Thank you, Lori. Everything you've written will be very helpful immediately!
I'm currently sort of at a crossroad, wondering which response from a senator is LESS helpful:
Tim Scott - from what I hear he has NEVER responded to a message from a Dem, so it seems unlikely he'll start now.
Lindsey Graham - Always responds, and even occasionally indicates disagreement, so at least someone is reading. (Or checking a database for constituent ideology trends.)
Obviously, living in the only state on the eastern seaboard considered a 100% lock for Trump in 2016 (and likely ever since) means there is no obligation to reply at all.
I think a non-reply is maybe the more honest of the two. At least Tim Scott’s silence doesn’t pretend there’s a conversation happening.
The fact that Graham responds at all is interesting, even if it’s mostly performative. Sometimes those canned replies are a sign they’re tracking sentiment more closely than they let on — not because they plan to act on it, but to see how far they can go without backlash. Scott’s total silence might be honest, in a way, but it’s also a sign he feels completely insulated.
Thank you for this. It is very helpful to have concrete suggestions for where to refocus energy, being in a district where the rep avoids/ignores with impunity. Also good to have action responses for friends & neighbors in the same boat. Thank you.
It may be arrogant to suppose that our phone calls and letters to Tom Tillis had something to do with his position on the destructive bill of which we are all too aware, and/or his withdrawal from re-election in the face of being primaried. His withdrawal leaves some hope that a Democrat can be elected despite the probable billions of dollars that will be put into the Republican campaign. Likely a form letter, but at least Tillis' office did respond, showing a touch ofclass unlike our other Senator. Here is the last:
Dear Dr. Palmer:
Thank you for the kind words of support. It is an honor and a privilege to serve the
people of North Carolina in the United States Senate. I appreciate your thoughtfulness in
reaching out to me.
Please do not hesitate to get in touch with me again if you or a loved one need assistance
with a federal agency.
Sincerely,
Thom Tillis
U.S. Senator
Meanwhile, I receive around thirty solicitations a day from PAC's around the country for the pathetic dollar or two that I am able to put into play against the donations of Republican billionaires on the pathetic hope that perhaps a hundred million like-minded schmoes will do the same. Do the click on by . . .
Yes, that’s so frustrating, Carleton — a form letter’s still a brush-off, even when it’s polite. But you're right that Tillis stepping down shifts the landscape, even slightly. It doesn’t make it fair or functional, but fingers crossed it opens a crack worth watching.
Lori, this inattentive reader passed over your mention of Mugabe and had to be reminded of Zimbabwe and its' travail of so many years. Your wisdom is hard earned.
I'm in Hawley's district. He and Burlison are MAGA and totally useless. I don't even get answers anymore. They were form letters, some of which had nothing to do with my call/email. I don't know which was worse, not getting an answer or getting bullshit letters back.
I hear you. That kind of dismissal — whether it’s silence or bs — wears you down in a different way. It’s one thing to be ignored, quite another to get a reply so off-base it feels like mockery.
With reps like Hawley and Burlison, I'm sure it’s not just demoralising — it’s dehumanising. But naming the pattern helps. Not because it changes them, but because it helps you reclaim your energy and decide where it’s still worth investing.
I guess now I know why my U.S. Representative, Vern Buchanon, never responds. He's just being honest in his indifference to a Dem constituent. Yes, alternative actions are necessary!
I was heartsore to think we'd come to a point where the institutional Church is not a safeguard against fascism, but by tracing that failure through history, you helped me understand that it was my expectation that was off, and that's easier to rectify. I was also grateful that you've pointed quietly to where the real courage tends to live — I look forward to part 2.
This has been on my mind for a while. And, like many of the things we are witnessing, there is precedent. There is also, fortunately, means of correcting.
