral media. These messengers do not need to be politicians! They can be celebrities, Tik Tokers, grassroots folks – make sure everyone has the same vision statement driving their appearances.

The leadership needs to let go of their belief that the NYT and Washington Post drive their vision. They need to create and support their own forms and media, and need to accept that they won't control them. Meidas Touch and Crooked Media are trying to carve out this space and are having some success, but not relative to the right-wing media. Dems need to be breaking news on the platforms that support them politically without believing they can control the narrative.

Legislative action

Dems need to be actually preparing for the legislative and regulatory action needed to reinforce democracy and implement their platforms. As implied by the name of this newsletter, I believe in The Rebuild as much as The Pushback. Rebuilding doesn’t start when we retake the House and Senate. It starts in the state legislatures and secretary of state offices now. Existing laws need to ensure that full and fair elections will be held. (This is an area where geographical diversity helps; Trump cannot stop federal elections; they are run by the states).

After that, we need a legislative powerhouse similar to ALEC with ready to go legislation so policy changes don’t take longer than a legislative cycle.

Judicial Action

Although I noted that the legalist-institutionalist will not save democracy, nevertheless the lawsuits and courts are important, if only to slow down the executive actions. As I write this, Tom Homan of DHS is saying that the administration does not need to provide information to a federal judge, setting up a constitutional crisis. Judicial action is a prominent tactic but it isn’t the only one, and we shouldn’t be completely despondent over its insufficiency. Meanwhile, the third branch of government - the courts - is the only one we are not sure is completely captured by the right, and again, geographical diversity is a positive. Judges throughout the country are coming to similar conclusions, which is great, at least in the short term.

Direct action and escalation

Although these are tactics usually reserved for the Grassroots (see below), the Dem sub-parties can and should utilize them. Legislators started to engage in direct action by protesting at federal buildings under siege by DOGE. They failed to escalate; they should have demanded entry, sat in, or permitted themselves to be arrested. Non-violent escalation in support of the vision will get lots of media attention.

Labor Dems in particular need to be creating an economic strike model of escalation. #TeslaTakedown is an effective (grassroots) example. Even if Tesla’s shares would have fallen anyway, it seems as though the grassroots actions are driving that to harm Musk, and Labor Dems could initiate more effective economic actions. The AFL-CIO should be prominently planning rolling strikes and a general strike.

Provision of services

Democrats need to be filling to services gap created by Trump’s gutting of the social safety net, and they need to be doing it in public. Not only should they be doing town halls but they should be doing focused, vision-drived town halls. For example, do a veterans town hall and bring veteran services groups there to connect people to so that they have organizational support. Right now, the Dems rely too heavily on non-profits that do not have actual constituencies for their policy agenda. They can help non-profits build those constituencies by making sure the people being hurt by Trump are being helped by the non-profits tasked with helping them. Dems can grow their own constituency by helping their allies create constituencies.

Dems need to commit to protecting the vulnerable. They should hold targeted town halls to hear the voices of those folks and allowing them to highlight how they are being hurt allows legitimate stories (instead of hack lies) to be available for the media.

What to stop

Finally, I think Dems need to take a hard look at their fundraising and communication tactics. They need to put an end to letting campaigns sell their lists to fake PACs and every single candidate that gets on the ballot. It is consistently the most common reaction that people have to Dems is that they want to stop getting fundraising text messages. Dems diluted/destroyed what would be a great organizing and rapid response tool. They need to regain trust by stopping their assault on people's time and wallets.

I know text and email fundraising are effective because a candidate or PAC can reach a huge audience and only need a small number of respondents for it to pay off. But the constant onslaught is turning off a larger group of people that they need for the larger fight.

The Grassroots

Just as the Democratic Party isn’t truly one party, but is instead a collection of loosely connected political viewpoints, the Grassroots isn’t just one thing. It includes individuals and political organizations. It also loosely includes non-profits that do policy and service work (ACLU, Planned Parenthood) but who do not have constituencies that they can activate for voter turnout, for example.

Remarkably, the leading grassroots organizations seem to be working more closely with each other than the Democrats are. Instead of fighting over who “gets” to do what, they are sharing messages and moments and bringing together their constituencies for larger actions. For example, protests and marches are being coordinated so that everyone shows up at the same place regardless of their personal message, thus reinforcing one another. The 5 Calls app is being utilized generally, even though the message may differ from day to day and region to region. However, this is a tactical approach that hasn't coalesced into a vision and strategy-driven approach.

While protests are an important tactic, the grassroots also have a full toolkit available. That toolkit doesn’t just exist for grassroots organizations; it exists for individuals within the movement.

Messaging and Media

Individuals can craft messages and amplify them to their personal audiences. This newsletter and the hundreds of others springing up right now are evidence that people are trying to find alternative methods of communication. Because they are personal, they are more likely to reach an intended audience.

