The park is between Division and Normandie St., Garland and LaCrosse.

We Will Not Bow

Our demonstration of moral strength is in opposition to the tyranny that threatens our very existence as a country. And this kind of gathering can unite us, in a moral movement to save America. And we will not stand down, not now, not ever. 

What can these protests accomplish?

3100 protests across the nation busts through that bubble, that air of inevitability, that Trump is invincible, unstoppable. 

The protests are not just in large cities but communities in rural and red parts of the country.

They are organizing not only for March 28 but for what comes next.  

Standing in a crowd matters

but it’s not enough

on its own

This moment is about turning frustration into movement, concern into commitment. If you’ve been wondering what you can do, this is where you start.

NO KINGS 3

Take Action – Do Something

At B A Clark Park in Spokane:

Bring a relative, bring a friend, bring a neighbor!

Speakers will address issues that stood out in Indivisible surveys of where support, resources and action were actually needed – the environment, affordability, voting rights, immigration, racial injustice, and government corruption.

Over 35 organizations will have tables with opportunities to learn what is happening and where to plug in.

Stand Up For Our Country!

Stand Up For Our Rights!

Stand Up For Our Neighbors!

Millions of people marching in the streets across the United States and 10,000 – 20,000 marching here in Spokane. The marchers are asking a fundamental question: How do we preserve democracy when so many of our neighbors seem willing to trade it for the promise of security?

It appears that there is a great deal of fear dividing our country in two. Why these fears, what needs to be done, and how can we do it? What do our readers think? What does our community think? What do others think?  

This is a three part series.  The first part describes the fears and what needs to be done to address them. The second part addresses why Black people should resist the loss of democracy, the third part deals with what needs to be done. Later articles can follow the progress of the Spokane fight for democracy.

The articles discuss various evidence-based approaches to enhance democratic resilience and social cohesion at government, institutional, and individual levels. They highlight the importance of economic interventions, leadership strategies, educational reforms, media responsibility, and personal engagement. The text outlines measures for specific demographic concerns while emphasizing the need for systemic changes and the importance of measuring success. Key factors for success include authenticity, inclusivity, patience, consistency, local focus, and bipartisan support.

Feedback from social media posts and interactions can be used to invite them to remove the fear, save democracy and participate in building a better community they want to live in.

Read the first article in the Fighting Fear series:

1. Why Are People So Afraid That They Choose Tyranny Over Democracy

2. Why Blacks Will Resist the Loss of Democracy

3. What Needs To Be Done to Relieve Fear?

4. Join Fighting Fear and Volunteer

SUBSCRIBE: If you want suggestions on what we must do in addition to protesting in the streets, subscribe to 4comculture.com. Go to the top of the sidebar and send us your email address.

October 18th millions marched. They said NO TRUMP! In order to stop tyranny now what do you want to do?

When the choice is tyranny or revolution, to keep your head in the sand is to choose tyranny. If you choose revolution the question is nonviolent or violent.

The Scenario

1. A presidential candidate has won the election and gained control over all branches of government.
2. The new administration refuses to follow court rulings and historical norms.
3. Democratic processes and checks and balances have broken down.
4. The leadership style is modeled after authoritarian regimes like Russia, North Korea, and China.

This situation represents a significant threat to democratic institutions and the rule of law, which are fundamental to a functioning democracy.

Can We Trust This Man?

Options for Grassroots Movements

In such a scenario, grassroots movements and civil society organizations face a critical decision: whether to accept the new regime or to resist. Based on historical examples and research on civil resistance, there are several potential courses of action:

Nonviolent revolutions have endured longer

1. Nonviolent Revolution

Historically, nonviolent revolutions have been more successful and led to more stable democratic outcomes than violent uprisings. Research by Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan has shown that nonviolent campaigns are twice as likely to succeed as violent ones.

