The Grind (Part One)
How to Sustain Daily Resistance against President Trump’s Regime
This post is written by Just A. Nobody, the Founder of Defenders of Our Republic (DOOR). It is the final part of a four-part series that started way back in June 2025 with “The Pitch.” This publication is long overdue. But I will save an explanation about that for a post coming out in the next several days.
This post merges several old Threads from Bluesky over several weeks into a single, coherent post (broken into several parts for the sake of easing consumption), while also adding a significant amount of new content. The purpose of this post is to offer advice on how We the People can resist every day in a sustainable way, avoiding burnout while persistently putting pressure on President Trump and his corrupt Republican Party enablers in Congress. Part One of this post is focused on staying tethered to truth, virtue and compassion while we strategically engage in our resistance efforts.
In “The Pitch,” I laid out my rationale for establishing Defenders of Our Republic (DOOR). In “The Destination,” I talked about DOOR’s Ultimate Goal: 12 million Americans staging a prolonged sit-in in Washington, D.C. As ever, this will be a tremendously challenging achievement to realize. Admittedly, it may never happen, but that is not really the point. We may also never need that many Americans to act in such a way to end this regime. And through persistent, daring, uplifting and peaceful action, there is nobility in the pursuit. In “The Journey,” I proposed bold action on an individual level to work towards our Ultimate Goal, with a 22-day silent sit-in and hunger strike. In that post, I also laid out only a few of our grievances against the Trump regime at the time. Even then, that list of grievances was too innumerable to keep straight. Now, well…if you are reading this, you probably know how that list is going. The Hunger for Action protest was my desperate gambit to mobilize Americans to end this regime. But it failed. I failed. Stay tuned for more on that very soon. This post is about where we go from here. It focuses on the space in between the bold stands for Our Republic, where we must continue to resist but also to live our lives.
No matter what We the People do, we are a long way from impeachment, conviction, and removal of President Trump and his corrupt cabinet. It is impossible to predict how long it will take. It could be months. It could be years. While personally, this reality only motivates me more, given the imperative for all-the-more urgent action to mitigate the damage of this regime’s actions to Our Republic, it is still an important acknowledgement to make. We are in this for the long haul, so our strategy must be appropriately sustainable. We cannot realistically be bold every single day, risking it all with endless sit-ins while simultaneously fulfilling our routine obligations and responsibly looking after our families. Further, the best civil protests are not reactive, nor are they quickly put together. Protests greatly benefit from painstaking planning of both tactical and strategic considerations in order to extract the most value for the cost, whether that be in resources, sacrifices, risks, or expended opportunities. I plan to examine the topic of protest design in much greater detail in a future post. For now, however, my point is that the best protests take a lot of time to plan, and as individuals, we cannot simultaneously execute and plan exceptional protests every day, especially considering my previous point.
So on the days when we are not engaged in bold protests, what can resistance look like? That is a big question that I will not pretend to have all of the answers to. What I do have are some worthwhile recommendations.
First of all, our path forward must be tethered to the truth. In a previous Bluesky thread, I put together a list of “rules” that summarize best practices in media and activism. Rather than republish that here, please read it over to get some appropriate context for what I will expand on from that thread. Expanding on Rules #1 through #4, for our resistance to remain grounded in truth, we all have to do the increasingly difficult work of staying informed without being misinformed. For many years, I have used Ad Fontes Media to help me navigate the news media landscape. It has proven itself an invaluable resource. While it has its own biases, it is true to its mission to offer fair and accurate assessments of news media on reliability and bias measurements. With regards to instead attacking mainstream media as a whole, I would caution against this. Yes, legacy media keeps taking hits as the Trump regime continues to assault fundamental first amendment rights and corporate owners kowtow to save their bottom line (see CBS or ABC capitulation). Yes, with the acquisition of CBS by Trump-pal David Ellison, CBS has become a caricature of its former greatness. Yes, the despicably complicit Jeff Bezos is tanking The Washington Post with what sure looks like deliberate malice. But… “legacy media” and “mainstream media” are overbroad terms, and many that might fall under these umbrellas are doing much to put up a fight and remain true to journalistic integrity. As much as I may criticize them, The Atlantic is a leading contender in this space. So, too, is Wired, which, given its unconventional origins, may not be mainstream media? Again, overbroad term. Then there is ProPublica. Associated Press. MS Now is still going strong…I could go on. Point being, as with most things in life, “mainstream media” is a mixed bag. Not all good. Not all bad. There is of course a lot of great independent media, too, such as Mo News or Sharon Says So. Democracy Docket. The Bulwark. Mother Jones. Meidas Touch. Just to name a few. NPR deserves mention (and could use your donations). Don Lemon for the win. However, the White House Press pool also has a lot more “Independent Media” (read “propagandists”) under President Trump. All media consumption should be done skeptically. We need the news media to remain free. Despite any of its flaws, mainstream media has an important place in protecting our freedom. It is up to all of us to responsibly consume news media to uphold truth in journalism.