Thank you! Wow. You lived under Mugabe. You are so wise! I know organizing will take time. I hope I have enough. It is frustrating to feel unheard. I know that staff opens emails, takes the phone messages … they might even tell them, “hey! Senator, we have a lot of calls against this,” but the Senator is basically isolated and as you said - focused on political survival which at the moment kind of ignores constituents.
Hoping large organized groups of frustrated voters has an impact.
Thanks Lisa — and yes, that time under Mugabe shaped a lot of how I see things now. I’m not sure about ‘wise’ though — maybe just ‘experienced’?
You’re absolutely right in saying that even when messages are being logged, the isolation at the top often means they don’t land where they should. But I share your hope. When enough people strategically organise together — not just out of outrage — pressure can still break through. Maybe not quickly. But sometimes, even a crack is enough to start a shift.
I agree. We would need at least a million followers to really make them take notice. I am not sure how fast we can do that organically. What has to happen is other like-minded people have to join with us and combine networks. We have over a year to midterms. One hope is there are a lot of small groups just like ours, and I am pretty sure we are all heading the same direction. Now we just have to figure out how to get us all united. 🤔
I’m deeply troubled by this post. The message seems to be “give up resistance on a federal level.” More precisely, if people feel their efforts aren’t making a difference, they can turn their attention elsewhere. Although Timothy Snyder details a much more pervasive surrender in his first Lesson Against Tyranny, I'm concerned that your message inadvertently sends people down a slippery slope, an early step towards the larger scale "anticipatory obedience” Snyder describes as undergirding nazism.
And, just because an elected official doesn’t respond to a communication doesn’t mean the message has been ignored. And yes, local involvement is valuable — but not if one’s heart is in fighting large-scale authoritarianism.
This is going to be a long, hard fight. I heard Chenoweth speak on a call today; she reminded listeners that in some nations, overthrow has taken years, in concert with an extensive effort to train people on how to enact social resistance that can undermine different power structures.
I suggest you advise people to take a break, then engage in some serious reflection about the level at which they want to be involved. Encourage them to find their people— depending on where they live, this might not be easy, but it will be possible.
I appreciate you taking the time to articulate your concerns so thoughtfully, Kay. I hear your fear about the risk of anticipatory obedience — it’s a legitimate worry in times like these. But the purpose of this piece wasn’t to tell people to give up. It was to help them stop blaming themselves if familiar tools of resistance no longer work as they once did.
I endeavour to root my work in sustained, strategic resistance, not despair. But strategy requires an honest reading of the terrain. If a lever isn’t working, I believe in saying so plainly — not to disempower readers, but to help them redirect their energy toward that which still has traction. That’s what I was trying to do here.
I also want to say, gently but firmly: I write drawing from my own personal experience of living under authoritarian rule, as well as reference to academic research. You’re free to disagree, but respectfully, perhaps it’s not appropriate to tell me what I should be advising my readers. If you think a different message is more appropriate, you’re absolutely welcome to write your own. That’s part of the beauty of this platform — many voices, many paths, many with the same goal.
And yes, I agree completely: this will be a long fight. I’ve been there — I lived in Mugabe’s for 12 years. Social resistance is hard, but it’s also powerful — especially when we stop wasting energy on trying to open closed doors, and start building something that can’t be captured.
I understand your reaction, though I didn't come away with the same point.
I do think your last paragraph is THE blueprint, and I have found this to, generally, be the tone of the content Lori delivers.
We don't, currently, have the "institutional" weight (media outlets, political party, etc.) to go head-to-head. This will have to be the social resistance you mentioned, sustained over a long period of time. Not exactly the hand, I think, any of us want to play. But those are the cards we are holding.
Thank you, Lori. Everything you've written will be very helpful immediately!
I'm currently sort of at a crossroad, wondering which response from a senator is LESS helpful:
Tim Scott - from what I hear he has NEVER responded to a message from a Dem, so it seems unlikely he'll start now.
Lindsey Graham - Always responds, and even occasionally indicates disagreement, so at least someone is reading. (Or checking a database for constituent ideology trends.)