Strategies for nonviolent revolution could include:

a) Mass Mobilization: Organizing large-scale protests, strikes, and boycotts to demonstrate widespread opposition to the regime. This was effectively used in the Philippines People Power Revolution (1986) and the U.S. Civil Rights Movement (1950s-1960s).

b) Civil Disobedience: Engaging in coordinated acts of nonviolent resistance, such as sit-ins, blockades, or refusal to pay taxes. The Indian Independence Movement led by Mahatma Gandhi successfully employed these tactics.

c) Alternative Institutions: Creating parallel governance structures or “shadow governments” to challenge the legitimacy of the regime and provide essential services to the population.

d) International Solidarity: Appealing to international organizations and foreign governments for support and sanctions against the regime. This strategy was crucial in the South African Anti-Apartheid Movement.

2. Civic Engagement and Grassroots Organizing

Even in challenging political environments, there are legal and peaceful methods to resist authoritarianism:

a) Stakeholder Engagement: Identifying and mobilizing key stakeholders who can influence the political process.

b) Effective Communication: Using clear, consistent messaging to articulate grievances and demands.

c) Technology and Social Media: Leveraging digital platforms for organizing, information sharing, and mobilizing support.

d) Educational Interventions: Implementing programs to promote civic engagement and democratic values.

e) Building Trust and Relationships: Establishing networks of trust within communities to strengthen resistance efforts.

3. Seeking International Support

Grassroots movements can appeal to international democratic support systems and diplomatic channels:

a) International Organizations: Engaging with bodies like the UN, OSCE, and International IDEA to highlight democratic backsliding and seek support.

b) Foreign Diplomatic Pressure: Encouraging democratic nations to exert diplomatic pressure on the regime, similar to Sweden’s “Drive for Democracy” initiative.

c) NGO Partnerships: Collaborating with international NGOs like Freedom House to document and publicize human rights violations and democratic erosion.

Violent Revolution as a Last Resort

While violent revolution might seem like an option, it’s important to note that:

1. Violent uprisings are statistically less likely to succeed than nonviolent movements.
2. They often lead to prolonged conflict and instability.
3. Violent revolutions can delegitimize the movement in the eyes of both domestic and international observers.
4. They may provide justification for increased repression by the regime.

Conclusion

In the face of democratic breakdown and the rise of authoritarianism, grassroots movements have historically been most successful when employing nonviolent strategies. These strategies, combined with effective civic engagement and international support, offer the best chance for restoring democratic norms and institutions.

The choice between accepting tyranny and forming a revolution is a complex one, with significant consequences. However, the historical record suggests that nonviolent revolutions, when well-organized and widely supported, can be effective in challenging even the most entrenched authoritarian regimes.

It’s crucial for grassroots movements to carefully consider their options, build broad coalitions, and maintain a commitment to nonviolent tactics to maximize their chances of success and minimize the risk of further destabilization or violence.

When tyranny and revolution appear to be the choices, which do you think we ought to choose? The choice should be made with deep thought. If you keep your head in the sand and refuse to recognize the current conditions, you have chosen tyranny. But if you choose revolution the question is nonviolent or violent.

If you want suggestions on what we must do in addition to protesting in the streets, subscribe to 4comculture.com. Go to the top of the sidebar and send us your email address.

Eric Hoffer’s “The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements” (1951) is a seminal work that examines the psychology of individuals who become deeply committed to mass movements, whether political, religious, or social. Hoffer’s analysis focuses on the motivations and characteristics of these “true believers” and the conditions that make mass movements thrive.

Key Psychological Traits of the True Believer

1. Discontent with the Present Self: True believers often feel a deep dissatisfaction with their personal lives. They see themselves as ineffectual, powerless, or insignificant and seek to escape this reality by merging their identity with a larger cause or movement [1]. Hoffer argues that this dissatisfaction drives people to seek meaning and purpose in something external, often leading them to embrace ideologies that promise radical change.

2. Desire for Certainty and Simplicity: True believers are drawn to movements that offer clear, black-and-white answers to complex problems. They crave certainty and are often intolerant of ambiguity or nuance.

3. Willingness to Sacrifice Individuality: Hoffer notes that true believers are willing to subordinate their individuality to the collective identity of the movement. This allows them to feel part of something greater than themselves, which can be empowering but also leads to fanaticism.

