Preface:
Lately I have seen a strange scene in the middle of New York. A cluster of men who looked alike. All white. Speaking recognizable prison slang. They stood by a subway entrance looking alien and lost. One stepped up and asked me for six dollars. I asked why. He seemed confused, then said he wanted cigarettes. I said that is a bad purpose, so no. He said then five. I moved toward the station to make an appointment. He blocked me with his leg. I looked at him. He glanced back at the group. A short-haired middle-aged man tilted his head in disapproval. The blocker pulled his leg back and let me pass.
On the way back it clicked. I had seen that same watchful stare in Kyiv. During the crackdown, local power aligned with Russia sent petty criminals into the capital to spark fights and justify force. They were called tïtushky. The method was simple. Seed provocation. Create a pretext. Call in the state.
I do not claim certainty about what I saw in New York. I do claim pattern recognition. America is sliding toward the same toolbox of manufactured unrest and staged permission for repression. This preface explains why I wrote the following action plan. It comes from living under a totalitarian system, from seeing how small staged moments open the door to larger violence, and from the belief that citizens must prepare lawful, nonviolent defenses before the pretext arrives.
Context: The United States in 2025 faces an acute democratic crisis, with multiple institutional pillars under strain. Analysts note that core safeguards – free elections, rule of law, anti-corruption efforts – have developed “dangerous cracks” under recent authoritarian pressures[1]. The inauguration of a second Trump administration has intensified concerns about eroding civil liberties and “authoritarian tendencies” that could undermine constitutional rights[2]. In response, broad coalitions of civil society, media, labor, and state officials are mobilizing resistance[3]. This document lays out an exhaustive action plan of lawful, nonviolent measures to fortify democracy. The focus is on U.S. institutions, but global support and solidarity are also crucial, as the repercussions of America’s democratic breakdown will be felt worldwide. All suggested actions are legal, nonviolent, and high-impact – aiming to leverage existing laws, economic power, and collective organization to uphold fundamental rights. The plan also identifies who can help implement each measure (lawyers, workers, technologists, journalists, etc.), emphasizing that everyone has a role in defending democracy.
A crowd of pro-democracy demonstrators rallies in New York City in early 2025, protesting actions by the new administration that they view as undermining democracy. Signs reference authoritarianism, workers’ rights, data privacy, and the rule of law.
1. Build Legal Firebreaks
Goal: Erect immediate legal barriers to block or slow unlawful authoritarian policies at every level of government.
· Pre-Draft Emergency Lawsuits: Form legal teams to pre-write model complaints, temporary restraining orders (TROs), and injunction motions targeting likely unconstitutional orders or bans. For example, civil rights attorneys and state Attorneys General should have boilerplate lawsuits ready to file within hours if the federal government issues an illegal directive (such as a nationwide protest ban or speech gag). Professionals: Constitutional lawyers, ACLU and similar organizations, state AG staff, law school clinics.
· Rapid Litigation Network: Fund and coordinate a “rapid litigation” pod that links state Attorneys General, city attorneys, public-interest legal groups, and pro bono private firms. This coalition can quickly share information and file lawsuits in multiple jurisdictions to block or delay federal overreach. (This echoes the successful strategy after the 2017 travel ban, when states and NGOs swiftly sued and obtained injunctions.) Having a standing network ensures no time is lost in response. Professionals: State and city lawyers, nonprofit litigators, legal scholars.
· State & City Shield Laws: Enact robust “shield laws” at the state and municipal level to protect vulnerable groups and service providers. These laws refuse cooperation with punitive actions from other jurisdictions or the federal government that violate rights. For instance, since Roe v. Wade was overturned, over a dozen states have passed shield laws protecting clinicians who provide telehealth abortion or gender-affirming care across state lines[4][5]. By late 2024, one in four U.S. abortions were provided via telehealth, and about half of those used providers in “shield” states sending medication to patients in banned states[6] – demonstrating how such laws maintain access despite hostile bans. Shield laws can also cover free speech (barring enforcement of libel judgments from bogus out-of-state lawsuits), digital privacy (refusing to hand over user data for prosecution of things like abortion or dissent), and worker protections (protecting employees who refuse to carry out illegal orders). Professionals: State legislators, city council members, advocacy organizations (women’s rights, LGBTQ+, digital rights groups) drafting model bills.
· Anti-Commandeering & Non-Cooperation: Invoke the Tenth Amendment’s “anti-commandeering” doctrine to the fullest. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the federal government cannot compel state or local officials to enforce federal law or policies[7]. Blue states should formally instruct their agencies, law enforcement, and officials not to assist with any federal program that infringes constitutional rights. Just as “sanctuary cities” refused to help enforce harsh immigration laws[8][9], states can refuse to enforce new voting restrictions or punitive measures against minorities. For example, a state could bar local police from aiding federal officers in rounding up peaceful protesters or pressuring librarians over banned books. This creates legal firebreaks: the feds would have to rely solely on their limited personnel, which, as seen in immigration, drastically curtails enforcement[10]. Professionals: Governors and mayors issuing executive orders; state legislators codifying non-cooperation; police and sheriff departments aligning policies with constitutional priorities.
2. Starve the Pipeline (Procurement & Pensions)
Goal: Cut financial support for anti-democratic agendas by leveraging the economic clout of blue states, cities, and institutions.
· Reform Vendor Rules: Rewrite state and municipal procurement policies to exclude or penalize companies that materially enable authoritarian or rights-abusing policies, wherever legally defensible. Governments purchase billions in goods and services – this money shouldn’t go to firms that, for instance, build surveillance tech for political repression or fund extremist disinformation. Example: In 2017, Seattle’s city council unanimously voted to divest about $3 billion in city funds from Wells Fargo due to the bank’s unethical practices (financing the Dakota Access Pipeline and creating fake accounts)[11][12]. Similarly, a state could bar contracts with any company that complies with bounty-hunter abortion laws or that contributes to anti-voter suppression efforts. This creates market pressure on companies to distance themselves from autocratic agendas. Professionals: State/city procurement officers, treasurers, legislators, ethical business coalitions.
· Leverage Public Pension Power: Harness the enormous stock ownership of public-sector and union pension funds. These institutional investors should aggressively vote their proxies in favor of pro-democracy shareholder resolutions – such as demands for transparency in political spending, independent board oversight of election-related lobbying, and human rights risk assessments. Notably, shareholder support for political accountability resolutions surged in 2025, with average votes up to 41.6% (from 26.2% in 2024) as investors pushed companies to align lobbying with democratic values[13][14]. Pension funds can announce they will oppose boards of companies that bankroll efforts to undermine voting or civil rights. They should also publish an “exclusion list” of companies that persist in anti-democratic behavior (similar to how some funds divest from tobacco or Sudan). This name-and-shame, backed by dollars, will incentivize better corporate behavior. Professionals: Pension fund trustees, union leaders, investment managers, ESG analysts.
· Move Public Money to Pro-Democracy Banks: Shift state and local government deposits, as well as university and nonprofit accounts, away from big financiers of anti-democratic causes. Instead, place funds with community banks, credit unions, and financial institutions that uphold civil rights. This echoes earlier divestment campaigns – e.g., cities like Seattle and Davis, CA moved funds out of a major bank over its pipeline financing[11][12]. If a large bank is found enabling corruption or extremist networks, officials can lawfully choose to bank elsewhere. Public finance officials can also tighten criteria for bond underwriters and financial advisors, favoring firms with strong commitments to democratic governance and transparency. Professionals: State treasurers, city finance directors, university CFOs, responsible banking coalitions.
· Travel & Business Boycotts of Repressive States: Implement official travel bans and procurement boycotts targeting jurisdictions that erode democracy, within the bounds of law. For instance, until recently California barred state-funded travel to states with anti-LGBTQ laws – by 2023 the ban list had grown to 26 states following a surge of discriminatory legislation[15]. Similar policies can refuse reimbursement for conferences in states that e.g. criminalize abortion or undermine elections. Cities and states can likewise prefer suppliers headquartered in jurisdictions that meet basic democratic standards. (Care must be taken to avoid unconstitutional discrimination against sister states, but tailoring based on business conduct is often permissible.) The message: states that undermine fundamental rights will not enjoy business as usual with blue-state governments. Professionals: Governors, state legislatures, city councils, university boards (for campus travel policies).