As you may have noted in my first Substack post, “The Hardwired Susceptibility of the Mind to Misinformation,” we are primed to accept false information, especially when that information aligns with our beliefs or values. The amount of misinformation I see, even on Bluesky, is staggering. If social media posts offer no credible validation of the information presented, you should automatically be skeptical. If that information aligns with your views, all the more reason to be suspicious of it, if for no other reason than because this is precisely the type of misinformation that we are all most susceptible to. If we want to save Our Republic, we must always advance the truth and reject misinformation. In today’s social media environment, that requires diligent fact checking.
To elevate our media consumption skills, we should understand how disinformation is employed. There are patterns that can become fairly easy to recognize with practice. With pattern recognition, we are better inoculated against attempts to deceive us. As only one prominent example, how many times have we all seen “BREAKING NEWS” in some graphic image presenting information? It is everywhere. Might this information be accurate? Sure. But do not take that for granted. If we can also recognize what disinformation is attempting to achieve, we can guard against its efforts to defeat our activism and political engagement. Sometimes, recognizing disinformation is not so straightforward. However, if we know what disinformation is often trying to accomplish, we can overcome disinformation by recognizing how it might be affecting us. Even if we do not recognize it upon first glance, understanding the underlying tactics allows us to apply more efficient diligence and catch disinformation we might otherwise miss.
RULE #5: COMBAT DISINFORMATION STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES
METHODS:
(1) Divide & Conquer - create infighting or erode unity of effort
(2) Mislead & Misdirect - trick people into making bad choices
(3) Overwhelm & Exhaust - cause paralysis w/ negative info
With Rule #5 and the paired video, we start to get ahead of disinformation and to proactively defeat it. Rule #5 is all the more critical in the current situation, as it so closely resembles so much of what President Trump and his loyalists are doing, and even bares similarities to mistakes the resistance continues to make against this authoritarian regime. How many times, for example, have you heard “flood the zone” or “muzzle velocity”? Does this not sound like overwhelming and exhausting? How many times has President Trump’s trolling with things like AI videos of rebuilding Gaza into “The Riviera of the Middle East” or AI images of him dressed as the Pope distracted us from the far more disturbing issues of his rampant corruption, flagrantly illegal actions, or blatant attacks on the Constitution, federal judges, and the rule of law? Does this not align with misleading and misdirecting? How much effort has been invested in criticizing Democratic leaders such as Senator Chuck Schumer, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, or Senator Cory Booker? However well intentioned (and often justified) this criticism is, does it not still support opposition efforts to divide and conquer? Look at how divided we all continue to be. Look at how eagerly we squabble over whether James Tallarico or Jasmine Crockett should be the Democratic nominee for Senate, as just one example. And hey, I fall into the trap sometimes too. It is so easy a mistake to make. But we have to do better. Our Republic is counting on us.
Do you know who benefits the most from all of this infighting, distraction, and exhaustion? Trump. I guarantee you that he loves to see it. But he will be truly terrified when we all finally set aside our differences to bring this regime down.
Knowing the overall strategies of disinformation campaigns help us not only to combat those campaigns, but also to avoid making the very mistakes that match strategies being used against us.
RULE #6: BUILD TRUST & SHOW EMPATHY
“People don’t care what you know until they know that you care.”
To promote a cause, you have to grow your tent. Always. Your fight is with ideologies, not people. To fight ideologies, you have to meet people where they are. When push comes to shove, there is only one litmus test that I truly care about: Does Trump and his entire coterie have to go? If yes, you pass. It is that simple. Our movement should be able to find a place for ANYONE that believes we should engage in peaceful civil resistance to impeach, convict, and remove the Trump regime.
I cannot stress how important Rule #6 is. On Bluesky, I see so many accounts talk about MAGAts or otherwise dehumanizing people that voted for President Trump (Also see Rule #4 on this). And look, I understand the emotional undercurrent that motivates this behavior, because I feel it too. I am pissed that so many of my fellow Americans made the wildly irresponsible and irrational decision to vote for a narcissistic, corrupt, and treasonous criminal and felon. That said, I do not hate my fellow Americans for their obscenely poor choice. I am mad and disappointed and deeply dismayed. But I do not hate them. I believe in the capacity of my fellow Americans to change. Not just in a philosophical sense, but because I know MAGA people. They are my family members, friends, mentors, colleagues and neighbors. I literally love these people, in spite of their flaws.