4. Frustration and Resentment:!Many true believers harbor feelings of frustration and resentment, often directed at society, elites, or other groups they perceive as responsible for their struggles. This resentment fuels their commitment to the movement and their willingness to fight for its goals.

5. Faith in a Glorious Future: True believers are often motivated by a vision of a utopian future promised by the movement. This vision gives them hope and a sense of purpose, even if it requires sacrificing the present [2].

6. Susceptibility to Leadership: Hoffer emphasizes that true believers are often drawn to charismatic leaders who embody the ideals of the movement and provide a sense of direction and unity.

Comparison to Modern “True Believers”

The psychological traits Hoffer identified remain relevant today and can be observed in the followers of contemporary political figures like Donald Trump, Kamala Harris, Barack Obama, and Bernie Sanders. While the specific ideologies and movements differ, the underlying motivations and behaviors of their most ardent supporters often align with Hoffer’s analysis.

1. Donald Trump: Many of Trump’s most devoted supporters exhibit traits of true believers, such as a strong desire for certainty, resentment toward perceived elites, and faith in Trump’s promises to “Make America Great Again.” His charismatic leadership and ability to channel frustration into a cohesive movement resonate with Hoffer’s description of mass movement dynamics.
2. Kamala Harris and Barack Obama: Supporters of Harris and Obama often emphasize their hope for a more inclusive and equitable future. While their movements may not exhibit the same level of fanaticism as others, the faith in their leadership and vision for change reflects some of the psychological traits Hoffer described, particularly the desire for a better future and identification with a collective cause [2].
3. Bernie Sanders: Sanders’ supporters often align with Hoffer’s analysis of frustration and resentment, particularly toward economic inequality and corporate power. His movement’s focus on systemic change and a vision of a more just society appeals to those seeking meaning and purpose through collective action.

Key Differences in Modern Contexts

While the psychological makeup of true believers remains consistent, modern mass movements are shaped by new factors:

• Social Media: Platforms like Twitter and Facebook amplify the reach of mass movements, allowing true believers to connect and organize more easily. This can intensify the sense of belonging and reinforce ideological echo chambers.

• Polarization: Modern politics is highly polarized, which can deepen the divide between opposing groups of true believers and increase the intensity of their commitment.

• Polarization: Modern politics is highly polarized, which can deepen the divide between opposing groups of true believers and increase the intensity of their commitment.

• Diverse Ideologies: Unlike the mid-20th century, today’s mass movements span a broader range of ideologies, from progressive to conservative, reflecting the complexity of modern societies.

Conclusion

Eric Hoffer’s insights into the psychology of the true believer remain strikingly relevant in understanding the dynamics of modern mass movements. Whether supporting Donald Trump, Kamala Harris, Barack Obama, or Bernie Sanders, true believers today share many of the same psychological traits Hoffer identified: dissatisfaction with the present, faith in a better future, and a willingness to subordinate individuality to a collective cause. However, the tools and contexts of modern movements—such as social media and political polarization—have added new dimensions to the phenomenon.

Then click here for for strategies to protect our democratic institutions.

One of the current cliches is that we are all in it together. But how is this expressed in terms of social justice? In the constitution it says liberty and justice for all, but Blacks were counted as only 3/5ths of a person. The diversity of the nation has increased through immigration but we still all live in our silos and everyone was not and is not considered equal. One of most segregated organizations are our churches. But now when we are on the verge of a tyranny when everyone is losing their rights suddenly we are all in it together. But our protests are still segregated. The only diverse marches and rallies here in Spokane are the Martin Luther King rally and march in January of each year.

Thousands Turn Out in Spokane and The Nation

Our protests are not diverse. Think of these examples:

Civil Rights Movement (1960s -1970s)
Vietnam War Protests (1960s -1970s)
Environmental Movements (1970s – present)
Indigenous Rights
LGBTQ+ Rights
Black Lives Matter (2010s – present)
Protest Anti-Semitism
Protest Anti-Muslim
Open Housing
Homeless Rights
Economic and Labor Protests
Anti-Trump Protests
Women’s March

How do we all work together? When people leave the meetings and rallies they return to their homogeneous communities. Check out the following links for things that can be done in-between the significant emotional events of major protests.