3. Blue-State Fiscal Alignment
Goal: Use the collective market and regulatory power of like-minded states (the “blue” or pro-democracy states) to create a bulwark for rights and democratic norms.
· Prioritize Funds to Rights-Preserving Areas: Steer discretionary grants, aid, and partnerships preferentially to localities that uphold civil rights. State agencies can, for example, give bonus points or priority in competitive grants to cities or counties that meet standards (like not enforcing book bans or providing inclusive education). Similarly, governors can direct more collaboration (e.g., public health initiatives, infrastructure projects) toward states that maintain fair elections and the rule of law, while minimizing entanglements with those that do not. Over time, this creates incentives: communities see tangible benefits for standing on the side of democracy. Professionals: Governors’ offices, state budget directors, federal grant coordinators (where possible), advocacy groups monitoring fund distribution.
· Interstate Compacts & Alliances: Form formal interstate compacts or informal alliances among pro-democracy states to coordinate policies on key issues – effectively creating a bloc that sets its own higher standards. For example: establish a Multi-State Data Privacy Compact to enforce strict data minimization and ban the sale of sensitive personal data (preventing data from being used to target activists or vulnerable groups). Or a Reproductive Freedom Alliance – indeed, in February 2023, 21 states (now 23) formed the Reproductive Freedom Alliance to jointly protect abortion access across state lines[16]. Through such alliances, states share legal strategies and even pool resources (e.g., a legal defense fund for doctors facing prosecution from other states). Another area is telemedicine reciprocity: states can sign agreements to honor each other’s medical licenses for services provided to residents of repressive states, creating an interstate shield network. These compacts not only protect citizens within those states but also offer lifelines to people in states where rights are under attack. Professionals: Governors and state attorneys general, multistate coalitions (e.g., National Governors Association caucuses), policy think tanks drafting compact language.
· Joint Purchasing Blocs (Values-Based): Organize multi-state purchasing consortia that collectively boycott suppliers in anti-democratic jurisdictions and favor those in rule-of-law environments. For example, several states’ procurement departments could aggregate their purchases of medications, election equipment, or even textbooks – and use that leverage to say, “We will only buy from manufacturers in states that protect voting rights and do not criminalize teachers.” This effectively creates a market reward for companies in states that respect democracy. (A parallel from climate policy: states formed the U.S. Climate Alliance to coordinate purchases of green technology – here, the driver is democracy protection.) Such blocs can also negotiate better terms due to scale, making it financially attractive for companies to comply. Professionals: State procurement officials, interstate commission on procurement, large school districts and university systems (for textbooks or software), possibly the private sector allies joining in voluntary compacts.
4. Workplace and Labor Levers
Goal: Empower workers and unions to act as a democratic check from within critical sectors and to slow or halt compliance with unjust directives.
· Expand Unionization in Key Sectors: Support union organizing drives, especially in sectors crucial to authoritarian governance or resistance. Workers with collective bargaining power can better refuse unethical orders. For instance, tech workers, transportation workers, and federal/state employees should be encouraged to unionize or strengthen their unions. Unions provide a structure for collective action – they can pass resolutions condemning anti-democratic orders and legally negotiate clauses to protect members. The mere presence of a union can deter retaliation against whistleblowers or those who object to illegal tasks. Professionals: Labor organizers, employees in tech, logistics, government agencies; pro-bono labor lawyers assisting new unions.
· Work-to-Rule and Slowdowns: Where labor contracts allow, use work-to-rule campaigns or strategic slowdowns to gum up the machinery of oppression – entirely within the bounds of the job. “Work-to-rule” means employees perform only the exact duties in their job description, following every regulation to the letter, which can significantly reduce efficiency without violating any rules. For example, if pressured to process dubious surveillance warrants or censorship orders, public employees can ensure every t is crossed and i dotted, taking the maximum time for each step. Real-world hint: Unions representing transit workers have done this to protest unsafe conditions – doing everything by the book to slow service and force negotiations. In our context, it could mean bureaucrats meticulously reviewing every case related to a repressive policy, causing delay after delay. It’s legal (not a strike, just not rushing or taking on extra work) and effective. Professionals: Union locals in government agencies, postal workers, transportation, etc., guided by labor lawyers to stay within contractual rights.
· Conscience & Non-Complicity Clauses: Negotiate “conscience clauses” into employment contracts, particularly for professionals (engineers, healthcare workers, data analysts) who might be asked to implement unethical orders. Such clauses would allow an employee to refuse an assignment that violates professional ethics or legal norms without punishment. For example, a software developer could decline to build a tool for mass voter intimidation; a nurse could refuse to report a patient for seeking prohibited care. Already, some laws protect medical providers who refuse to partake in what they consider unethical (historically invoked by anti-abortion pharmacists, ironically); here we flip it to protect those upholding rights. Unions and professional guilds should push for these provisions. Professionals: Union negotiators, professional associations (medical boards, bar associations, tech worker coalitions) establishing ethical standards.
· Trigger Clauses in Contracts: Include language in labor and vendor contracts that triggers automatic non-cooperation if red lines are crossed. For instance, a state employee union contract might say if the government defies a court order or the Constitution (e.g. tries to implement martial law without basis), the union reserves the right to strike or suspend work. Similarly, a city’s contract with a software vendor could stipulate that if the vendor’s product is used to violate human rights (facial recognition for political targeting, say), the contract is void. While such clauses are unusual, they set clear expectations and provide leverage to halt business as usual during a coup or emergency power grab. Professionals: Labor lawyers, procurement lawyers, contract officers, union leaders aware of historical “democracy clauses” (akin to morals clauses in contracts).
Leverage in Action – Example: In April 2024, during protests in New York City, unionized bus drivers refused to drive city buses commandeered by police to transport arrested protesters. Their union-contract argument was that driving prisoners wasn’t in their job description. This act of non-cooperation was completely lawful – and it worked. Six bus drivers walked off, and police were left scrambling for hours to find anyone to drive the buses, severely hampering the mass arrests[17][18]. The drivers “slowed the city’s mass-arrest machine by sticking to their union-negotiated contract”[17]. This illustrates the power of organized labor to lawfully disrupt authoritarian tactics.
5. Administrative “Sand in the Gears”
Goal: Exploit bureaucratic processes, transparency laws, and regulatory requirements to delay or derail harmful policies.
· Flood Regulatory Comment Periods: When the federal administration proposes new rules that threaten rights (e.g. an onerous voter registration rule or gag on climate science), mobilize a mass public comment campaign to flood the rulemaking docket with detailed objections. Under the Administrative Procedure Act, agencies must read and respond to substantive comments before finalizing rules, and significant pushback can force revisions or trigger public hearings[19][20]. Activists and experts should submit high-quality comments citing evidence and legal arguments – effectively doing the homework the agency failed to do. If tens of thousands of comments come in raising different concerns, the agency faces a massive workload and potential legal vulnerability for ignoring input. (For example, public interest groups successfully delayed a Trump-era USDA rule by flooding it with technical critiques that the agency struggled to address.) Even automated tools can help individuals submit unique comments. The goal is delay and documentation – slowing implementation and building a record to challenge the rule in court for being “arbitrary and capricious.” Professionals: Policy experts, scientists, lawyers drafting template comments; grassroots networks (Indivisible, professional societies) mobilizing members to submit.