Legislative and Judicial Action

This work is being performed by the non-profits and PACs who are filing lawsuits and preparing legislation. They are not technically Grassroots - they are closer to the institutional Democrats - but the individuals who are brave enough to put their names and faces to the lawsuits are Grassroots and should be lauded for their courage.

Direct Action

The Grassroots are more comfortable with and capable direct action than the Democrats are. So far, we have seen many protests - more than I expected - and they have managed to stay focused on the bad actions of the Trump administration despite who his misdeeds have affected. Federal workers, veterans, transfolk, seniors, and students have all rallied together under the banner of Trump = bad. We've also seen town halls that have been quite effective of starting to scare Republicans, as I will discuss below.

But there are so many more kinds of non-violent actions. Indeed, Gene Sharp identified 198 methods of nonviolent action, and activists should use his list as a menu of options for planning their tactical approach to this problem. They identify escalation methods as well as methods that will be more approachable for folks who are unaccustomed to direct action.

Okay, we have our actors (the Grassroots), our actions, and now we need to focus on the connection between actions and message. Here I'll turn to W. Kamau Bell, who identified the purpose of the symbols in action:

Again, I’m not against symbols, but they have to point to something bigger. They need to:

Direct you to do something bigger AND/OR

Comfort the afflicted by showing solidarity AND/OR

Put the people who are enacting the symbols in harm's way to demonstrate a commitment to a larger cause

His point is critical. The symbolic action must stand in for the problem. The example he gives is the lunch counter sit-ins, which showed the use of military/state force against law-abiding Black people. The viewer knew exactly what the problem was, and what the protesters' message was. I would argue that the #TeslaTakedown protests have a similar virtue. Protesting Elon Musk represents a protest against DOGE while simultaneously injuring Musk in a way that actually hurts - financially.

From Liberal Currents Roadmap to American Reconstruction:

We have this idea today that first you hold a protest that grabs people's attention, and then afterwards you explain what it was about. You throw soup at a painting or block a highway or whatever. This gets attention but it also just gets people mad at you. It is narratively vacuous. In an effective act of protest, the act itself is the message. The story being told in microcosm is the story you want to advance. The sit-ins—and all the acts of the Civil Rights Movement—were based on this principle.

Provision of Services

The grassroots provision of services happens in our homes and communities. It is the community groups, church groups, PTAs, block parties, house parties, volunteerism, and friend-to-friend support that is necessary to support resistance. The acts of being social, rather than antisocial, are what will rebuild the fabric of America. When people know one another's stories, they have empathy and act in accordance with caring principles. Authoritarian governments rely on people being afraid of each other and alien to each other. It's much easier to turn people against one another that way.

In this vein, it's important to welcome the apathetic and the former Trump supporters back into the community fold by acknowledging their newfound pain (the leopard did eat their face!) rather than scolding them with I-told-you-sos.

What to Stop

The despair. The gloom, the doom, the certainty that Trump has already won and fascism is completely upon us. Folks, it can get so much worse that we will be pining for these days. Despair is akin to denialism. This is typically used in the climate change context, but the premise is the same. To despair is to capitulate to the forces that want Trump to succeed.

I recommend you go listen to Sob Story by Minor Threat and then pick something else to do beside feeling like this is an unwinnable fight.

The Disloyal Opposition

I am using the term Disloyal Opposition to refer to Republicans, conservatives, and their putative allies who act against the interests of the Trump administration. They are, in essence, disloyal to Trump while also not necessarily in favor of any other part of the Democratic Party's or Grassroots' agenda. The Disloyal Opposition is a part of the vision and tactics of the other groups without necessarily being aware of that or complicit in it, no matter how they get branded by Trump.

There are only few tactics used by the Disloyal Opposition: messaging, direct action, and stopping their complicity in the Trump administration. All require a degree of courage that exceeds the courage of the individuals who are willing to be the names and faces of the Grassroots' legal actions.

Neither the Grassroots nor the Democrats can create Disloyal Opposition, but they can capitalize on it when it happens. They can broadcast it, they can reward it, they can ignore it. Each statement or action of the Disloyal Opposition will generate its own appropriate reaction. For example, just today, Chief Justice John Roberts issued a statement that impeachment is not the appropriate measure when a party disagrees with a judge; appeal is. This is a significant statement that demonstrates that the Courts are not willing to let certain actions by the Trump administration fly. A Republican Congressman had already tried to file articles of impeachment against a judge for ruling against ICE. The Democrats on the Judiciary Committee now need to ensure that those articles are withdrawn and GOP members go on the record about their view on this.

We shall see. It will take all three of these groups acting on multiple fronts to assure that democracy is saved. It will take years and lots of money and lots of work, but it is doable.

Thanks for hanging in with me through this long read. I welcome feedback and ideas about this blueprint for saving democracy. Going forward The Pushback will be organized differently, highlighting the news by tactics and their actors, in hopes that we can start to see patterns of effective resistance. I would really appreciate if you could share this newsletter with as many people as you can. If you are receiving this from someone else, please subscribe to The Pushback.