Category: Society

Some Qualities of Good Leadership

Does Donald Trump Exhibit Any?

BILL ASTORE

SEP 29, 2025

Recently, I jotted down some qualities of good leadership. Of course, the importance of specific traits depends on context—a leader who is overly cautious may be a liability in a crisis requiring quick action, though less so in a college faculty meeting. That said, here are thirteen attributes I consider essential, in no particular order:

· Decisiveness balanced with care: the ability to decide informed by experience and consultation.

· Integrity and character.

· Bringing people together–motivating and inspiring them.

· Calmness under pressure.

· Leading by example, or “walking the walk.”

· Honor and trustworthiness.

· A commitment to fairness. Setting high standards that apply equally to all.

· Selflessness. A belief in service.

· Compassion. A hard-ass shouldn’t have a hard heart.

· Open-mindedness. A willingness to listen.

· Humility. A willingness to admit no one knows everything or always gets it right.

· Experience (again). While people want to know a leader cares, they also expect competence. Confidence erodes quickly if a leader doesn’t grasp the fundamentals of the job and mission.

· A commitment to ethics, or “doing the right thing.”

That’s my baker’s dozen. Sadly, when I measure Donald Trump against these qualities, I don’t see him embodying any of them with consistency. Yet his supporters insist he is not only effective but “great.” In Trump’s case, does he have the integrity to support and defend the U.S. Constitution? Does he realize that no man is above the law? Is the example he sets a selfless one? Does he bring people together for the greater good?

In business and the military, leadership is often judged narrowly by results—profits earned, battles won. But that standard can elevate sociopaths, people who care only about themselves and about producing results at any cost. Such leaders may achieve short-term gains, like higher profits, but at immense costs to those beneath them. Ultimately, a self-absorbed, “results-at-any-cost” leader drives organizations into the ground.

Leadership can be lonely, in the sense of “uneasy lies the head that wears a crown.” True leaders must sometimes accept unpopularity, stand firm, and take responsibility—“the buck stops here.” Leadership is both privilege and burden, which is why many shy away from it. Sociopaths, by contrast, don’t hesitate; they feel no weight from the consequences of their actions.

So, America, are we doing our best to identify the right—truly qualified—leaders? Evidence suggests we are not.

A final thought. I was once asked, as a young lieutenant competing for “Company Grade Office of the Quarter,” to explain the difference between management and leadership. For management, I said something about teamwork, smarts, effectiveness—taking on a project and bringing it to fruition. For leadership, I remember saying something like the ability to make good things happen. Here I was inspired by Chief Dan George in “Little Big Man” when he asks the Great Spirit “to grant me my old power—to make things happen.” And I remember a friend of mine, another lieutenant, saying the selection board loved short snappy answers. Maybe it was true—I won the award for that quarter.

Competitive Consumption as America’s Pastime

The Real American Way

BILL ASTORE

SEP 24, 2025

Competition can be a good thing. Think of sports, for example. Would victory have any meaning without competition? If we just randomly selected a winner each year of the Super Bowl or the World Series, who would care?

Competing is completing—a way to motivate oneself, to better oneself. That said, “victory” is more than just lifting a trophy in triumph. How you got there—how you treated your fellow competitors along the way—matters too. 

I remember a saying—If you’re not enough before the gold medal, you won’t be enough with it. Competing honorably, giving your very best, is really what it’s about, not just shiny medals and trophies. If your soul is empty, if your heart is cold, the glow from even the highest accolade will fade—and quickly.

Too often in our society, competition is embraced for the sake of dominance. For some, winning has no meaning unless others suffer by losing. A real winner, however, lifts up others even as she or he is competing to be the very best.

This is a lengthy prelude to an article I thought I would write about Americans competing for everything. Cooperation? Fuhgeddaboudit! Competition for everything, always, calls to mind a cutthroat world in which only the fittest—or the most ruthless, the nastiest—survive and thrive. 

Far too often, competition in America is further expressed through materialism, buying, and display. Competitive consumption, if you will. Over-the-top displays of dominance: having the biggest yacht, the loudest stereo system, the largest truck, the most expensive SUV, the most exotic pets, you name it.

America, let us say, is not a country known for its restraint. But as I thought about consumption as a national pastime, I recalled the great monologue on America by comedian George Carlin, who in less than eleven minutes dissected the American way with more power and wit than just about anyone else I’ve heard. His lessons were grim, but Carlin spoke from his heart and warned us we were losing our way in mindless consumption.