· FOIA and Open Records Blitz: Launch a blanket Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) campaign at the federal level – and parallel state open-records requests – to demand internal documents on every controversial program. Agencies legally must respond (typically within 20 business days, though often delayed) and release non-exempt records. By filing hundreds of FOIA requests on different aspects (policy memos, email communications, cost analyses, enforcement statistics), activists can both uncover malfeasance and burden agencies with compliance. When agencies stall, file lawsuits to enforce deadlines. Under Trump’s first term, FOIA lawsuits spiked – e.g., over 650 FOIA lawsuits were filed in FY2017, a sharp increase over 2016[21] – showing watchdogs using courts to pry out info. The current effort should be even more aggressive. As officials realize their every move might become public, they may think twice about blatantly unlawful actions. Additionally, the documents obtained (like evidence of plans to purge civil servants or correspondence with extremist groups) can be fed to the media and used in litigation. Professionals: Investigative journalists, watchdog NGOs (American Oversight, CREW), volunteer lawyers for FOIA suits, techies to manage document databases.
· Demand Thorough Reviews to Slow Rules: Insist agencies perform all required cost-benefit analyses, scientific reviews, and Paperwork Reduction Act checks for new policies. Often, authoritarian-leaning directives are pushed out hastily. By formally pointing out that “Major Rule X lacks a proper cost-benefit analysis of its impact on voters/business/etc,” one can force an agency to conduct months of analysis or risk the rule being struck down in court. Similarly, use the Paperwork Reduction Act – which requires approval for information collection burdens – to object to any new surveillance or data mandate that wasn’t cleared. File complaints to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) if agencies cut corners. Essentially, hold the government to its own rulebook. It’s tedious for them and buys time. Professionals: Administrative law attorneys, economists, academics who can submit formal critiques, former agency staff familiar with procedural Achilles’ heels.
6. Corporate Governance Pressure
Goal: Motivate corporations to actively defend democratic norms (or at least withdraw support from anti-democratic efforts) through shareholder action and executive accountability.
· Democracy Criteria in Executive Compensation: File shareholder proposals tying executive pay to democracy/human-rights performance indicators. Many companies already link bonuses to environmental or diversity goals; extend this to democratic principles. For example, a proposal could require that a CEO’s bonus is partially contingent on the company not being complicit in any human rights violations or anti-democratic lobbying. While such resolutions are advisory, they bring attention to corporate political behavior. The trend is favorable: investors are increasingly pushing beyond disclosure to demand companies “refrain from certain kinds of political spending” that conflict with stated values[14]. A few majority votes in 2025 on political spending transparency (five passed, a record[22]) show growing support. Even if boards resist, high votes (30-40%) put CEOs on notice. Professionals: Institutional investors (pension funds, socially responsible mutual funds), shareholder activists (As You Sow, ICCR), sympathetic executives internally.
· Proxy Campaigns Against Complicity: Coordinate campaigns to oust or pressure corporate board members who funnel money to extremist causes. Shareholders can withhold votes from directors who approved company PAC donations to election deniers, for instance. If a major company’s board member is also a prominent backer of anti-democracy politicians, activists can publicize that conflict and rally big investors to vote them out. Additionally, support investor lawsuits if directors breach fiduciary duty by supporting illegal schemes (for example, if a telecom company hands data to unlawful surveillance programs, shareholders could sue for the legal risk created). The message to corporate boards: aiding authoritarianism is a material risk that will get scrutinized. Professionals: Union pension fund trustees (often active in proxy fights), corporate governance experts, large asset managers (who can be pressured by clients to vote certain ways), proxy advisory firms (ISS, Glass Lewis) if convinced of the long-term risk to companies.
· Mandate Political Risk Disclosure: Utilize securities laws and the concept of material risk to force transparency about threats to democracy. Investors should demand that companies disclose in their 10-K filings any material risks related to democratic instability or human rights. For instance, a tech company enabling mass voter disinformation could face reputational and legal risks – that should be in their risk factors. If companies downplay these issues, file complaints with the SEC for misleading disclosures. Notably, investors and regulators have started viewing political spending as a governance issue: 2025 saw strong support for greater disclosure of corporate PAC activities[23]. By compelling honest disclosure, companies will be wary of engaging in activities they’d be ashamed to report. Also, an ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) reporting focus on democracy (the “G” in ESG) can be sharpened – rating firms can downgrade companies for supporting authoritarian politics, which affects their access to capital. Professionals: Securities lawyers, activist investors, the SEC’s investor advisory committees, ESG rating agencies.
7. Targeted Consumer and Donor Pressure
Goal: Mobilize the general public’s economic power to penalize democracy-undermining companies and to channel resources into pro-democracy causes. This is about smart boycotts, responsible spending, and funding the fight.
· Precision Boycotts (10 Major Offenders): Rather than diffuse boycotts, coordinate high-impact boycotts focused on a small set of strategic targets – for example, 10 corporations with outsized political spending on anti-democratic candidates or policies. Activist researchers will publish lists of these companies’ brands, products (SKUs), and the retailers that sell them, so consumers know exactly what to avoid. By concentrating consumer action, we create noticeable sales drops that get executives’ attention. Past examples: the Grab Your Wallet campaign in 2016 targeted retailers carrying Trump-family products, leading several to cut ties[24]. Here, the list might include, say, a major media company funding election denial or a manufacturer bankrolling voter suppression lobbyists. Provide viable alternatives so consumers can easily switch to substitute products or services. Monitor impact weekly (sales, stock price if public) and publicize wins (e.g., “Company X’s revenue down 5% this quarter amid boycott”). This keeps momentum and shows others the cost of anti-democratic behavior. Professionals: Consumer advocates, grassroots organizers (Women’s March, MoveOn), data analysts tracking sales, marketing experts to get press coverage of boycott.
· Subscription & Services Off-Ramp: Many people unknowingly support problematic companies via subscriptions or digital services. Create a campaign to cancel or switch subscriptions from any news outlets, streaming platforms, cloud services, or software providers that actively promote authoritarian narratives or fund extremists. Provide “one-click” guides to help users cancel these services and find replacements (for instance, if a popular streaming service’s owner bankrolls voter suppression, suggest an alternative service). Even a few hundred thousand cancellations can make a huge financial dent and send a clear signal to corporate leadership. Similar to how users boycotted social media platforms for lax hate-speech policies, this targets recurring revenue, which companies prize. Professionals: Tech-savvy activists to build cancellation how-tos, social media influencers to spread the word, consumer rights groups.
· Banking and Credit Card Migration: Launch a public drive to move personal and small-business accounts from big banks that finance anti-democratic agendas to local banks/credit unions. Also encourage people to switch credit cards away from issuers associated with political extremism. For example, if a major bank is revealed to have enabled money laundering for corrupt officials, or a credit card company’s PAC maxes out to election deniers, urge thousands to cut up those cards. In the late 2010s, we saw “#MoveYourMoney” campaigns in other contexts; here, frame it as protecting your dollars from being used against democracy. Provide resources to make the switch easy, and partner with credit unions that welcome the new accounts. Publicize the dollar amounts moved (e.g., “$50 million in deposits shifted away from BigBank in Q4 as customers protest its ties to voter suppression laws”). Banks hate losing deposits – it’s their lifeblood for loans – so this hits where it hurts. Professionals: Financial activists, community banking associations (they can help advertise the benefits of switching), social media campaigns highlighting any scandal at the target banks.
· Insurance and Telecom Switches: Encourage consumers to switch insurance (auto, home, health) and telecom providers if their current ones funnel money to anti-democracy politicians or causes. Many insurers and mobile carriers have large lobbying operations and donate to campaigns – activists should publish scorecards showing which are “neutral” or pro-democracy versus which heavily support extremist agendas. (For instance, if an insurance conglomerate funded efforts to overturn elections, customers should know and have the chance to drop their policies and go elsewhere.) Document how many policies are switched or canceled and any premium differences, showing people they don’t have to pay more for ethical choices. Even a modest percentage loss of customers can spur corporate boards to reconsider their political spending. Professionals: Consumer Reports-style researchers for political spending, coalitions like “Insure Our Future” (which focuses on climate, can adapt to democracy), and influencers who can demystify switching these services.