Obviously, living in the only state on the eastern seaboard considered a 100% lock for Trump in 2016 (and likely ever since) means there is no obligation to reply at all.
You're welcome F&C.
I think a non-reply is maybe the more honest of the two. At least Tim Scott’s silence doesn’t pretend there’s a conversation happening.
The fact that Graham responds at all is interesting, even if it’s mostly performative. Sometimes those canned replies are a sign they’re tracking sentiment more closely than they let on — not because they plan to act on it, but to see how far they can go without backlash. Scott’s total silence might be honest, in a way, but it’s also a sign he feels completely insulated.
Either way, it's not encouraging.
Excellent points, and it's impossible for me to disagree.
Thank you, Lori!
Thank you for this. It is very helpful to have concrete suggestions for where to refocus energy, being in a district where the rep avoids/ignores with impunity. Also good to have action responses for friends & neighbors in the same boat. Thank you.
You're very welcome Kemi — I'm so glad you found it helpful, and grateful to you for sharing it.
It may be arrogant to suppose that our phone calls and letters to Tom Tillis had something to do with his position on the destructive bill of which we are all too aware, and/or his withdrawal from re-election in the face of being primaried. His withdrawal leaves some hope that a Democrat can be elected despite the probable billions of dollars that will be put into the Republican campaign. Likely a form letter, but at least Tillis' office did respond, showing a touch ofclass unlike our other Senator. Here is the last:
Dear Dr. Palmer:
Thank you for the kind words of support. It is an honor and a privilege to serve the
people of North Carolina in the United States Senate. I appreciate your thoughtfulness in
reaching out to me.
Please do not hesitate to get in touch with me again if you or a loved one need assistance
with a federal agency.
Sincerely,
Thom Tillis
U.S. Senator
Meanwhile, I receive around thirty solicitations a day from PAC's around the country for the pathetic dollar or two that I am able to put into play against the donations of Republican billionaires on the pathetic hope that perhaps a hundred million like-minded schmoes will do the same. Do the click on by . . .
Yes, that’s so frustrating, Carleton — a form letter’s still a brush-off, even when it’s polite. But you're right that Tillis stepping down shifts the landscape, even slightly. It doesn’t make it fair or functional, but fingers crossed it opens a crack worth watching.
Lori, this inattentive reader passed over your mention of Mugabe and had to be reminded of Zimbabwe and its' travail of so many years. Your wisdom is hard earned.
That's very kind, Carleton, thank you. But you — inattentive? Never.
I'm in Hawley's district. He and Burlison are MAGA and totally useless. I don't even get answers anymore. They were form letters, some of which had nothing to do with my call/email. I don't know which was worse, not getting an answer or getting bullshit letters back.
I hear you. That kind of dismissal — whether it’s silence or bs — wears you down in a different way. It’s one thing to be ignored, quite another to get a reply so off-base it feels like mockery.
With reps like Hawley and Burlison, I'm sure it’s not just demoralising — it’s dehumanising. But naming the pattern helps. Not because it changes them, but because it helps you reclaim your energy and decide where it’s still worth investing.
I guess now I know why my U.S. Representative, Vern Buchanon, never responds. He's just being honest in his indifference to a Dem constituent. Yes, alternative actions are necessary!
Like Lori, I believe in calibrating our actions based upon (a) facts/knowledge and (b) where leverage is best applied.
This is the first of two-parts. I hope it provides (a) facts and (b) the message that local is leverage.
https://johnhamilton.substack.com/p/christianity-is-not-coming-to-the
Thank you for sharing this John.
I was heartsore to think we'd come to a point where the institutional Church is not a safeguard against fascism, but by tracing that failure through history, you helped me understand that it was my expectation that was off, and that's easier to rectify. I was also grateful that you've pointed quietly to where the real courage tends to live — I look forward to part 2.
This has been on my mind for a while. And, like many of the things we are witnessing, there is precedent. There is also, fortunately, means of correcting.