I also think of one of my greatest personal heroes of modern times: Cassidy Hutchinson. I do not share her political beliefs. I have also never voted for or supported President Trump, as she did. However, she is still my hero. As a young woman, she stood up to Donald Trump and MAGA, sacrificing her anonymity and her way of life while putting herself at great personal risk to speak the truth and do the right thing. No matter what you might think of her political views, she is an incredibly courageous person. She is also wise beyond her years. In this clip from a 2024 Principles First conference (starting at 14:33), she talks about the importance of Rule #6, in her own words. One quote in particular stands out: “We don’t shame people out of their belief system. We have to welcome them back.” This is spot on. It is not just morally praiseworthy to treat people of opposing views with compassion: It is strategically necessary. Take Cassidy Hutchinson, for example. She did not get to a place where she testified in the January 6th Committee Hearing all on her own. She had people like Alyssa Farah Griffin and Liz Cheney that showed her compassion and welcomed her back when she was ready to turn away from President Trump.
Just as a personal thought experiment, I challenge anyone to produce a single example where insults, shame, condescension, derision, contempt, or ostracizing ever caused a person with harmful beliefs or perspectives to change their mind and see the error of their ways. This sounds silly, right? But then why do so many people engage in this exact behavior? At best, it is cheap emotional validation. At worst, it is deliberate disinformation efforts (Again, see Rule #4). Frequently, it is simply exploitative self-promotion using popular emotionally-charged content.
To be clear, Rule #6 is not the same as forgiving all offenses against We the People with no accountability. On the contrary, we need our Nuremburg moment, especially for the powerful that know all too well the truth behind their many lies and abuses. And yes, we need accountability for the rank and file that commit crimes against us as well, especially violent ones. That said, this demand for accountability must be settled in the courts. A return to law and order is imperative to restore Our Republic. And we must temper our demands for accountability with compassion and grace.
On a final note for this rule, consider also where dehumanizing Trump supporters may lead when they are also dehumanizing us. Worst case scenario? Civil war. Is this what we want? The only logical reason I can think that anyone would want to pursue a long-term strategy of dehumanizing others is because they think that those that support Trump should be put down like Kristi Noem’s dog. No matter the supposed justification, dehumanizing others is always both immoral and foolish. I will always reject it.
RULE #7: EXERCISE RESPONSE DISCIPLINE
Not only should you not share disinformation, you should be wary how to engage it. Taking your attention away from your purpose to address disinformation serves disinformation goals as well. Ignoring is often the best option.
Just fact-checking is already extremely time consuming. Now add to that engaging with the source of this misinformation. Picture a dispute. You respond. They respond. Argument. Counterargument. We cannot afford to expend our valuable time in this manner. There is presumably a reason that you are on social media in the first place, and correcting all of the misinformation on the platform probably is not it.
Sometimes, engaging with disinformation is necessary. But be especially careful here. In trying to counter disinformation, you might accidentally advance it. It is a mistake that is much easier to make than you might think.
RULE #8: AVOID COMMON ADVOCACY PITFALLS
(1) Centering facts & statistics over storytelling (facts are important but stories drive home the meaning)
Hundreds of people were illegally captured and sent to a literal torture prison in El Salvador in March of last year. Did this catch your attention at the time? Probably. But it caught the attention of a lot more people when 60 minutes personalized the stories of these individuals, along with the murder of Renee Good. Add to that the murder of Alex Pretti… Can you tell me how many children are being held in ICE detentions? Maybe, but if so, I would be quite impressed. That said, I bet you are familiar with Liam Ramos. The lesson is clear. Facts and statistics are far more powerful when they are given meaning through the telling of stories.
(2) Telling “doom & gloom” stories (inspire hope!)
For anyone that read my letter to the Editor in Chief of The Atlantic, it should come as no surprise that I am a harsh critic of strictly “doom & gloom” narratives. As the saying goes, The only good news is bad news. This may be true if your goal is selling more content and profiting off of suffering. But if the goal is to bring about change, bad news can only get you so far, and it always comes at a cost. Framing bad news with a positive perspective, such as how ICE violence in Minnesota backfired, or how the Trump regime is losing in the courts, makes all the difference. If people read bad news and it looks like there is nothing being done, or nothing that can be done, it amplifies helplessness. But if news articles highlight that sliver of hope, people begin to remember that they have power. That they can do something, just like the people they might be seeing take action in that inspiring story.
“Doom & gloom” is something I see a lot on Bluesky. Whenever I see this, it fills me with frustration, because whoever is posting that content is not helping. They are doing the opposite, and I often wonder to myself, “Why did you even post that? What was your objective? What were you trying to achieve? Attention? Go away.”