· Data Broker and Tech Opt-Outs: Personal data can be weaponized for microtargeting and harassment by bad actors. Launch a mass exercise of data privacy rights – for instance, under California’s CCPA or similar state laws – to opt out of data sales and delete personal data from data brokers and social media platforms. Activists should provide template letters or online forms people can use to demand removal of their information from data broker databases (which could be used by extremist groups to target individuals, or by states to track people seeking banned healthcare). If thousands flood data brokers with deletion requests, it not only protects those individuals, it also burdens the companies (which must process them) and reduces the overall trove of data available for nefarious targeting. Additionally, advocate for browser extensions and privacy settings that limit tracking. This is a defensive measure: starve the surveillance and propaganda machine of raw fuel (data). Professionals: Privacy rights organizations (EFF, EPIC), tech volunteers to build an “opt-out kit”, lawyers to follow up if companies don’t comply (CCPA allows legal recourse).
· Factual Ratings & Reviews Campaign: Organize volunteers to leave truthful, policy-focused reviews on business review platforms (e.g., Yelp, Google, Amazon) for companies involved in anti-democratic behavior. The twist: ensure these reviews strictly follow Terms of Service (no harassment, no falsehoods), but do call out what the company has done. For example: “I am giving 1 star because this company’s CEO donated \$100k to support an official who tried to overturn a legitimate election, which I find unacceptable[25]. I won’t buy their products until they stop funding attacks on democracy.” Such reviews both warn potential customers and put CEOs on notice that their political actions are public. Coordinate so that a critical mass of reviews citing reputable sources (news articles, FEC records) appear for target companies. These reviews must remain civil and focused on public conduct to avoid removal. By aggregating these on a dashboard, we can even create a “score” for each company’s public sentiment regarding democracy. Professionals: Consumers (anyone can leave a review), communications strategists to unify messaging, possibly former employees as whistleblowers adding weight in reviews.
· Regulatory Complaint Pipelines: Develop a system to file formal complaints with relevant regulators or oversight bodies whenever companies or organizations violate laws in pursuing anti-democratic ends. For instance: if a workplace fires an employee for political speech or for refusing to break the law, file complaints with the National Labor Relations Board (for unfair labor practice) or OSHA (if safety was invoked). If a financial entity facilitates corrupt payments, file with the SEC and CFPB. If a media outlet engages in fraud (like fundraising on false pretenses), file FTC complaints. Even if enforcement is uncertain, a volume of complaints creates pressure. Maintain a library of templates for each agency (FTC, CFPB, FEC, IRS for 501c3 violations, state Attorneys General consumer divisions, BBB for ethical violations) so citizens can easily report. This “whack-a-mole” approach forces scrutiny. Example: in 2025, multiple state AGs opened investigations after receiving waves of consumer complaints about fundraising fraud by political PACs that misled donors – citizen vigilance can spark official action. Professionals: Public interest lawyers, civic tech (to automate complaint filings), nonprofit watchdogs (Common Cause, Campaign Legal Center).
· Shareholder Activism for Transparency: Encourage individuals (or activist funds) to buy minimum shares in targeted companies so they can attend shareholder meetings, ask hard questions, and introduce resolutions. Even owning a few shares allows one to speak up in Q&A: “What is Company XYZ doing to ensure it isn’t supporting efforts to subvert democracy? Will the board commit to disclosing all election-related spending?” Media often cover shareholder meeting drama, which amplifies the issue. Furthermore, small shareholders can band together to file proposals (usually one needs \$2,000 in stock held for a year to file a resolution). These proposals could demand an audit of the company’s political contributions and their alignment with stated company values – similar resolutions have been getting significant votes[26]. The Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR) filed 60 such proposals for 2025 proxy season[27], showing momentum. Join and support these efforts, and make sure to vote proxies (via pension funds or individually) in favor of all pro-democracy and transparency measures. Professionals: Retail investors, faith-based investors, socially responsible investment funds, financial advisors educating clients on proxy voting.
· Vendor and Venue Pressure: Expand activism to the local level: ask local businesses, event venues, and community spaces to drop products or sponsors that undermine democracy. For example, convince a local grocery chain to stop carrying a certain brand that is on the boycott list, by showing community support for the move. Or urge a convention center to refuse bookings from groups that foment authoritarianism. Provide these businesses alternatives (replacement products or bookings) to mitigate financial loss. Community boycott threats can be persuasive: if a supermarket sees dozens of customers asking them to drop a product linked to extremist funding, they might replace it with a neutral brand. On the flip side, reward and promote businesses that take a stand (free positive publicity for a venue that says “we won’t host hate”). This creates a ripple effect of de-normalizing authoritarian affiliations. Professionals: Community organizers, chambers of commerce (progressive caucuses within them), local business leaders who support democracy.
· Ad Spending Deflection: Pressure advertisers and ad agencies to defund media outlets and websites that spread authoritarian propaganda or lies. This is similar to past “brand safety” campaigns (e.g., getting ads off of hate websites). Activists can provide companies with blocklists of websites or keywords associated with election denial, racism, or calls to political violence, and urge them to exclude those from their programmatic ad buys. Many companies don’t want the reputational risk of appearing next to toxic content if alerted. Also, directly appeal to major ad agencies and social media platforms: demand they enable opting out of ad placement on certain channels. In 2020, for example, hundreds of brands boycotted Facebook for its failure to curb hate speech – here we galvanize a similar effort but targeting outlets that actively undermine democracy (whether on cable, radio, or online). If major revenue streams dry up for propaganda networks, it diminishes their reach. Professionals: Media watchdog groups (Media Matters), marketing professionals inside corporations who can push for ethical ad policies, investors raising the issue with ad-dependent tech companies.
· Workplace Non-Complicity (for Individuals): Encourage individual workers, especially in tech and government, to use internal policies or laws to refuse tasks that violate rights or laws. Many companies have ethics hotlines or policies that allow employees to object to illegal instructions. For government workers, the Federal Whistleblower Protection Act (and state equivalents) shields those who refuse to break the law. A widely-shared “Employees’ Guide to Non-Complicity” can inform workers of their rights: e.g., a data analyst at a telecom can lawfully refuse to hand over user data without proper warrant, citing corporate privacy policy and legal concerns – if fired, they have recourse. While this is a personal risk, knowing there’s a supportive network (unions, legal aid) makes it more feasible. We saw hints of this during the Trump years: scientists refused to doctor data, lawyers refused to prosecute certain immigration cases – now we encourage it en masse where needed. Professionals: Whistleblower lawyers, professional societies (American Medical Association, etc., issuing ethical guidance), unions again as backup.
· Whistleblower Routes: Set up encrypted, anonymous tip lines (SecureDrop or similar) to media outlets, inspectors general, or watchdog NGOs for employees inside abusive agencies or companies to report wrongdoing. Publicize the existence of robust whistleblower reward programs – e.g., the SEC and IRS have programs that award whistleblowers a percentage of recovered penalties for exposing fraud or tax evasion. If, say, someone inside a campaign knows of illegal foreign funds (e.g., via crypto exchanges tied to Russia as the user alluded), they can report to the IRS Whistleblower Office and potentially get a reward. Provide guidance on these channels so insiders inclined to leak choose a safe and legal path (instead of just tweeting or something traceable). Whistleblower protections in certain areas (like for government scientists or contractor employees) should be strengthened at state levels as well. Professionals: Investigative journalists (setting up tip lines), NGOs like Whistleblower Aid, tech activists to distribute tools for secure communication (Signal, Tor usage guides).
· Union and Guild Actions: Use the collective power of labor beyond the workplace. For example, entertainment industry guilds (writers, actors) can refuse to participate in state propaganda – as some did by boycotting events at Trump hotels. Coordinate union actions across sectors: teachers’ unions, transit unions, and others might plan a synchronized day-of-action or work stoppage if a particularly egregious anti-democratic move occurs (short of a general strike, targeted strikes in critical services send a big message). Unions can also bargain for contract provisions requiring employer neutrality in politics – e.g., some tech worker unions demand that their companies not retaliate if workers protest company contracts with border agencies, etc. Another idea: insist employers disclose any political spending or lobbying the company does (some union contracts have won the right to inspect company political contributions). This way workers can expose and pressure from within. Professionals: Union leadership at national federations (AFL-CIO, Change to Win), cross-union alliances like Labor for Democracy, rank-and-file caucuses raising awareness among members.