Every now and then, I rewatch the 11-minute clip below to give myself a cold slap of reality. Believe me, there’s a lot in his monologue to digest. And a lot of profanity as well—consider yourself warned.

The End Game for Gaza

Using Old Tools of War

BILL ASTORE

SEP 12, 2025

I’ve taught military history “from Plato to Nato,” as we used to joke, but my expertise focused on technology and warfare. Along with “revolutions” and “transformations” in weaponry, I probably spent too much time focusing on “decisive battles” and “great captains” in history. When you look at the course of military history, most deaths from war didn’t come in battle. They came from hunger and disease, from famine and pestilence. Sometimes, mass starvation and pandemics were unintentional byproducts of chaos and societal disruption caused by war, and sometimes starvation and disease were intentional weapons and products of war.

And behold a pale horse, and his name that sat on him was Death

You might call this apocalyptic war, from the Bible and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, which included famine and pestilence among the death riders.

An apocalyptic fate seemingly awaits Palestinians in Gaza. I’ve written about Gaza as a genocide, the mass bombing by Israel, the mass killing, with the apparent goal of forcing Palestinians out of Gaza, but I haven’t given enough thought to the use of mass starvation and diseases as weapons in this genocide.

A reader, Dan White, brought this lesson home to me, and I’d like to quote his message to me at length:

I can’t think of a better word than the etiology of starvation. It hasn’t been adequately addressed by the snoozemedia. Starvation death rates have a funny shaped curve. During the first stages of starvation–can’t give any figures on a time period for this or any other part of the process/curve, due to there being varying levels of food deprivation–there are few deaths, generally (but not always) those persons with compromised health/preexisting health problems that make them more susceptible to death than others in the population. After some (varying length) period of starvation, people start to die in larger numbers, and then all of a sudden, everyone is dying, and then everyone is dead. This period of death is fairly short compared to the period of starvation. Again, due to varying levels of starvation and varying levels of preexisting health and varying levels of surplus consumable body tissue in the starved group, this period has no fixed length, but it happens all of a sudden, and it doesn’t take long for everyone to die once it starts–couple of weeks seems common.

The starving residents of Gaza haven’t reached the mass-death stage of starvation, but it could well start happening tomorrow. I can’t say because I don’t know the food reserves preexisting, the food delivery figures since the ‘war’ started, and nobody in the news biz has bothered to look for them, either. There really should have been some government or multistate agency who has looked for them and published them, but nobody has.

When the mass-death stage hits, people in Gaza will be dying by the tens of thousands a week. Stopping the mass-death by all of a sudden providing food isn’t going to work very well, on account of logistical delivery problems and the medical problems of alleviating starvation at this advanced stage–folks’ digestive tracts may well not work well enough even if they get food. That will be the real genocide, and I’d bet money it happens, and bet more money that this is the real objective of Israel’s ‘war’ in Gaza. The notion of Israel’s war objective is displacement of Gazans is an absurdity–you want someone to leave, well they have to be able to walk, right? And they have to have a place to go. Israel is counting on the rest of the world to all of a sudden do a mass-evacuation of Gazans combined with a mass feeding and mass medical intervention all at the same time in order to prevent this mass death of Gazans from occurring? NFW–Israel’s leaders have accepted mass killing as an official state policy, and have commenced doing it, and do it as we speak. And Israeli hasbara [propaganda] will blame us for it, and a whole lot of whored-out American and European politicians, as well as Israel-worshipping American Jews, will go along with it.

What Dan White posits here is horrifying—and increasingly likely. Of course, as people are weakened through starvation, they become more susceptible to various diseases associated with famine and unsanitary conditions.

These “old” weapons of war—starvation and disease—will serve as the grimmest of reapers among the Palestinians in Gaza.

The “mass-death stage” of starvation is nearing, unless the U.S. and other countries intervene to force Israel to allow adequate food and medical supplies into Gaza. A failure to act will only spur the pale horse on whose back Death sits.

Genocide Is Apparently OK in Gaza

Lesson from the LA Holocaust Museum

BILL ASTORE

SEP 09, 2025

The LA Holocaust Museum recently suggested that “Never Again” is a fundamental lesson of the Holocaust. Then they took it back. Here’s the (almost) inconceivable story from Caitlin Johnstone:

Israel supporters are so crazy and evil that the Los Angeles Holocaust Museum recently retracted a statement saying “Never again can’t only mean never again for Jews” after objections from Zionists.

The museum issued a statement saying, “We recently posted an item on social media that was part of a pre-planned social media campaign intended to promote inclusivity and community that was easily open to misinterpretation by some to be a political statement reflecting the ongoing situation in the Middle East. That was not our intent. It has been removed to avoid any further confusion.”

Think about how gross your position has to be for you to be all hey, let’s say no genocide for ANYBODY, and then immediately have to come back and clarify that you definitely weren’t saying no genocide for the Palestinians.

I’m glad that’s clear! Talk about a profile in cowardice.

Then there are those who get testy about applying the word “genocide” to events in Gaza. Their distorted mouth noises sound something like this: Israel is at war with terrorists (Hamas) and *only* 70,000 or so Palestinians are dead so it’s not really a genocide, is it? Plus it’s all their fault because of October 7th, end of story.

For what it’s worth, I taught the Holocaust as a professor of history after attending a seminar at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum. Also, if it means anything, I’m Catholic, retired military, with no particular axe to grind.

Yes, it’s a genocide in Gaza. A holocaust in slow motion. Heck, Israeli leaders have freely confessed their goal is a final solution to the Gaza question, mainly by killing many Palestinians while forcing the rest to leave. (Whether they’ll have any place to go remains to be seen.)

There is no one model of genocide, and definitions also vary. But if what’s happening in Gaza isn’t a genocide, I don’t know what other word applies. Mass murder, perhaps? Extermination, but slowly? Ethnic cleansing and mass death followed by mass expulsion? That is genocide, plain and simple.

Sports and the Military

An Unholy Alliance

BILL ASTORE

SEP 07, 2025

There’s a full slate of NFL football games today, meaning there’ll be a full slate of military flyovers and similar ceremonies to “support” our troops. The militarization of sports in America is something to behold, and a new report that tackles the issue is available from a series on “Consuming War” at Brown University. Here’s the link.

It put me to mind of an article I wrote for Huff Post back in 2011. Fourteen years later, the unholy alliance between sports and the military has only deepened.

Here’s what I wrote in 2011. What do you think, readers? Will we ever learn to play ball again without all the military trappings?

America!

The Militarization of Sports — And the Sportiness of Military Service

The co-joining of corporate-owned sports teams and events with the military strikes me as more than disturbing. We’ve created a dangerous dynamic in this country: one in which sporting events are exploited to sell military service for some while providing cheap grace for all.

William Astore

By William Astore, Contributor

Writer, History Professor, Retired Lieutenant Colonel (USAF)

Jul 28, 2011, 01:19 PM EDT

Updated Sep 27, 2011

Connecting sports to military service and vice versa has a venerable history. The Battle of Waterloo (1815) was won on the playing fields of Eton, Wellington allegedly said. Going over the top at the Battle of the Somme (1916), a few British soldiers kicked soccer balls in the general direction of the German lines. American service academies have historically placed a high value on sports (especially football) for their ability to generate and instill leadership, teamwork and toughness under pressure.

But in today’s America, we are witnessing an unprecedented militarization of sports, and a concomitant emphasis on the sportiness of military service. With respect to the latter, take a close look at recent Army recruitment ads (which I happen to see while watching baseball). These ads show soldiers lifting weights, playing volleyball, climbing mountains and similar sporty activities. The voice-over stresses that army service promotes teamwork and toughness (“There’s strong. Then there’s armystrong.”) There are, of course, no shots of soldiers under direct fire, of wounded soldiers crying for help, of disabled veterans. Army service in these ads is celebrated as (and reduced to) an action-filled sequence of sporting events.

Today’s militarization of sports is even more blatant. Consider this excellent article by U.S. Army Colonel (retired) Andrew Bacevich, which highlights the “cheap grace” available to crowds at major sporting events. For-profit sports corporations and the Pentagon join hands to orchestrate pageants that encourage (manipulate?) us to cheer and celebrate our flag, our troops and our sports and military heroes, as the obligatory fighter jets roar overhead.

Now, I’m sure there are well-meaning people who see such pageantry as an uncontroversial celebration of love of country, as well as a gesture of generosity and thanks to our military. And this retired veteran admits to feeling my heart swell when I see our flag flying proudly and our troops marching smartly. But the co-joining of corporate-owned sports teams and events (which are ultimately about entertainment and making a buck) with the military (which is ultimately in the deadly business of winning wars) strikes me as more than disturbing.

To cite only one example: The San Diego Padres baseball team takes “tremendous pride” in being “the first team in professional sports to have a dedicated military affairs department,” according to a team press release quoting Tom Garfinkel, the Padres president and chief operating officer. But is it truly “tremendous” for sports teams to be creating “military affairs” departments? As our sporting “heroes” celebrate our military ones, does not a dangerous blurring take place, especially in the minds of America’s youth?

War is not a sport; it’s not entertainment; it’s not fun. And blurring the lines between sport and war is not in the best interests of our youth, who should not be sold on military service based on stadium pageantry or team marketing, however well-intentioned it may be.

We’ve created a dangerous dynamic in this country: one in which sporting events are exploited to sell military service for some while providing cheap grace for all, even as military service is sold as providing the thrill of (sporting) victory while elevating our troops to the status of “heroes” (a status too often assigned by our society to well-paid professional athletes).

Which brings me to a humble request: At our sporting events, is it too much to ask that we simply “Play Ball?” In our appeals for military recruits, is it too much for us to tell them that war is not a sport?

Think of these questions the next time those military warplanes roar over the coliseum of your corporate-owned team.

“There is no America, there is no democracy”

Thoughts on Gaza and the Profitability of Genocide

BILL ASTORE

JUL 10, 2025

I sent this somewhat despairing note to a friend this morning:

It remains unclear to me whether the U.S. government kowtows to Israel (for all the reasons we know, like AIPAC), or whether Israel is a sort of cat’s paw for U.S. imperial and corporate interests. Maybe it’s not about nations and borders, as the famous speech from “Network” put it, but rather resources and profit, whether oil, water, weapons, and the like. The people of Gaza are simply in the way and entirely expendable to these larger interests. Naturally, propaganda is skillfully used to portray just about every Palestinian as a Hamas terrorist. Then, as you noted, there’s a media blackout on Gaza in most U.S. mainstream media sources.

Short of revolution, I don’t see any changes coming. The Democrats, of course, are just as happy to serve Israel and corporate interests.

This is the famous scene from “Network” featuring a brilliant performance by Ned Beatty:

If the world is a “college of corporations” (heck, even Harvard is a corporation) and if business and money is the universal lubricant, the Palestinians in Gaza are both good and bad for business. They are “good” in the sense that money can be made from killing them, concentrating them, monitoring them, expelling them, and so on. Speaking and documenting this horrendous truth got Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur for Palestine, sanctioned by the U.S. government, as Lisa Savage noted here.

They are “bad” for business with respect to the gas fields off Gaza. Those marine gas reserves are likely worth $5 billion or more, money that would have done much to alleviate poverty in Gaza. Of course, Israel wasn’t about to allow Palestinians in Gaza to share in this bounty. Getting rid of Palestinians is a means to the end of completely dominating future trade in gas and other commodities in the Levant Basin.

I’ve been wondering why Great Britain is at great pains to help the Netanyahu government—then I noted that British Petroleum is one of the giant corporations that Israel granted a license to for future gas exploration. Coincidence?

Now, unlike Ned Beatty above, I’m not saying everything is explained by money and currency flows as “the primal forces of nature.” But it’s always a good idea to follow the money. It’s a ghastly business indeed when genocide makes money, but there you have it. A large part of the Holocaust in World War II was Germans and their fellow travelers taking everything from the Jews before they killed them. Profit from death factories—a grim truth I care not to contemplate, but it happened. Mass death can be a huge money-maker, and those pulling the strings couldn’t care less about body counts. Quarterly profits—now those they care about.

This suggests a strategy for activism—except efforts at BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions) are heavily resisted by the powers that be. Surprise! You can find out more about the BDS movement here.

When protests are bad for business, that’s when the powerful pay attention. Powerful people already know the truth—they do everything in their power to determine what is “true”—so they’re not interested in right or wrong. What’s “right” is what makes money and what’s wrong, very wrong, loses money. You can’t appeal to their collective conscience (Good luck with that!), but you can possibly appeal to or cut into their collective profits.

Too cynical? What say you, readers?

Catastrophic Flooding in Texas

Just Don’t Mention Global Warming or Climate Change

BILL ASTORE

JUL 07, 2025

More than 100 people are already dead from catastrophic flooding in Texas. The “blame game” has started, with the Trump administration taking heat for flash flood warnings that came too late to save those in the path of surging rivers fed by thunderstorms dumping too much rain in too short a time.

Camp Mystic in Texas was especially hard hit by flooding, losing 27 children and camp counselors

The White House, naturally, says it’s not their fault. If you want to blame someone, blame God. A quick summary from NBC:

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt pushed back against questions as to why flood alerts were issued “while people were likely sleeping” and what the administration is doing to ensure alerts go out earlier.

Leavitt noted that the National Weather Service issued escalating warnings Thursday regarding the weather forecasts as information came in. She said there were “timely flash flood alerts” including a flood watch in the afternoon, evening, and “timely flash flood alerts” at night.

“So people were sleeping in the middle of the night when this flood came — that was an act of God,” Leavitt said. “It’s not the administration’s fault that the flood hit when it did, but there were early and consistent warnings.”

“An act of God” — Divine wrath? Judgment? What, exactly?

Why do we use this expression, “an act of God,” as if God or gods are just waiting to smite people with hurricanes, floods, locusts, tornados, and (Lord?) knows what else.

Wasn’t it really an act of nature? Too much heat, too much humidity, and wind patterns combining somewhat predictably to cause dangerous flash flooding. An act of nature we can guard against. An act of God implies caprice, violence, and forces that can neither be predicted nor prevented.

We know about acts of nature. That’s why we have science and scientists, or in this case meteorologists, radar, supercomputers, and the like. We fund a national weather service of experts so that we can predict and perhaps ameliorate some of these acts of nature.

But we know as well nature is becoming more extreme. Nature’s acts are becoming more violent as the earth slowly warms and as climate patterns become more violent and hence often less predictable—as well as more punishing.

Let’s not talk about acts of God, whether as a way to shift blame or even as a form of comfort. (Speaking for myself, I wouldn’t be comforted if someone told me God had swept my loved one away in a flash flood He sent.) Let’s talk about acts of nature, and how they’re growing more violent, and the steps we can take to understand them, predict them better, and lessen their impact.

Again, “act of God” gets us nowhere. But I know man is acting, with drill, baby, drill consistency, and man’s acts are something we do have control over.

With sympathy to all those who’ve lost loved ones in the terrifying flash flooding in Texas. Nature can be brutal—it’s why we must respect it, study it, and understand it.

Remember When the Balanced Budget Amendment Was A Thing?

$37 Trillion in Debt and Counting

BILL ASTORE

JUN 30, 2025

With the U.S. national debt sitting at $37 trillion, it’s hard to imagine a time when Congress argued for a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. Remember when Republicans had a reputation for fiscal conservatism?

According to the non-partisan CBO, President Trump’s big beautiful bill will add another $3.3 trillion in debt over the next decade. At the same time, the bill cuts health care to poor people. This from the New York Times:

G.O.P. Bill Has $1.1 Trillion in Health Cuts and 11.8 Million Losing Care, C.B.O. Says

Analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that Republicans’ new version of the legislation would make far deeper cuts and lead to more people becoming uninsured than previous proposals.

Who needs health insurance, am I right?

Yearly interest on the national debt is now higher than the Pentagon budget, which is truly saying (and spending) a lot.

Where is all the money going? Leaving aside the cost of servicing the national debt, most of discretionary spending goes to the Pentagon, Homeland Security, and similar forces of aggression and repression. New nuclear weapons, for example, may cost $2 trillion over the next 30 years. A misnamed “golden dome” (leaky sieve is more accurate) allegedly to protect America against nuclear missile attacks may cost $500 billion or more over the next decade or two. And nothing costs as much as foreign wars, as we learned from the disastrous Iraq and Afghan Wars, which may end up adding $8 trillion to the national debt when all the bills come due.

While achieving a balanced budget isn’t easy, there are two easy ways to come closer:

  1. Tax the rich.
  2. Stop making war, downsize the empire, and focus the U.S. military on national defense and defense alone.

Option (1) is out since the rich own the government. (Welcome to Plutocracy USA.) Option (2) is also out since the military-industrial-congressional complex is the fourth branch of government and arguably the most powerful. All presidents appease it, whether their names are Bush or Biden, Obama or Trump.

So, Congress and the President do what they always do: Serve the rich and kowtow to the MICC, the National (In)Security State. Any “balancing” to be done with the federal budget will be done on the tired backs of the poor and disadvantaged. They have no lobbies, no money, no say.

Can the working classes pull America up by their collective bootstraps? America’s workers have achieved miracles before, but this is too big of an ask even for them.

Donald Trump, Insulter-in-Chief

Teenage Boys Playing “Risk” Lead America!

BILL ASTORE

JUN 27, 2025

When I was in high school, my friends and I would get together and play “Risk,” the game of world domination. It was an excuse to hang out, to have fun, and especially to trade insults as we rolled the dice and moved our “armies” around the board to vanquish one another.

Trump understands this mentality—the mentality of adolescent teens trading insults for fun, bonding over shared putdowns. Never did I or my friends think, however, that juvenile and puerile insults should become the foundation of politics and governance in America. That was Trump’s peculiar “genius”: he has become America’s Insulter-in-Chief. 

Consider this recent post from Trump’s Truth Social account:

Now, my teenage self is smiling or laughing even as I read these insults. Of course they’re outrageous, deceptive, irresponsible, juvenile, inaccurate, add your own descriptors here. Yet Trump recognizes that they work, especially with his followers, whose main objective often appears to be “owning the libs.”

To Trump, all of this is par for the course. His “genius” in 2015-16, when he first ran, was recognizing that his Republican challengers were, as we say in the military, whiskey deltas, often deserving of insults and contempt. He recognizes too in 2025 that the Democrats similarly are weak, are corrupt, and therefore targets of opportunity for the most withering insults, no matter how exaggerated.

Predictably, more than a few of his insults are patently absurd. Israel has no bigger champion than Chuck Schumer, yet Trump labels him as a “Great Palestinian Senator.” Absurd as that is, it’s a reminder to Chuck to get back in line, to continue kowtowing to Israel, which, of course, he doesn’t need much reminding to do.

Best of all, perhaps, is Trump’s reference to Dirty Harry’s “Make My Day!” tagline, which Ronald Reagan also employed. Again, we as teenagers were fond of quoting our favorite lines from various Clint Eastwood movies, and I can still recite many from memory. (“Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?”)

Trump’s insults resonate in part because America’s so-called best and brightest have so often failed or betrayed the working classes or sold themselves out to the highest bidder. And most everyone deserves to be taken down a peg or two now and again. But, to state the obvious, there should be something more to our political scene than insults and name-calling.

Too often, U.S. politics and foreign affairs today resemble a bunch of 16-year-olds ragging on and insulting each other while hatching plots for world dominance. It might make for a fun “Risk” game, but it doesn’t make for a healthy world.

America’s Unrepresentative Government

How can ordinary Americans regain political agency?

BILL ASTORE

JUN 06, 2025

When you have an unrepresentative government, or, put differently, a government that represents oligarchic interests and corporations, as well as being heavily influenced by lobbyists, domestic and foreign (AIPAC), you get Trump and Congress conspiring to decrease Medicaid, to cut food support for the poor, while funneling more money upward to the very richest Americans.

American workers essentially have no agency, no ability to act in meaningful ways in the political realm. Along with no agency, Americans also have fewer liberties, especially if you should choose to criticize U.S./Israeli policies and otherwise challenge the imperatives of the powerful.

Be careful shouting “Give me liberty or give me death!” in these times. Death may be far easier to achieve.

Hannah Arendt

What is the answer to regaining our agency? In “Between Past and Future,” the political philosopher Hannah Arendt wrote how French resisters to the Nazis during World War II discovered themselves—their true nature—in and through action. In resisting the Nazis, they seized control over their own agency by exercising it in the face of danger. They chose risk, they fought to effect change, they took stands that often meant life or death.

Through action, these resisters lifted themselves out of “normal” time, Arendt argued, entering instead a realm between past and future, a realm of true existence, a present of dynamism, of possibilities, of clarity of commitment.

Political agency is not going to be given back to the people. If we regain it, it will only be by seizing it ourselves, through action, through commitment, through risk-taking, and perhaps most of all through large-scale organized resistance.

Hopefully, that resistance can remain non-violent. I prefer reformation or restoration to revolution, recalling the words of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn that revolutions unleash the most elemental barbarism.