• https://4comculture.com/choices-now-tyranny-or-revolution
• https://4comculture.com/opportunities-for-white-people-in-the-fight-for-racial-justice
• https://4comculture.com/what-we-can-do-198-methods-of-nonviolent-action
• https://4comculture.com/100-coffee-discussion-groups
• https://4comculture.com/14-principles

198 Methods of Nonviolent Action:

Pass this out at every march, rally and meeting you attend

Practitioners of nonviolent struggle have an entire arsenal of “nonviolent weapons” at their disposal. Listed below are 198 of them, classified into three broad categories: nonviolent protest and persuasion, noncooperation (social, economic, and political), and nonviolent intervention. A description and historical examples of each can be found in volume two of The Politics of Nonviolent Action, by Gene Sharp

I’ve got health care.

DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) doesn’t affect me.

I’ve got a job.

I’m not an immigrant.

Addressing the question “if it doesn’t affect me directly, why should I care?”, it’s crucial to understand the broader impact of community organizations. Understanding and evaluating community organizations requires a multifaceted approach. By considering their effectiveness, transparency, coalition-building efforts, and legitimacy indicators, you can make informed decisions about which organizations to support and engage with. Remember that while an organization’s impact may not always be immediately apparent to you personally, their work often contributes to broader societal improvements that can benefit everyone in the long term.

For full article We Need Organizations CLICK HERE

For full article CLICK HERE

IN TIMES OF TRUMP DISMANTLING AMERICAN GOVERNMENT 

Comprehensive Strategies to Regain Control and Protect Democratic Institutions from Systematic Dismantling

# Immediate Action Strategies

The success of these strategies depends on coordinated action across multiple sectors and sustained commitment to democratic principles. The research suggests that combining legal mechanisms, civil society action, and international support provides the most effective approach to protecting and restoring democratic institutions.

Comprehensive Strategies to Regain Control and Protect Democratic Institutions from Systematic Dismantling

Freedom of Assembly – A Constitutional Right

# Immediate Action Strategies

## 1. Legal and Constitutional Mechanisms

– Utilize judicial review to challenge unconstitutional executive actions, as established by Marbury v. Madison [[1]]

– Leverage existing checks and balances systems to limit executive overreach [[2]]

– Employ legislative oversight tools, including:

  – Congressional hearings

  – Investigations

  – Strategic use of funding controls [[2]]

## 2. Civil Society Response

– Engage with organizations like Civil Service Strong and Partnership for Public Service that specifically work to protect civil service [[3]]

– Support watchdog organizations and legal advocacy groups like Protect Democracy [[4]]

– Mobilize grassroots movements and civil society organizations to:

  – Monitor government actions

  – Expose corruption

  – Lobby for governance reforms [[5]]

## 3. Institutional Protection Measures

### Government Workforce Protection

– Support initiatives defending civil service against political interference

– Work with unions and professional associations to protect government employees

– Document and challenge illegal terminations or restructuring [[3]]

### Democratic Process Protection

– Safeguard election integrity through:

  – Protection against voter suppression

  – Combating disinformation

  – Maintaining election infrastructure [[6]]

## 4. International Cooperation and Support

– Engage with international organizations like International IDEA and UNDP’s Democratic Governance [[7]]

– Utilize international pressure and accountability mechanisms

– Learn from other democracies’ experiences in resisting authoritarian attempts [[8]]

# Long-term Strategic Approaches

## 1. Develop a National Democracy Strategy

– Create a comprehensive plan integrating democracy protection into:

  – Economic policy

  – Social policy

  – Technology policy

  – Diplomatic relations

  – Military considerations [[9]]

## 2. Build Cross-sector Alliances

– Form coalitions between:

  – Civil society organizations

  – Legal professionals

  – Academic institutions

  – Business leaders

  – Pro-democracy politicians [[10]]

## 3. Public Education and Engagement

– Launch public awareness campaigns about democratic institutions

– Educate citizens about their rights and democratic processes

– Foster civic participation and engagement [[5]]

## 4. Media and Technology Strategy

– Support independent journalism

– Combat disinformation through fact-checking initiatives

– Engage technology companies in protecting democratic processes [[11]]

# Success Indicators from Historical Examples

Historical examples show that democratic institutions can recover from systematic dismantling attempts. Key lessons include:

1. **Post-WWII Germany and Japan**: Successful reconstruction required:

– Strong constitutional frameworks

– International support

– Economic rebuilding

– Democratic institution building [[12]]

2. **Eastern European Transitions**: Demonstrated the importance of:

– Civil society movements

– International support

– Economic reforms

– Democratic constitution development [[12]]

# Current Public Support

Recent data shows potential for successful resistance:

– High public demand for government reform (49% Democrats, 83% Republicans) [[13]]

– Strong electoral responses against anti-democratic actions

– Growing concern about institutional integrity across political spectrums [[14]]

The success of these strategies depends on coordinated action across multiple sectors and sustained commitment to democratic principles. The research suggests that combining legal mechanisms, civil society action, and international support provides the most effective approach to protecting and restoring democratic institutions.

The phrase “the good old days” typically refers to a nostalgic longing for a past time that individuals perceive as better or simpler than the present. However, the meaning and implications of this phrase can vary significantly depending on the context and the speaker’s perspective: personal memories, cultural context, privilege and exclusion, selective memory, dissatisfaction with modernity. The Good Old Days

timeline: the Last 100 Years

To compare the last century, let’s break this down into key categories: cost of living, wages, population, culture (movies, slang, toys, hairstyles, clothing), and the experiences of marginalized groups highlighting changes over time and providing context for marginalized communities where relevant.

1. Cost of Living and Housing

• 1925: The average cost of a home in the U.S. was around $6,000. Rent was about $20–$60 per month, depending on location. The cost of living was significantly lower, but wages were also much smaller [1].
• 2025: The median home price in the U.S. is now over $400,000, with rent averaging $1,700 per month. Housing costs have skyrocketed, making homeownership increasingly difficult for younger generations.

Marginalized Communities:

In 1925, Black Americans and other marginalized groups faced systemic barriers to homeownership due to redlining and discriminatory lending practices. These inequities persist today, with racial wealth gaps making it harder for marginalized groups to afford homes.

2. Minimum Wage and Wages

• 1925: There was no federal minimum wage in the U.S. until 1938, when it was set at $0.25/hour. Many workers, especially women and minorities, earned far less in informal or agricultural jobs.
• 2025: The federal minimum wage is $7.25/hour, though many states have higher rates. However, adjusted for inflation, wages have stagnated since the 1970s, meaning purchasing power has barely increased.

Marginalized Communities:

Historically, women, immigrants, and Black workers were often excluded from wage protections. Today, these groups are still overrepresented in low-wage industries, such as service and caregiving jobs, where wage growth has been slow.

3. World Population

• 1925: The global population was approximately 2 billion.
• 2025: The world population is now over 8 billion, with significant growth in Asia and Africa.

Marginalized Communities:

Population growth has brought challenges like resource scarcity and climate change, which disproportionately affect marginalized communities in developing nations.

4. Movies and Entertainment

• 1925: Silent films dominated, with stars like Charlie Chaplin and Clara Bow. A movie ticket cost $0.25–$0.50. Popular films included The Gold Rush (1925).
• 2025: Movie tickets now average $10–$15. Streaming services dominate entertainment, but blockbuster films like Avatar: The Way of Water (2022) still draw crowds.

Marginalized Communities:

In 1925, Hollywood largely excluded Black actors and other minorities, relegating them to stereotypical roles. Today, representation has improved, but disparities remain in opportunities and pay.

5. Toys and Games

• 1925: Popular toys included teddy bears, yo-yos, and tin soldiers. These were simple and often handmade.
• 2025: Toys are now high-tech, with video games, drones, and AI-powered gadgets dominating the market.