· Professional Accountability (Licensing): File complaints with professional licensing boards and ethics bodies against individuals who use their professional roles to violate rights. For instance, lawyers who participate in frivolous schemes to overturn election results should face bar complaints – indeed, by 2024 Trump-aligned attorneys like Rudy Giuliani were disbarred for promoting election lies[28][29]. Continue this: file bar complaints against any attorneys who defy court orders or facilitate unconstitutional acts. Similarly, if a doctor breaches patient confidentiality to aid a prosecution under an unjust law, file a complaint with the state medical board. If a law enforcement officer grossly abuses power, push for de-certification. All done by the book, focusing on professional conduct, not personal politics. Even if the boards are politically influenced, the public documentation of complaints puts peers on notice. Professionals: Lawyers (filing against lawyers), medical ethics advocates, oversight nonprofits.
· Campus Procurement Activism: Students and faculty can harness their universities’ economic clout. Press colleges and school districts to drop vendors, banks, or partners that fail democracy tests. For example, if a university’s dining services provider busts unions or its bank invests in authoritarian regimes, campaigns can demand the contracts not be renewed. In recent history, campus activism got many colleges to divest from apartheid South Africa and fossil fuels; now apply that model to democracy. Perhaps a university will refuse to accept funding from oligarchs or foreign governments undermining democracy. Additionally, push universities to require civics and ethics training for business and law students so future leaders are less likely to acquiesce to authoritarian demands. Professionals: Student government leaders, campus labor unions, progressive faculty committees, endowment oversight committees.
· Redirect Philanthropy Locally: Encourage foundations and donors (including small-dollar donors who give to national orgs) to divert funds away from large, complacent institutions into front-line pro-democracy work. For example, instead of giving yet more to a prestigious think tank that stays neutral, channel funds to local investigative journalism centers, legal aid for protestors, or election protection efforts. Also identify and defund “captive” think tanks and fronts that provide intellectual cover for authoritarian policies. (If research finds a certain nonprofit is essentially pushing voter suppression under academic guise, expose it to donors and urge them to cut it off.) Publish guides for major donor networks highlighting which charities and nonprofits actively bolster democracy – and which ones, despite nice names, are actually eroding it. We need a philanthropic realignment to match the gravity of the crisis. Professionals: Philanthropy watchdogs, influential donors (who can lead by example), community foundations shifting priorities.
· Cooperative Purchasing Groups: At the micro level, form community buyer co-ops committed to buying only from democracy-friendly businesses. For instance, a neighborhood could start a cooperative that collectively orders household goods in bulk from companies that have pro-worker, pro-voter values – achieving both discounts and a political statement. They could agree to avoid Amazon if it’s seen as union-busting and instead pool orders through a worker-owned platform. Publishing the savings and impact each month (like “our 50 families saved \$X and ensured \$Y didn’t go to Company Z that funds disinformation”) motivates others to join. This builds local solidarity and educates people on how everyday spending can align with values. Professionals: Community organizers, cooperative business experts, neighborhood associations.
· Local Ballot Initiatives and Ordinances: Use direct democracy at the city/county level (where available) to pass ordinances that uphold democratic norms. If the state government is hostile, cities might still enact, via citizen petition or council vote, things like: a ban on city police executing out-of-state warrants for actions that are legal in-state (e.g., criminalizing abortion travel – a city could say “not on our watch” within city limits); strong data privacy rules forbidding city departments from using geofence warrants or mass surveillance on political activists; anti-doxxing laws creating penalties for publishing officials’ or citizens’ private info to harass them. While these local measures can be preempted by state law in some cases, they assert moral leadership and can serve as models. For example, several U.S. cities banned their police from using facial recognition due to bias and misuse concerns[30] – proving localities can lead on rights when higher levels won’t. Professionals: Local civil liberties groups, city council members, volunteers who can run petition drives, supportive law enforcement leaders who will implement such policies.
· Healthcare Access Shields: On the consumer side, support the creation of networks for lawful access to healthcare in the face of interstate crackdowns. This includes donating to groups that fund travel for patients from repressive states to free states (for abortion, gender-affirming care, etc.), and pushing for telemedicine and mail-order pharmacy solutions. By late 2024, telehealth abortion has skyrocketed – 99% of abortions in some ban states were done via out-of-state providers under shield laws[31][4]. We should bolster these systems: encourage consumers to use mail-order pharmacies from states with “shield” protections (some states allow doctors to prescribe and pharmacies to ship anonymously[32]). If demand grows, it normalizes the idea that people will route around bad state laws, and creates economic ties (a Texas patient buys from a California pharmacy, benefitting the latter’s economy). Also fund “health sanctuaries” – clinics in blue states near red state borders, with volunteer networks to get people there safely. Make these efforts visible, so opponents know any crackdown will meet massive community-funded resistance. Professionals: Healthcare non-profits, medical professionals (offering pro bono telehealth), crowdfunding specialists (for patient travel funds), legal advisors ensuring compliance with shield laws.
· Events and Sponsorship Pressure: Identify major public events (sports tournaments, conferences, concerts) and pressure organizers to drop sponsors that actively undermine democracy. For example, if a big brand sponsoring a marathon is found to support voter suppression bills, coordinate with athletes or influencers to call it out and demand the sponsor’s removal. If not, ask participants or performers to boycott that event. This kind of pressure has worked in other contexts (e.g., artists boycotting venues to get them to cut ties with certain sponsors). Offer to help events find alternative sponsors who meet ethical criteria – perhaps a consortium of local businesses can step in. The goal is to make aligning with authoritarian politics a liability in the lucrative event marketing world. Track and publicize any sponsor changes or refusals so consumers can respond accordingly. Professionals: Activist athletes and artists, advocacy groups focusing on corporate social responsibility, event organizers sympathetic to the cause (they can quietly signal support for pressure so they can swap sponsors).
· Media Hygiene at Home and School: Encourage families, schools, and workplaces to voluntarily block or limit low-trust media outlets that peddle extremist disinformation. This can be done by choosing cable packages without certain channels (some people saved money by dropping packages that include known propaganda channels – depriving them of carriage fees), or installing ad blockers and using curated news apps focused on reliable sources. While censorship by the government is not allowed (and not our goal), individuals can absolutely decide not to give clicks or airtime to outlets that lie. Share “opt-in blocklists” for web browsers or smart TVs that filter known fake news sites. Moreover, encourage advertisers to blacklist those outlets (as covered above in ad deflection). By reducing exposure to constant propaganda, we build resilience in the population. Also promote media literacy education focusing on how to identify credible journalism. Professionals: Educators (pushing media literacy curricula), IT admins in workplaces (they might set default homepage to local news instead of partisan sites), librarians sharing factual news recommendation lists.
· Corporate PAC Transparency Maps: Many people are employees or customers of big companies that have Political Action Committees (PACs). Demand that companies publish easy-to-read quarterly reports of all their PAC contributions and lobbying expenditures, with comparisons to the company’s public values. Activists can create a “PAC map” website showing side-by-side which companies’ PACs are funding which politicians – making it simple for consumers or employees to see (e.g., Company A said it supports democracy, but its PAC gave \$50k to legislators who passed voter suppression law XYZ). Some shareholder proposals already press for this transparency[14]. With data in hand, employees can pressure management (“why are our corporate dollars undermining my rights?”) and consumers can adjust buying. If a company is confident its spending is benign, it should have no issue being transparent – thus, resistance to transparency is a red flag. Ultimately, shame companies into either aligning their political spending with their stated support for democracy, or ceasing such spending altogether. Professionals: Corporate accountability NGOs (Center for Political Accountability), journalists who can amplify discrepancies, internal employee resource groups advocating ethical corporate behavior.