Sure, the silver lining can be hard to find. Sometimes, bad news is just…bad. But wherever possible, we should all focus on encouraging hope and empowerment amongst each other. We are all in this together. As soon as we all realize how powerful we really are, we will have Our Republic back. Be part of that solution. It starts by promoting hope.
(3) Myth-busting & reactive (focus on YOUR agenda!)
I talked about this quite a bit already in Rule #7 (and more in Rule #10), so I will refrain from repeating myself here.
(4) Manipulate audiences with fear & anger
Fear-mongering and rage baiting is a highly refined skillset especially amongst the far right propagandists and Trump regime officials. But this is not one of those “fight fire with fire” situations. We have to model the public discourse that we want to see in Our Republic. There is tremendous opportunity by showing people how much more positive, uplifting, and unifying our message is compared to that of the regime. I mean, honestly, given a choice between overarching narratives, would you prefer one that fills you with fear and anger, or would you want to align with one that makes you feel optimistic and loving towards your neighbors?
I am not saying there is never cause for fear or anger. Trump’s calls to nationalize elections are a reason to be afraid. The murders of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, along with so many other horrors under this regime, are reasons to be outraged. I am not even saying that there is no utility in sharing stories that are likely to make people feel this way. On the contrary, when it is genuine and justified, it is important not to shy away from this truth. However, it must not become disingenuous, and it absolutely cannot be used as a prime mover. Put in the simplest of ways, fear and anger are the disease. Hope and love are the cure.
(5) Using the passive voice (subject/offender should be the focus, not the victim)
We have all heard the term, “victim blaming.” One of the best ways to counter this is to focus attention on the offenders. When DHS escalates encounters with Americans exercising their First Amendment rights time and again, the discussion should never be, “wow, that man/woman was pushed to the ground. They must have really upset those DHS officers with whatever they were doing.” No matter how well intentioned, passive framing focuses attention not on the offenders, but the victims, subconsciously making the victims the focus of discussion. The attention needs to be on the offenders. “Wow, those DHS officers just keep escalating with more and more violence. Do they have no self-control at all?” There are so many reasons DHS officers wear masks. Prime amongst them is a desire to not be the subject of our focus. Deny them this, as we should with any individuals committing offenses against We the People.
(6) Overestimating support for Trump, underestimating our power
The Trump regime is weak. That is the truth. It would be difficult to overstate just how weak they all are. In contrast, we are incredibly powerful. The Trump regime needs us to fear them and to act on that fear. They need us compliant, propping up the status quo. They need us working our jobs and spending our money. They need us to pretend like there is nothing we can do to stop them. In so many ways, THEY need US. And we have NEVER needed them. I look forward to the tipping point where we all realize this and finally decide to act on it in ever-bolder ways that will end this regime. It fills me with hope to know that day is an inevitability. The bill will come due. But not until we embrace our power and demand it.
Believe in the righteousness of the cause & its appeal. If you don’t believe in it, how can you expect to convince others?
RULE #9: BE AWARE OF LARGER DANGERS IN SOCIAL MEDIA
Even for problems that feel beyond our ability to change, knowing the dangers helps fight the effects.
Consider watching these Netflix documentaries to learn about poignant dangers:
I will not elaborate on this. Just watch the stuff. They will explain it far better than I could.
RULE #10: REPLACE, DON’T REPEAT!
Repetition of disinformation, even in efforts to fight it, still benefits bad actors by perpetuating lies.
DO: “Wearing a mask in public empowers us to resume daily life.”
DON’T: “Wearing a mask in public is not a lockdown.”
I touched on this briefly in Rule #7, but this places important emphasis on a little-known mistake: Negating falsehoods still propagates falsehoods. This is rarely worth the cost. The best way to reject a lie is to replace it with the truth, which is subtle, but makes a powerful difference both psychologically and practically. It brings the conversation back to reality.
Bluesky is littered with misguided attempts to negate falsehoods. I see it everywhere: A literal restatement of the falsehood, word-for-word, but with a “not” or a “no” added at the appropriate point. This is self-defeating in so many ways that too many do not realize. Reject the lie by uplifting the truth. Create your own message. Do not do this regime any favors by repeating theirs, even to contradict it.
Sometimes, it helps to see the madness firsthand. Trump’s crazy Truth Social posts are a great example. But with these, the point is not to negate the falsehood, but to expose the absurdity. Even then, it comes at a cost, but that psychological cost is worth the trade-off. This is an exception. Another powerful exception is putting liars and traitors up against their own words, as can easily be done with Marco Rubio, JD Vance, Lindsey Graham, and others. But unless there is an element of absurdity to highlight, then always replace the falsehood with the truth we know and that deserves to be shared.
That’s it for Part One. Stay tuned for Part Two, coming out by tomorrow.