I've just started working on my own... https://publiusrants.substack.com/p/liking-and-subscribing-wont-help?r=8a5vz
Thank you! Wow. You lived under Mugabe. You are so wise! I know organizing will take time. I hope I have enough. It is frustrating to feel unheard. I know that staff opens emails, takes the phone messages … they might even tell them, “hey! Senator, we have a lot of calls against this,” but the Senator is basically isolated and as you said - focused on political survival which at the moment kind of ignores constituents.
Hoping large organized groups of frustrated voters has an impact.
Thanks Lisa — and yes, that time under Mugabe shaped a lot of how I see things now. I’m not sure about ‘wise’ though — maybe just ‘experienced’?
You’re absolutely right in saying that even when messages are being logged, the isolation at the top often means they don’t land where they should. But I share your hope. When enough people strategically organise together — not just out of outrage — pressure can still break through. Maybe not quickly. But sometimes, even a crack is enough to start a shift.
I agree. We would need at least a million followers to really make them take notice. I am not sure how fast we can do that organically. What has to happen is other like-minded people have to join with us and combine networks. We have over a year to midterms. One hope is there are a lot of small groups just like ours, and I am pretty sure we are all heading the same direction. Now we just have to figure out how to get us all united. 🤔
I’m deeply troubled by this post. The message seems to be “give up resistance on a federal level.” More precisely, if people feel their efforts aren’t making a difference, they can turn their attention elsewhere. Although Timothy Snyder details a much more pervasive surrender in his first Lesson Against Tyranny, I'm concerned that your message inadvertently sends people down a slippery slope, an early step towards the larger scale "anticipatory obedience” Snyder describes as undergirding nazism.
And, just because an elected official doesn’t respond to a communication doesn’t mean the message has been ignored. And yes, local involvement is valuable — but not if one’s heart is in fighting large-scale authoritarianism.
This is going to be a long, hard fight. I heard Chenoweth speak on a call today; she reminded listeners that in some nations, overthrow has taken years, in concert with an extensive effort to train people on how to enact social resistance that can undermine different power structures.
I suggest you advise people to take a break, then engage in some serious reflection about the level at which they want to be involved. Encourage them to find their people— depending on where they live, this might not be easy, but it will be possible.
I appreciate you taking the time to articulate your concerns so thoughtfully, Kay. I hear your fear about the risk of anticipatory obedience — it’s a legitimate worry in times like these. But the purpose of this piece wasn’t to tell people to give up. It was to help them stop blaming themselves if familiar tools of resistance no longer work as they once did.
I endeavour to root my work in sustained, strategic resistance, not despair. But strategy requires an honest reading of the terrain. If a lever isn’t working, I believe in saying so plainly — not to disempower readers, but to help them redirect their energy toward that which still has traction. That’s what I was trying to do here.
I also want to say, gently but firmly: I write drawing from my own personal experience of living under authoritarian rule, as well as reference to academic research. You’re free to disagree, but respectfully, perhaps it’s not appropriate to tell me what I should be advising my readers. If you think a different message is more appropriate, you’re absolutely welcome to write your own. That’s part of the beauty of this platform — many voices, many paths, many with the same goal.
And yes, I agree completely: this will be a long fight. I’ve been there — I lived in Mugabe’s for 12 years. Social resistance is hard, but it’s also powerful — especially when we stop wasting energy on trying to open closed doors, and start building something that can’t be captured.
Thanks for your insights, Lori. I appreciate the food for thought.
I understand your reaction, though I didn't come away with the same point.
I do think your last paragraph is THE blueprint, and I have found this to, generally, be the tone of the content Lori delivers.
We don't, currently, have the "institutional" weight (media outlets, political party, etc.) to go head-to-head. This will have to be the social resistance you mentioned, sustained over a long period of time. Not exactly the hand, I think, any of us want to play. But those are the cards we are holding.