· Tenant and HOA Leverage: Even residential communities can flex power. Homeowners’ associations (HOAs) and apartment co-ops/condos often control service contracts (landscaping, security, cable packages for the building). They can adopt vendor standards too – for instance, an HOA could decide it will only contract with security companies that don’t employ officers with records of civil rights violations, or a condo board could choose an internet provider that has a strong privacy record over one known to comply eagerly with unwarranted surveillance. If enough housing complexes drop a service provider for ethical reasons, that provider may rethink its practices. On a smaller scale, neighbors collectively can boycott a local business owner who, say, funds militant groups – until they stop. It’s community self-defense via wallet. Professionals: HOA board members with a conscience, tenant unions, community organizers in residential neighborhoods.
· Faith and Civic Groups Procurement: Extend the procurement and boycott logic to churches, temples, nonprofit clubs, and civic groups. Many religious congregations have bank accounts, caterers, event venues, and suppliers – they should choose ones aligned with justice. Some progressive churches already divested from banks investing in private prisons or pipelines; now they can ensure their vendors don’t underwrite authoritarian politicians. For example, a large church might say we will only rent buses from companies whose owners didn’t fund the January 6th rally. These organizations can publicly “witness” their changes, inspiring their members to follow suit at home. They can keep a public log of changes (“This year, First Baptist moved \$200K to a community credit union and chose a new security firm after learning the old one’s CEO participated in election subversion efforts.”). This not only hits regressive businesses financially, but provides a moral example. Professionals: Clergy and lay leaders, umbrella orgs like the National Council of Churches (to share best practices), nonprofit boards.
· Travel and Tourism Decisions: Use personal and institutional travel choices as leverage. Avoid spending tourism dollars in states that have gutted democratic norms (as long as doing so doesn’t harm vulnerable populations). For instance, academic conferences could be moved out of states with extreme anti-voter laws; vacationers might choose a different destination until the state improves. Some state governments themselves tried this: California’s travel ban to anti-LGBT states (until 2023) aimed to send a financial signal[33]. While California pivoted strategy, individuals can still decide where to spend. If a group of major conventions cancels in an anti-democracy state, local business leaders there will lobby for change. Coordinate announcements of such decisions for impact and ensure it’s framed not as partisan, but pro-democracy (e.g., “We love the people of State X, but we cannot in good conscience fund a government that nullified voters’ will in elections”). Provide guidance for travelers on how to ethically redirect plans. Professionals: Academic societies, sports tournament organizers, celebrity performers (who can skip tour stops), travel bloggers spreading the word.
· Small Claims and Consumer Lawsuits: If everyday people are deceived or harmed as consumers by entities pushing authoritarian agendas, take them to court in small claims or under state Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices (UDAP) laws. For example, if a propaganda news site sells merchandise or subscriptions claiming to support “patriotism” but actually raises money for illegal insurrection, possibly those donors/buyers could sue for false advertising or fraud. Or if a social media platform promises a safe user experience but then allows doxxing and violence threats, perhaps a user can claim unfair business practice. Individually such cases might be small, but many filed across jurisdictions create legal trouble that ties up the bad actors. Even the process of defending small claims in many counties could be a headache for, say, the owners of a disinfo network – potentially deterring them. Provide templates for these lawsuits that ordinary citizens can file without a lawyer (many small claims courts are user-friendly). Sometimes just the filing, even if one doesn’t win, forces some transparency or changes behavior to avoid further suits. Professionals: Consumer rights lawyers to draft boilerplate complaints, law students to assist pro se litigants, state consumer protection offices (AGs) who can also bring larger civil suits if patterns emerge.
· Open-Source Developer Boycotts: Tech workers and open-source software developers have unique leverage: much of modern infrastructure relies on their voluntary contributions. Encourage developers to refuse collaboration or pull their open-source code support for projects used to violate rights. There have been instances where open-source maintainers added clauses to licenses barring ICE or authoritarian usage. While controversial, one could craft ethically-focused licenses (the “Do No Harm” license exists to prevent misuse of software for human rights abuses). Moreover, tech communities can pressure companies like Github or cloud providers to drop services for clients that engage in extreme anti-democratic behavior (similar to how Cloudflare dropped certain hate sites after public outcry). If authoritarian regimes can be denied some tech tools by collective action of coders, it raises their costs. Professionals: Software engineers, open-source consortiums, tech ethicists, maybe leveraging the emerging field of Tech Worker Union/Guild movements to assert these demands in contracts.
· Transparency Mirrors: Host and disseminate primary documents, videos, and evidence of authoritarian wrongdoing on resilient, mirrored infrastructure. Activists can set up websites (including on the decentralized web or Tor .onion sites) that archive things like leaked memos, lists of corrupt payments, or footage of rights abuses – making it hard for any single authority to take down. This ensures the truth remains accessible even if an authoritarian administration tries to erase records. The mantra: “Cite, don’t speculate”. By providing the raw documents (court filings, contracts, emails) in a verified repository, journalists and the public can see and believe. For example, a redundant archive of all Jan 6 committee evidence and new findings could live on multiple servers worldwide. If domestic websites are pressured to remove content, an international mirror (or something on IPFS/blockchain storage) can keep it up. Activists did this in other countries during crackdowns; we must be ready here. Professionals: Archivists, IT experts in decentralized tech, international partners in safer jurisdictions, librarians.
· Rapid Boycott Pivots: Running boycotts can lead to fatigue or diminishing returns over time. To keep consumers engaged, adopt a rolling boycott strategy – rotate target companies every 1-2 months based on campaign progress. For instance, focus pressure on Company A for 60 days; once they make some concession or you’ve extracted maximum impact, publicly declare a pivot to Company B (possibly returning to A later if needed). Clearly state entry and exit criteria: e.g., “We will boycott X until it stops funding politician Y or implements policy Z.” When achieved, announce victory and pivot. This avoids burnout and keeps the movement dynamic. It also keeps targeted corporations on their toes because even if they escape the spotlight this round, they know they could be next. Ensure each “rotation” is well-publicized so supporters know where to focus. Think of it like a targeted strike that then moves location unpredictably. Professionals: Campaign strategists, communications teams to announce phases, researchers constantly scanning for next targets (like a “dirty dozen” list cycling through).
· Impact Ledger and Public Dashboard: Create a monthly public dashboard tracking all these collective actions and their results. Metrics could include: number of legal cases filed and injunctions won; number of vendors dropped by governments or universities for ethics; dollars moved in boycotts/divestments; count of states in compacts; poll workers trained; FOIA requests filed; pieces of disinformation removed or debunked; etc. By quantifying the resistance, we keep momentum and hold ourselves accountable. For example, “Month 3 Dashboard: 5 major lawsuits filed, 2 injunctions issued stopping new voter purge law[34]; \$250 million in public funds reallocated to pro-rights suppliers; 300k people opted out of data broker lists; 50k new poll workers trained; corporate PAC money to Big Lie candidates down 20%,” and so on. The Red-Line Matrix is part of this: define triggers (e.g., if the administration tries to ignore a court ruling, that’s a “red line” triggering an escalation like a general strike or mass protest). The dashboard can show if any red lines were hit and what automatic responses were activated. This approach provides a sense of progress and vigilance. Professionals: Data analysts and activists, transparency orgs, perhaps a coalition like a “Democracy Defense Task Force” maintaining the scoreboard.
Guardrails: All the above measures must remain lawful, nonviolent, and focused on institutional accountability rather than personal attacks. We target public actions and policies, not private individuals’ homes or families. No doxxing, no harassment, no threats – that behavior only feeds the authoritarian playbook. Instead, we weaponize truth, legal rights, and economic choice. Every action should be documented and based on verifiable facts (e.g., citations to public records, as we’ve included here). This both strengthens our moral standing and provides evidence if challenged in court or media. Coordination is key: acting collectively (whether as consumers, workers, or states) amplifies impact but should be done with respect for local laws and through peaceful means. By setting these guardrails, we contrast ourselves with those who flout the rule of law, and we attract broader public support.