Marginalized Communities:

In the 1920s, toys often reflected societal norms, with few options representing diverse cultures. Today, there’s a growing push for inclusive toys, such as dolls with different skin tones and abilities.

6. Slang Terms

• 1925: Popular slang included terms like “bee’s knees” (something great) and “cat’s pajamas” (something stylish).
• 2025: Modern slang is heavily influenced by internet culture, with terms like “slay” (to succeed) and “vibe” (a mood or feeling).

Marginalized Communities:

Slang has often originated in marginalized communities, particularly Black and LGBTQ+ cultures, before being adopted by mainstream society.

7. Hairstyles and Clothing

• 1925: Women embraced the bob haircut and flapper dresses, symbolizing liberation. Men wore tailored suits and hats.
• 2025: Hairstyles are diverse, with natural hair movements celebrating Black hair textures. Clothing trends are casual, with athleisure dominating.

Marginalized Communities:

In the 1920s, Black women faced pressure to conform to Eurocentric beauty standards. Today, natural hair movements challenge these norms, promoting acceptance of diverse styles.

8. Marginalized Communities: Then and Now

• 1925: Segregation, lack of voting rights, and systemic discrimination defined the experiences of many marginalized groups. Women had just gained the right to vote in 1920, but opportunities were limited.
• 2025: While progress has been made, systemic inequities persist. Wage gaps, housing discrimination, and underrepresentation in media and politics continue to affect marginalized groups.

Black and White

Population Trends Over the Last 100 Years

1. Early 20th Century (1920s-1950s):

• In the early 20th century, the U.S. population was overwhelmingly white, with white Americans making up approximately 90% of the population. Immigration policies, such as the Immigration Act of 1924, heavily restricted non-European immigration, reinforcing this demographic dominance.
• People of color, including African Americans, Native Americans, and smaller populations of Asian and Hispanic Americans, made up a much smaller percentage of the population.

1. Mid-20th Century (1960s-1980s):

• The Civil Rights Movement and changes in immigration laws, such as the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, began to reshape the racial makeup of the U.S. population.
• The African American population grew steadily, while immigration from Latin America and Asia increased significantly, diversifying the population further.

1. Late 20th Century (1990s-2000s):

• By the 1990s, the percentage of white Americans began to decline as immigration surged and birth rates among people of color outpaced those of white Americans.
• The Hispanic/Latino population, in particular, grew rapidly, becoming the largest minority group in the U.S.

Current Trends and Projections

1. Current Demographics:

• As of the 2020 Census, non-Hispanic white Americans made up about 57.8% of the population, a significant decline from the 1960s when they accounted for over 85% [1].
• People of color, including Hispanic/Latino, Black, Asian, and multiracial individuals, now make up a growing share of the population. For example, children of color became the majority of U.S. youth by 2020 [2].

1. Future Projections:

• The U.S. Census Bureau projects that by 2045, non-Hispanic white Americans will fall below 50% of the total population, making the U.S. a “majority-minority” nation[3].
• This shift is driven by higher birth rates among people of color and the aging of the white population. Generation Z is expected to be the last generation with a white majority, while Generation Alpha (born after 2010) will grow up in a majority-minority society [3].

Key Factors Driving These Changes

Immigration from Latin America, Asia, and Africa has been a major driver of population growth among people of color since the mid-20th century. Birth rates among Hispanic and Black populations have historically been higher than those of white Americans, contributing to the demographic shift. The white population is aging rapidly, with lower birth rates and higher mortality rates compared to other racial and ethnic groups.

The strongman leaders, oligarchs and White Christian nationalists have declared war on Blacks. The only way we will survive is to build coalitions. What are your thoughts on the demographics above?

Over the last century, the U.S. has transitioned from a predominantly white nation to one of increasing racial and ethnic diversity. This trend is expected to continue, with people of color projected to outnumber white Americans by 2045. The only way Black people will survive is to build a broad coalition with people of color, lower economic communities and the internationally disenfranchised.