8. International and Cross-Border Actions
Goal: Enlist global allies and legal mechanisms outside U.S. jurisdiction to help expose and counter anti-democratic forces in America. (The world’s democracies have a stake in the U.S. not becoming a failed state.)
· Expose Cross-Border Corruption: Authoritarians often involve foreign actors – secret deals, illicit funds, or support from other regimes. Appeal to foreign governments, international journalists, and watchdog entities to investigate and reveal these schemes. For example, in 2025 a major scandal broke when it was revealed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth accepted a $400 million luxury Boeing 747 jet from Qatar as a “gift” for Trump’s use as Air Force One[35][36], in exchange for allowing Qatar to build a training base in Idaho[37][38]. Allied officials (like members of Parliament in Europe) can demand inquiries into such transactions under anti-bribery laws (the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act has analogues abroad that could view a foreign gift to U.S. officials as bribery). Similarly, if Russian-owned crypto exchanges or Gulf sovereign wealth funds are funneling money to U.S. politicians, encourage those jurisdictions to make the information public or freeze assets. In mid-2025, for instance, an Abu Dhabi state fund (MGX) used Trump’s own stablecoin to invest \$2 billion in Binance – Senator Warren blasted this arrangement as blatant self-dealing and corruption[39]. European Union money-laundering units, or Asian financial regulators, could scrutinize such funds flow. Professionals: International investigative journalists consortia (ICIJ), foreign legislative committees, NGOs like Transparency International, U.S. diaspora communities lobbying their home countries to act.
· Global Magnitsky and Sanctions: Urge democratic countries to use Magnitsky-style sanctions against American officials or cronies involved in grave corruption or human rights abuses. The Global Magnitsky Act in the U.S. is used on foreign violators; allies could consider similar measures if U.S. leaders violate basic norms (though politically sensitive, the threat of personal sanctions – like freezing overseas assets or travel bans – could be a deterrent for some oligarchs or officials). Even the symbolic act of a U.N. Special Rapporteur publicly criticizing U.S. voter suppression or political violence signals that the world is watching. Professionals: International human rights lawyers, diplomats in friendly nations raising concerns in forums, advocacy groups making the case that democracy is a global human right.
· Invite Election Observers: Treat upcoming U.S. elections as what they are – dangerously imperiled – and invite reputable international election observer missions (from the OSCE, EU, Carter Center, etc.) to monitor. In 2024, international observers likely noted voter intimidation or disinformation; having them on the ground in 2026 and 2028 can deter the worst fraud. If the federal government resists, states or civil society can still coordinate unofficial international observation. On the flip side, if an election’s integrity is openly sabotaged, international bodies might refuse to recognize the result, adding pressure. Professionals: Pro-democracy NGOs (Freedom House), academic experts in election monitoring, sympathetic foreign embassies.
· Safe Harbor for Refugees of Persecution: Should the situation deteriorate further (e.g., journalists or activists face trumped-up charges), encourage allied democracies to offer asylum or special visas to Americans persecuted for pro-democracy stances. This has precedent: the U.S. has long offered refuge to dissidents from other countries; now Americans might need the same. Highlighting this possibility shames U.S. authorities (“American families seeking asylum abroad from political repression” is a bad look for any U.S. government). Even if few actually leave, the offer of safe harbor can embolden activists to continue their work knowing they have an out if needed. Some nations’ leaders have already hinted they’d welcome those fleeing tyranny regardless of origin. Professionals: International human rights organizations, immigration attorneys abroad, refugee networks (e.g., Scholars at Risk for academics).
· International Fact-Checking and Tech Norms: Work with global tech regulators (especially the EU, which leads on tech regulation) to force social media platforms and AI companies to curb the spread of politically manipulative disinformation emanating from the U.S. For instance, the EU’s Digital Services Act demands platforms mitigate systemic risks like election disinformation – if U.S.-based platforms fail to control bots or deepfakes fueling authoritarian narratives, they could face EU fines or restrictions[40]. This outside pressure can push companies to apply those standards in the U.S. as well. Also advocate for international standards banning political microtargeting using sensitive data – if enough major markets adopt such rules, platforms might implement them globally. Additionally, call out any use of AI to generate propaganda: if an American group uses deepfake videos to incite violence, other countries could classify that as a security threat and sanction those responsible. Essentially, ask our democratic allies to treat America as they would a backsliding democracy elsewhere – with vigilance, criticism, and conditional cooperation. Professionals: International tech policy experts, European Parliament members, global fact-checking alliances that can debunk lies in multiple languages/time zones.
9. Contingency for Escalation Scenarios
Goal: Prepare coordinated, lawful responses for worst-case “red line” scenarios – such as an attempt to cancel elections, a coup, or egregious suspension of the Constitution – so that democratic forces respond immediately and decisively.
· General Strike Frameworks: As a measure of last resort, lay the groundwork with major unions for a potential general strike if democratic order is gravely endangered. While a true general strike is unprecedented nationally (none since 1946[41]), labor federations in 2020 openly discussed it should Trump refuse election results[42][43]. In fact, union councils in Rochester, Seattle, and Western Massachusetts passed resolutions calling to prepare for a general strike if the election was subverted[43], stating that “extreme risk…to democracy may require more widespread resistance”[44]. Building on that, unions across sectors (dockworkers, truckers, teachers, etc.) can quietly agree on communication trees and minimal viable strike plans – legally framed as political protest strikes, which U.S. labor law does allow in limited cases. The mere knowledge that labor is ready to shut down the country if a wannabe dictator crosses a line can act as a deterrent. If invoked, it must be organized to be lawful and massive: e.g., a 24-hour nationwide strike with clear demands (return to constitutional order), rather than an open-ended stoppage that could invite crackdown. But planning and member education must happen in advance. Professionals: Union leaders (AFL-CIO leadership signaled openness to defending democracy[45]), labor lawyers mapping out legal protections for such a strike (First Amendment grounds), grassroots labor organizers preparing the rank-and-file.
· Non-Cooperation Resolutions on Standby: City councils, county boards, and state legislatures in pro-democracy areas should draft “Non-Cooperation” resolutions now, ready to pass the minute a red-line event occurs. For example, if a president defies a court ruling or tries to unlawfully deploy the military internally, these resolutions would declare that jurisdiction will not cooperate and considers the action illegitimate. If dozens of city and state governments immediately pass such declarations, it creates a layered domestic refusal. Likewise, state governors can have emergency orders ready that, say, recall National Guard units or refuse federalized control of state agencies. The key is speed – having them “on the shelf” means they can be enacted in hours, creating a blitz of institutional pushback. Professionals: State and local lawmakers (particularly in states with democratic majorities), constitutional scholars to ensure wording is strong but legal, civil society groups to generate public support for these measures.
· Data Evacuation and Protection: Activist groups, independent media, clinics, and others at risk should compile “data evacuation playbooks” to secure or destroy sensitive information if raids or seizures seem imminent. Similar to how companies have disaster recovery, NGOs might prepare encrypted backups of membership lists, donor info, patient records, etc., stored in safe jurisdictions (like an offshore server or simply a trusted friend in a safe state). Conversely, have plans to wipe data locally (without destroying evidence of wrongdoing by others, of course) to protect individuals from being targeted if offices are stormed. For journalists and NGOs, consider moving copies of critical archives (e.g., footage of official misconduct, research files) to the cloud or out-of-country on short notice. Practically, this might mean regularly scheduled backups to a secure location, and a trigger event (e.g., martial law declared) that prompts teams to shut off and secure devices. This ensures that even if physical offices are compromised, the work and evidence lives on. Professionals: IT and cybersecurity experts (volunteering to set up encryption, secure cloud accounts), international partners (offering server space or asylum for data), operational security trainers for activists.
· Safe Harbor Programs for Individuals: Have arrangements ready to relocate targeted individuals (activists, journalists, judges, scientists) to safer jurisdictions on short notice. Think of it as an underground railroad, but lawful and hopefully not needed unless things truly devolve. Some states or cities might create “sanctuary” programs offering temporary housing, public sector jobs, or university visiting scholar positions to those fleeing political persecution from other states. For example, a blue city could hire a fired health official from a red state as an advisor, giving them a livelihood. At an international level, coordinate with foreign embassies on emergency visas or humanitarian parole for high-profile democracy defenders if they face imminent imprisonment. Also, within the U.S., build a network of pro bono lawyers prepared to file habeas corpus petitions if activists are detained without cause. Professionals: Human rights NGOs, state government HR departments (to slot qualified refugees into vacancies), academic institutions (offering fellowship slots to dissident scholars), religious groups (many have refugee assistance infrastructure that can adapt to domestic needs).
10. Measurement, Cadence, and Adaptation
Goal: Continuously track progress of these actions, maintain momentum with regular check-ins, and adapt tactics as authoritarian actors respond.
· Monthly Democracy Defense Dashboard: As mentioned, publish an open dashboard or scorecard of key indicators. This creates public accountability for the movement itself and helps identify what’s working. For example, track cases filed vs. cases won in courts, count of laws blocked by injunctions, vendors cut off from public contracts, money moved (e.g., “\$1.2B in state pension assets reallocated from funds that support insurrectionists”), number of new voter registrations and updates (if a campaign to update addresses prevented, say, 100,000 voters from being purged, tout that), and training metrics (poll workers trained, people educated in secure communications, etc.). Also track the flip side: authoritarian actions taken (e.g., “5 states introduced new voter suppression bills this month”) to measure threat level. By analyzing this, we can focus efforts on areas lagging (if, say, FOIA requests are not being filed as much, ramp up outreach). The dashboard should be digestible and widely shared to reinforce the sense that a broad coalition is actively defending democracy – giving hope and rallying more participation. Professionals: Data analysts, designers for visualization, coalition leaders contributing their stats, media partners willing to feature these updates.
· Red-Line Trigger Matrix: Define in advance a matrix of “red lines” – specific anti-democratic escalations by the regime – and pair each with pre-planned escalated responses. For instance: if the administration cancels the 2026 Congressional elections, that’s a red line = trigger a nationwide general strike + states forming an emergency interstate convention. If the President fires independent prosecutors or defies the Supreme Court outright, trigger immediate impeachment proceedings in the House (if possible) and mass protests in streets. Having this matrix agreed upon by a broad front of pro-democracy groups means everyone knows what to do when X event happens, rather than scrambling in disunity. In 2020, such planning was done quietly by some (“Stop the Steal” was anticipated by coalitions that planned protests if votes weren’t counted). Now do it more formally and publicly: a published red line list could itself deter would-be authoritarians (“If you try to seize the Capitol, 5 million people will occupy the streets and every major union will strike – here’s the plan”). It also reduces uncertainty among the public about when to act. Professionals: A central council of pro-democracy orgs (could be an outgrowth of existing coalitions like Protect Democracy or Democracy Initiative), strategists including nonviolent movement experts (to plan large actions), and communications experts to quickly get the word out when triggers occur.
Finally, throughout all these efforts, emphasize that defending democracy is non-partisan and patriotic. This is not about Left vs. Right – it’s about rule of law, freedom, and government by the people. We should invite anyone (former conservatives, apolitical folks, even disillusioned moderate supporters of the regime) to join in measures that simply protect the constitutional order and basic rights. The coalition must be as broad as possible – including professions (lawyers, teachers, bureaucrats, techies, doctors), institutions (churches, businesses, unions, universities), and communities across demographics. By showing maximum diligence, unity, and creativity – and never resorting to the lawlessness we oppose – we keep the moral high ground and increase our chances of success.
The situation is dire – some call it a “failed state” scenario – but with maximum diligence and care, using every peaceful tool at our disposal, we can hold the line for democracy. The American people, with support from friends worldwide, still have considerable power if we organize it. This action plan outlines how to use that power. Now it’s about execution: turning these ideas into concrete campaigns and not letting up until the Republic’s democratic foundations are secure again.
Sources: Citations are provided in-line to substantiate factual claims and examples. These include news reports, legal analyses, and historical precedents that inform the strategies above. Every measure proposed is grounded in either current practice or documented experience from past struggles. By learning from these sources, we adapt tactics that have proven effective – from Seattle’s ethical banking vote[11][12] to the shareholder rebellions of 2025[22], from Laura Loomer’s backlash highlighting unexpected fault lines in the support base[46] to Jamie Raskin’s stand against blatant corruption with the Qatari jet[47][48]. These real-world touchstones guide our approach. (For full context of any citation, see the referenced source material.)
Use this line on signs, chants, and captions:
All actions here are peaceful and legal and aim to protect democracy. We do not tolerate harassment or violence. • Todas las acciones aquí son pacíficas y legales y buscan proteger la democracia. No toleramos el acoso ni la violencia. • 这里的所有行动都是和平合法的，旨在保护民主。我们不容忍骚扰或暴力。 • Все действия здесь мирные и законные и направлены на защиту демократии. Мы не допускаем преследования или насилия. • এখানে বর্ণিত সব পদক্ষেপ শান্তিপূর্ণ ও আইনসম্মত, গণতন্ত্র রক্ষা করাই উদ্দেশ্য। হয়রানি বা সহিংসতা আমরা সহ্য করি না। • Tout aksyon isit la yo lapè e legal, objektif la se pwoteje demokrasi. Nou pa tolere arasman ni vyolans. • 여기의 모든 행동은 평화적이고 합법적이며 민주주의를 보호하는 것을 목표로 합니다. 괴롭힘과 폭력을 용납하지 않습니다. • جميع الإجراءات هنا سلمية وقانونية وتهدف إلى حماية الديمقراطية. لا نتسامح مع التحرش أو العنف. • یہاں کی تمام کارروائیاں پُرامن اور قانونی ہیں اور ان کا مقصد جمہوریت کا تحفظ ہے۔ ہم ہراسانی یا تشدد برداشت نہیں کرتے۔ • Toutes les actions ici sont pacifiques et légales et visent à protéger la démocratie. Nous ne tolérons ni le harcèlement ni la violence. • Wszystkie działania tutaj są pokojowe i legalne i mają na celu ochronę demokracji. Nie tolerujemy nękania ani przemocy. • אַלע אַקציעס דאָ זײַנען פרידלעכע און לעגאַלע און צילן צו באַשיצן דעמאָקראַטיע. מיר טאָלערירן קיין האַראַסמאַנט אָדער געװאַלד נישט.
In sum, this plan represents a list of measures – a living strategy to defend American democracy using every lawful, nonviolent lever available. We will refine and add to it as conditions evolve, but we will omit nothing and forget no one who can help. The hour is late, but by acting with urgency and unity, we keep the promise of government of, by, and for the people alive. The world is watching, and together we will ensure that democracy prevails.
* * *
Citations:
[2] Post-Election 2024: The Future of Human Rights in the U.S. | Harvard Kennedy School
[16] Twenty-One States Announce Historic Governor-Led Reproductive Freedom Alliance | Governor of California
[19] The Trump administration is trying to suppress public input. What ...
[20] Last Day For Public Comment on US Government's “Patriotic ...
[21] Freedom of Information Act Suits Increase Sharply Under Trump
[24] GrabYourWallet - Wikipedia
[27] Investors File 60 Proposals Calling for Transparency Around ...
[30] 13 Cities Where Police Are Banned From Using Facial Recognition ...
[32] How pro- and anti-abortion activists use encrypted messaging apps ...
[39] Trump's stablecoin chosen for $2 billion Abu Dhabi investment in Binance, co-founder says | Reuters
[40] The US GOP's disinformation on Europe's Digital Rules
QR Code of this article:
