By Eric K. Ward

Two years ago, during that first terrible COVID summer, with a white nationalist sympathetic President in the White House and federal paramilitary units fomenting unlawful mayhem on the streets of Portland, Oregon, I spoke aloud a forbidden thought. What if we’re already winning?

“What if we’ve already won the war?” I asked in an essay. What would it take to win the peace?

I’m talking about inclusive multiracial democracy in the United States. The war is about “If” — If multiracial democracy has a right to exist. The peace is a question of “How” — How do we live pluralism every day, in a way that convinces more and more people that their neighbors are not their enemy?

With the attempted coup of January 6 and every other assault on democratic practice both here and around the world, I’ve been asked many times — do I still think we’re winning?

After the mid-term elections, I can say Yes. For the first time as a Black punk rocker who grew up a working poor, I can say that I feel truly thankful for Americans in this moment.

Folks showed up — the majority of voting Americans defended multiracial democracy. Enough of us were organized and mobilized on Election Day that authoritarianism wasn’t able to claim it had the agency of the American public. That’s a big fucking deal. And we should own it.

Owning how far we’ve come towards multiracial inclusive democracy does not diminish how imperiled the Black radical project of democracy remains. Trumpism is far from over. We have big work to do.

• First, we have to remain resilient in the face of the violence of those who seek to undermine America’s path to multi-racial inclusive democracy. They want us to believe that false narrative that we have lost. We haven’t.
• Second, we have to prove that governance of a pluralistic democracy can improve lives and increase equity and justice. It must become an appealing alternative.
• Third, we have to resist the most insidious tactic of authoritarianism — its ability to wedge marginalized communities against each other.

Let’s be real. The unwillingness of a minority to accept the reality of a multi-racial, multi-faith, gender-inclusive America is going to continue to generate political violence. Violence serves to make us cautious or surrender to conditions that are untenable. That’s one reason why historical remembrance is so important — telling the stories of those no longer with us, learning from the resilience of the survivors of political and hate violence. We can’t let the fear of violence distract us from the continued work of building inclusive democracy. We need to learn — as other societies have shown before us — how to manage the violence and govern in the midst of it.

By governance I mean everything from protecting voting rights to housing veterans to picking up the garbage. Right now we’re barraged by misinformation and disinformation that distorts the narratives that could bring us together. Our fundamental right to vote is undermined by anti-democratic tactics from gerrymandering to voter intimidation and outright election denial. Too many people simply don’t have enough to eat, can’t afford to make rent, can’t access decent health care or clean air or safe water. We have to engage in a response to the so-called “Culture War” (really the war on American democracy) but we can’t get distracted from our common-good responsibility to meet these basic needs.

The worst of the distractions are the ways we are turned against each other, the myths we internalize about who is to blame for our suffering — the Jews, the immigrants, the trans community. We simply can’t afford to perpetuate the dying vestiges of white supremacy on each other any longer. Inter-communal violence (the wedging, for example, of Blacks from Jews, rural from urban, or immigrants along color lines) only strengthens the hand of authoritarians.

We are not the first to face these challenges. I am grateful for the wisdom and advice extended to Western States Center from our global relationships with the Northern Ireland’s Social Change Initiative, the Nelson Mandela Foundation, the Train Foundation’s other Civil Courage Prize laureates, and the pro-democracy organizers and leaders we’ve been able to sit with in a number of countries around the world.

At Western States Center, we’ve always believed that what happens in the Pacific Northwest and Mountain States matters to the rest of the country. We’ve been the proving ground for extremist and anti-democracy formations and the broadly-supported movement-building that has pushed back. Over these past five years, as the fight for inclusive democracy has become a both a national and international struggle, it’s become imperative that we turn outward, to the global expertise that resides both inside and outside the U.S.

When we drop the myth of American exceptionalism, we have so much to learn from other paramilitary-impacted communities, other societies that have resisted authoritarian rule, and built multiracial democracy. Historical lessons and ones happening in real time.

As I look back on the five years I served as executive director of Western States Center before moving into my current role as Senior Adviser, I can say, it’s been a hard five years. Who isn’t exhausted, deeply impacted?

We’ve been under unrelenting attack. Rising support for white nationalism. The normalization of political violence. COVID-19 exposing all the weaknesses in our systems, super-charging the polarization of conspiracy culture. Our ongoing susceptibility to antisemitism on both the left and right and the continuing poisons of systemic racism and misogyny and income inequality. We’ve been pummeled.

But for all the ways we have been on the defensive, we’ve been pretty frigging creative. Our staff and board and senior fellows and program partners and leadership cohorts here at Western States Center, along with so many other civil society organizations, artists, and elected officials, have been building the scaffolding for the offensive. For winning the peace.

I hope you’ll read more about Western States Center’s work to build movement, develop leaders, shape culture, and defend democracy in our upcoming two-year Report to the Community.

It’s clear to me: we’ve begun to see the emergence of a movement. A movement committed to preserving democracy. A movement grounded in the rejection of bigotry and political violence as a solution. A movement led not just by Black-centered organizations but by culture shapers, indigenous activists, educators, local government workers, young people, immigrants — a multitude of voices.

Going on the offensive means supporting these emerging leaders, bringing them together in cohorts to learn from each other and defy the wedges that would divide us. Underwriting the development of the tools they create to equip their communities. Amplifying their voices.

Going on the offensive means lifting up values-based narratives that have the power to unify and inspire us. Shaping culture by moving into unexpected spaces, less preaching to the choir, more wondering what we can learn about and from each other. Building a culture of care and kindness within our movement too — we are proud to have been early adopters of the four-day workweek.

Going on the offensive means not just defending democracy — though that remains vitally important. It’s time for us to put out a beacon for people to orient themselves to in these admittedly frightening times. The movement we’re building has to be a place of radical inclusion that embodies the belief that’s long existed in the Black community and civil rights communities: everyone is redeemable. Ideological vanguards will not achieve inclusive democracy. It’s going to take old-fashioned community organizing and community building that includes the full breadth of who is America today.

The culture war keeps us on the defensive — that’s why it’s really the only thing on offer right now from anti-democracy forces. Going on the offensive means redirecting the attack to tackle our real problems: Why do police officers and military vets have such high rates of suicide? Why are so many of our kids dying from cancer? Why is the water undrinkable in major cities of the richest country on earth?

This is the real threat — and promise — of multiracial inclusive democracy. It makes us look at the actual problems we face instead of the made-up monsters we’re told are in the closet.

The majority of the American people don’t want a culture war. They don’t believe in either/ or; that my rights are at the expense of yours. It’s time for us to stop thinking small. To start thinking like a majority. To take care of the people’s business. To bring in as many people as possible to the beautiful work of a multi-racial, multi-faith, gender-inclusive America.

Eric K. Ward is the Executive Vice President of Race Forward and Senior Adviser at Western States Center.

Subscribe to receive biweekly e-news updates from Western States Center.

Three Most Dangerous Extremist Trends in 2022

White nationalism and antisemitism continued to be mainstreamed

In 2022, the mainstreaming of white nationalism and antisemitism intensified. From Trump dining with white nationalist Nick Fuentes to the normalization of the Great Replacement conspiracy theory, prominent media personalities and GOP leaders lent credibility to white nationalists and trafficked in their rhetoric. In particular, candidates and elected leaders promoted anti-immigrant “invasion” messaging associated with the Great Replacement conspiracy theory, while high-profile figures with large audiences like Kanye West and Kyrie Irving used their platforms to espouse antisemitism.

Extremists targeted electoral democracy

White nationalist, paramilitary, and other anti-democracy movements continued to set their sights on electoral democracy, with runs for office, engaging in local politics, and voter intimidation attempts. Many of these efforts failed, but some did not, and we can expect bigoted movements to learn from their failures and adjust. While most anti-democracy candidates lost, those who won will further normalize authoritarian views. Additionally, white nationalist and anti-democracy groups such as the Proud Boys continued to extend their influence over local politics and GOP groups in places like Idaho, Oregon and Florida.

Racist and anti-LGBTQ+ bigotry and violence wrought devastation

In 2022, anti-democracy movements coalesced around anti-LGBTQ+ bigotry, with offenders ranging from white nationalists to legislators in numerous states. Pride and drag queen events came under near constant threat from bigoted and anti-democracy groups, while state legislators passed dozens of pieces of anti-trans legislation. This trend, combined with racist so-called anti-CRT attacks that have persisted since 2021, has fueled hyper-local targeting of librarians, educators, health workers, and elected officials by anti-democracy groups. Dehumanizing and bigoted rhetoric led to stochastic terrorism in Buffalo, Colorado, and elsewhere, while white nationalist, paramilitary, and anti-democracy figures unleashed a wave of violence and threats on a smaller scale that resulted in multiple arrests around the country.

Three Biggest Pro-Democracy Victories in 2022

Legal strategies to counter anti-democracy activity broke new ground

This year saw an enormous increase in successful civil suits to hold dangerous anti-democracy actors accountable, likely a result of the pathbreaking victory in Sines v. Kessler at the end of last year. A New Mexico county commissioner was unseated due to civil legal action forcing novel enforcement of a state provision barring insurrectionists from office. Far-right conspiracy theorist Alex Jones is now facing well over a billion dollars in damages from multiple defamation lawsuits. More recent filings include a drag performer suing for defamation following targeting and harassment from a far-right blogger and a federal civil rights lawsuit against Patriot Front members for vandalism. Criminal prosecutions have also born fruit with the successful prosecution of the Oath Keepers for seditious conspiracy and the ongoing prosecution of January 6 insurrectionists.

Pro-democracy narratives won the day

In response to the continued mainstreaming of white nationalism, many elected, community, and institutional leaders have centered inclusive democracy as a priority to a greater extent than we’ve seen in recent years. This was apparent in the midterm elections, in which many candidates ran on a pro-democracy platform while the anticipated “red wave” and planned voter intimidation campaigns from anti-democracy groups both failed to materialize. The election bought those of us who believe in democracy a little more breathing room, largely thanks to the centering of the stakes for democracy and the actions of organizations and elections administrators who worked to protect voting rights. The Biden Administration’s summit to counter hate-fueled violence in September and the January 6th Committee’s essential public fact-finding and efforts to ensure accountability for the insurrection were also critical parts of this trend.

Communities mobilized for inclusive democracy and civil rights

In 2022, communities took meaningful action in small and large ways to celebrate inclusion, memorialize histories of bigoted violence, and defend rights. LGBTQ+ communities across the country successfully held Pride events, even under threat, including many small towns who hosted the first-ever Pride events in their locations. Examples of communities reflecting on bigoted histories and committing to meaningful change abound, from California’s exploration of reparations to descendants of enslaved people to Richmond, VA’s removal of the last city-owned Confederate statue; from a project in Coos Bay, OR to remember lynching victim Alonzo Tucker to a Los Angeles memorial honoring victims of a 1971 massacre targeting the city’s Chinese community. Finally, voters showed up to support abortion rights and reject anti-democracy candidates in key governor and secretary of state races, blunting threats to future elections for the time being.

Three Greatest Threats from Extremism in 2023

Conspiracy theories baked into US politics

As conspiracy theories, misinformation, and disinformation continue to run unchecked, they will become an increasingly standard part of American politics and an ongoing catalyst for racist, anti-Black, anti-Asian, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-immigrant, anti-indigenous, and antisemitic threats and violence. This is most likely to be reinforced in national narratives and play out on the local level with disruptions of drag events, witch hunts focused on educators, targeting of local elected officials, and more. The direct link between violent and dehumanizing rhetoric and hate violence itself also shows no sign of weakening in the new year.

Backlash to pro-democracy efforts

2023 will bring the verdicts of seditious conspiracy trials against Proud Boys and Oath Keepers leadership. Coupled with the potential impacts of the January 6 Committee’s vote on whether to bring criminal charges against certain individuals, these lawsuits may spur an organized reaction by anti-democracy groups. We may see renewed “political prisoner” narratives from Proud Boys and elected officials sympathetic to their cause. And with greater attention on law enforcement’s intersection with white nationalism and role in defending democratic rule of law, we expect some anti-democracy groups to renew attempts to make inroads with police while others will continue to target law enforcement with doxing and violence.

Opportunistic power-building from white nationalists

White nationalist leaders will aggressively seek opportunities to build power for their bigoted social movement, and they will certainly find them. With Trump’s candidacy for president exploiting grievance and intolerance yet again, Western States Center expects he will continue to platform bigoted actors, normalize dehumanizing rhetoric, and generate high-profile incidents that white nationalists can mine for support. One opportunity we expect bigoted and anti-democracy actors to exploit is an opening to appeal to communities of color using conspiracy theories and authoritarian ideals, particularly following the national attention on Kanye West’s antisemitism. Anti-democracy figures will likely also focus energy on taking over more local GOP groups, building on successes in this arena in 2022, and undermining the educational and equity goals of colleges by using them as recruiting pools.

White nationalist and anti-democracy groups will likely continue to use anti-immigrant rhetoric for political gain. Anti-immigrant groups have already launched a laundry list of proposed legislation for the new Congress to take up, and a GOP effort to impeach DHS head Alejandro Mayorkas will provide a focal point for dangerous “invasion” rhetoric. As the impacts of climate change become ever more apparent, we will likely see greater attempts by white nationalists to co-opt environmental issues and by paramilitaries to engage in cynical recruitment efforts and local infrastructure takeover disguised as disaster relief.

By Eric Ward

Even as racism and other forms of bigotry are at the center of our national debate, there is so little understanding of one widespread form of bias that The Atlantic recently published an article titled “Why So Many People Still Don’t Understand Anti-Semitism.” We don’t even have consensus on how to spell what we need to talk about; whether or not to hyphenate or capitalize. Anti-Semitism or antisemitism? As we explain below, many aspects of antisemitism are misunderstood. Our purpose here is to help expand the focus of antibigotry activists to understand the relationship of antisemitism to other forms of bigotry.

Defining Antisemitism

Encyclopedia Britannica defines anti-Semitism as “hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious or racial group.”

The Anti-Defamation League’s (ADL’s) definition also focuses on hostility as an element: “Antisemitism is the belief or behavior hostile toward Jews just because they are Jewish.”

Similarly, The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism defines antisemitism as “discrimination, prejudice, hostility or violence against Jews as Jews (or Jewish institutions as Jewish).”

The U.S. State Department is among more than three-dozen countries and international organizations that have adopted the Working Definition promoted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

Other definitions also include examples of antisemitism in practice. The Nexus Document states: “Antisemitism consists of anti-Jewish beliefs, attitudes, actions or systemic conditions. It includes negative beliefs and feelings about Jews, hostile behavior directed against Jews (because they are Jews), and conditions that discriminate against Jews and significantly impede their ability to participate as equals in political, religious, cultural, economic, or social life.”

We don’t seek to choose one definition over another here. Examining the range of definitions — the overlaps and nuanced distinctions — is a useful foundation for real discourse about what is taking place, and why.

That said, the definition posed by Yair Rosenberg in The Atlantic comes closest to the way we think. “Unlike many other bigotries, Rosenberg writes, “anti-Semitism is not merely a social prejudice; it is a conspiracy theory about how the world operates.”

We would add, antisemitism is a racialized form of social prejudice in the United States, by which we mean Jews are identified by others through whatever lens the anxiety of the moment demands. We discuss this further below.

Antisemitism functions to maintain the structural inequities that underlie all other forms of bigotry and oppression. Antisemitism in its daily manifestations causes devastating, sometimes mortal, harms to its targets, certainly — Jews are the most frequent target of reported anti-religious hate crimes in America even as they comprise less than two percent of the U.S. population and only two-tenths of one percent of the world’s population.10 More broadly, antisemitism divides potential allies, serves as a galvanizing force for white nationalist movements, and undermines democratic processes.

How Antisemitism Functions

Antisemitism functions in a similar way to all other forms of structural and unconscious bias, including racism. Antisemitism designates an “Other” who can be maligned, fetishized, dehumanized and then blamed for the difficulties that other groups of people are suffering. By tapping into an unconscious fear of the “Other,” antisemitism serves as a wedge that divides people who might be allies or form common cause, allowing those who hold structural power to escape responsibility for the conditions that are causing suffering.

Antisemitism is propagated through stereotypes and tropes about Jews. T’ruahs Very Brief Guide to Antisemitism delineates the most common of these:

Power: Claims that Jews are all-powerful secret puppet masters behind the scenes of world events, as popularized by the early 20th century antisemitic forgery, Protocols of the Elders of Zion; also, conspiracy theories that Jews cause disease, pandemic, war, or other disasters.

Greed/Wealth: Claims that Jews love money, or control the world’s financial system or the media.

Disloyalty: Claims that Jews are untrustworthy and/ or disloyal, or that Jews are more loyal to Israel or to world Jewry than to their country of citizenship.

Evil: Claims that Jews are in league with, or are children of, the Devil; that Jews drink blood or kill babies; and that Jews are a corrupting, inhuman force.

We can find all of these ideas at play today in even a casual survey of the news or social media. We must accept that antisemitism is a force in America today and that none of us are immune, including our own movements for justice.

Social Justice Movements are Not Immune

T here are three primary reasons antisemitism can be found in social justice movements. The first is that we’re all subject to the same unconscious biases and societal conditioning and segregation (not actually knowing the “Other”) that enables any form of bigotry to flourish.

The second complicating factor is the politics of Israel and Palestine. Several definitions of antisemitism devote entire sections to parsing what is and is not antisemitic when it comes to criticism of Israel. As The Nexus Document states, “As an embodiment of collective Jewish organization and action, Israel can be a target of antisemitism and antisemitic behavior. Thus, it is important for Jews and their allies to understand what is and what is not antisemitic in relation to Israel.”

By way of example, the Nexus Document provides the following helpful principles:

As a general rule, criticism of Zionism and Israel, opposition to Israel’s policies, or nonviolent political action directed at the State of Israel and/or its policies should not, as such, be deemed antisemitic.

Even contentious, strident, or harsh criticism of Israel for its policies and actions, including those that led to the creation of Israel, is not per se illegitimate or antisemitic.

It is antisemitic to use symbols and images that present all Jews as collectively guilty for the actions of the State of Israel.

It is antisemitic to treat Israel differently solely because it is a Jewish state, using standards different than those applied to other countries.

The third factor is a widespread misunderstanding of “race” — which was invented as a category to maintain social and economic control — as defined only by skin color. We explain this misconception below.

Are Jews “White”?

In a 2018 interview with Tikkun on The Evolution of Identity Politics, our team member Eric K. Ward addressed the question of race and the Jewish community. As he recounted, in the 1970s, many in the Jewish community found themselves “facing less — not none, but lesser — discrimination.” At the same time, new liberation movements emerged in response to a liberal mainstream that seemed satisfied with legal equality, even in the face of persistent real-world inequities. Some of these movements were grounded in a vision of identity politics that offered the promise of “rebuilding people centered movements for justice.” Unfortunately, “[m]isrepresentations of identity policies treat race, gender and sexuality as static terms rather than fluid narratives used to expand and reinforce inequality in the United States.”

In this context, Jews were defined as white not only by white society, but also elements of antiracist and leftists movements. Jews were left with the primary role of “white ally.” Jews who did not identify as white “found themselves without a political home” and “disengaged or began to claim whiteness as a primary identity so they could belong somewhere.” The result was that there was little opportunity for conversations about antisemitism as a current form of subordination, or its relationship to other categories of bigotry. Jewish communities within leftist social movements rarely get to self-identify, or lift up their experiences with antisemitism, which is a form of racism in the United States.

As Eric stated, “the Jewish community has never been white; it has only been allowed temporary access to privileges.” In the U.S., as in Europe, Jews have been “used as the scapegoats of the ruling class, a buffer between ‘the haves’ and ‘the have nots.’” In this way, “[p]ositioned perpetually as ‘the biological other,’ Jews often find themselves wrongfully cast as the existential evil behind every social disparity, scandalous leader, or societal disaster.”

Against this backdrop, “our society found itself defenseless as white nationalists intentionally used antisemitism to form its worldview, develop leadership and fuel its growing social and political power.” We discuss this further in the next section.

The Relationship Between Antisemitism and White Nationalism

Like all forms of bigotry, antisemitism evolves and adapts itself, and there are specific roles and purposes to current manifestations of antisemitism in the U.S. One dominant role that antisemitism plays today is to further white nationalist rhetoric and prop up narratives of white supremacy.

Antisemitism is employed as a narrative tool to explain away advances in social movements during the 1960s and 1970s. For example, the Civil Rights movement’s victories against legal forms of anti-Black discrimination was helped in part by a broad multiracial coalition that embraced nonviolent direct action. As Eric explained in Tikkun,

The loss of de jure white supremacy created a large problem for the advocates of white supremacy who long justified slavery and Jim Crow by arguing Blacks were inferior and whites were superior. If you believe you are superior, how do you explain this significant defeat? You can’t say those who were inferior bested you, there must be another answer; and an adaptation of modern European antisemitism provided the explanation. In short, white supremacists began propagating the narrative that a secret Jewish cabal must have been behind the Civil Rights movement. They argued, this was the only way Black folks could have won.

Subsequently, asserting that Jews were responsible for social justice movements became the “go-to” answer in how white nationalists understood calls for women’s rights, inclusive immigration policies, reproductive justice, and an expansive understanding of gender identity. White nationalists framed these movements as “fronts that allowed Jews to enslave whites.” This narrative “helped to birth the white nationalist movement from the ashes of de jure white supremacy.

If white supremacy is a system used to control and exploit structurally marginalized groups, white nationalism seeks the removal of these groups all together. Antisemitism is “the fuel for the white nationalist engine.”

Instead of recognizing this threat, many antiracists, leftists and progressives insisted Jews primarily recognize themselves as whites with privileges.

Temporal Privilege

The privileges held by Jews are recent and temporal, meaning that these privileges are contingent on Jews suppressing “their primary identity as Jews, except in those ways found acceptable by larger society.”

As Eric, a Black man, told Tikkun:

I liken it to my experiences in philanthropy. In my years working as a grant-giver in philanthropy, I automatically became the most humorous person in the room. I was suddenly 100 times better looking. Nearly everyone returned my phone calls. People would also send me invitations informing me of fundraisers and asking for individual donations of $500 or more. Yes, I had time-based privileges and access but it was only one small part of my identity, and a passing one at that. There were lots of assumptions being made about my identities and my background and most of it was based on a temporal position. I’m a kid who spent most of his teenage years living in a motel where rent was paid by the week. I was thin in my twenties because I was malnourished and often near-starving at times. I never made a living wage until well into my forties. When I left philanthropy, I wasn’t as good looking, I wasn’t as funny.

Indeed, “when Jews choose to self-actualize their own identities, the threat is always delivered that if the Jewish community doesn’t behave itself, access, safety and opportunity will be taken away.” Jews receive death threats, their houses of worship are targeted, their burial sites are desecrated. “Systemic antisemitic violence and threats are forms of social control and they exist to ensure that Jews know their place . . . Privileged white communities simply don’t receive threats like this; they don’t need to.”

The Threat Antisemitism Poses to Inclusive Democracy

Antisemitism harms all who benefit from an inclusive democracy and informed electorate. As Yair Rosenberg wrote in The Atlantic recently, “This ignorant status quo has proved deadly for Jews, and that alone should be enough for our society to take it seriously. But it has disastrous consequences for non-Jews as well. This is because people who embrace conspiracy theories to explain their problems lose the ability to rationally solve them.”

Rosenberg quotes Bard College’s Walter Russell Mead, who states:

People who think “the Jews” run the banks lose the ability to understand, much less to operate financial systems. People who think “the Jews” dominate business through hidden structures can’t build or long maintain a successful modern economy. People who think “the Jews” dominate politics lose their ability to interpret political events, to diagnose social evils and to organize effectively for positive change.

Rosenberg also quotes our team member Eric K. Ward, who explains:

Anti-Semitism has real impact beyond just hate crimes. It distorts our understanding of how the actual world works. It isolates us. It alienates us from our communities, from our neighbors, and from participating in governance. It kills, but it also kills our society. AntiSemitism isn’t just bigotry toward the Jewish community. It is actually utilizing bigotry toward the Jewish community in order to deconstruct democratic practices, and it does so by framing democracy as a conspiracy rather than a tool of empowerment or a functional tool of governance.

As Rosenberg concludes, “In other words, the more people buy into anti-Semitism and its understanding of the world, the more they lose faith in democracy.”

Keeping your child safe online has always been a challenge and an imperative for parents, but recent years have shown that it’s more important than ever, especially when it comes to bigoted and white nationalist groups actively targeting young audiences. If you feel a little overwhelmed by the scope and stakes of the challenge of keeping your child safe from bigoted views and dangerous movements like white nationalism, you’re not the only one.

These bigoted groups are increasingly finding their way to kids on social media platforms and even gaming sites. How do you, as a parent, prepare your child to recognize this content for what it is when they encounter it? How can you discuss it with them effectively when you may not be as digitally fluent as your child? The task may seem daunting, but you do have the power to make a difference and keep your child safe, if you have the right tools and strategies.

1. Exposure to bigoted ideas is very common

The first step to addressing a problem is recognizing that it exists, and the reality is that most kids will encounter bigoted, anti-democracy, white nationalist and conspiracy theory-based content, especially online. White nationalist leaders have publicly admitted that they intentionally try to reach young people, and Gen Z’s level of engagement on platforms like TikTok, Instagram, Twitch and Discord mean that’s where they are likely to encounter these attitudes and the jokes and memes meant to make bigotry seem cool.

2. It begins with vigilance

Protecting your child in this arena, like in so many others, begins with vigilance. Each home will find their right balance of oversight of social media and internet use, but being aware of what content your child is engaging with and on what platforms is a necessary part of keeping them safe. Don’t approach this as a monitor or a censor — approach it as someone who shares your child’s interests and is curious about their friends and the things they find stimulating and funny, and have conversations about it.

3. Learn to recognize and don’t overlook the warning signs

Your child’s first encounters with these ideas will likely not be full-blown manifestos or dark web chat rooms — they will probably first encounter offensive jokes, stereotypes, minimization of violence, and memes on some of the same social media sites you may use yourself. In order to recognize some of this harmful content, you may want to educate yourself on the lingo and visuals of white nationalist and anti-democracy groups to pick up on these early warning signs. Also remain attuned to changes in your child — more time spent isolating and online, a push-back against long-held views and values, or changes in their friend group — and make sure to keep lines of communication open.

4. Have an open-door policy and a judgment free-zone

The ability to have difficult conversations with your child begins with establishing a prerequisite degree of openness that encourages them to come to you with thoughts, ideas and concerns — an open-door policy. Your engagement with these ideas should come from a place of clear interest, curiosity and a desire to understand and explore — not from a place of judgment or punitive intervention. As tempting as the latter may seem when you perceive your child is in danger, it’s important to understand that overreaction or harshness can have an opposite effect here, and that many white nationalists encourage those they influence to see such corrective interventions as “politically correct” evidence of the assault on their “free speech.”

5. Start from a recognition that your child’s views matter and appeal to shared values

These difficult conversations can easily trigger a defensive response in your child, which is why it is important to start from a position of respect, curiosity, and an acknowledgement that your child is allowed to ask questions. You should avoid badmouthing and name-calling groups and individuals they feel attracted to or admire. Instead, ask why your child finds those views compelling and how they reconcile these new views with their values, as well as those of their family and community. Don’t overreact or be dismissive — engage constructively and help your child understand bigoted ideas in a broader and historical context, and help them ask smarter questions for themselves to pick these ideas apart.

6. Media literacy is key

A core part of debunking and defending against these bigoted messages and inoculating your children from their influence is strong media literacy. This goes beyond just evaluating credibility and is about encouraging your child to question the motives behind content they encounter, be it jokes or memes or more fleshed out bigoted arguments. Internalizing the process of questioning what they see and read from multiple angles better prepares them for the challenges of encountering disinformation, conspiracy theories and bigoted ideas online.

7. You’re not alone — enlist allies

On difficult subjects, we all know that parents and guardians aren’t always the voice their child is most receptive to or most eager to hear. Enlist the help of a trusted adult that your child is close to, and with care to not violate the child’s privacy, leverage the relationship of trust to reinforce common values and push back on bigotry and conspiracy theories.

8. It takes a village

You’ve heard the expression that it takes a village to raise a child, and the same applies here. Keeping your child safe and helping to pull them back once they’ve been influenced by bigotry or conspiracy theories online are both easier when education and resources come not just from you, the parent, but also the school and the community. Encourage your school and other community institutions to prioritize digital literacy education and critical thinking skills, and make sure that the curriculum includes learning about present-day and historical leaders and authors who are people of color, women, and LGBTQ. Being involved alongside your children in positive community organizations can also help to reinforce and strengthen their inclusive and pro-democracy values.

By Western States Center

In the 2022 midterms, nearly 300 candidates who denied or questioned the 2020 election results are running for office. Instead of receding after the January 6, 2021 insurrection, the threats to democracy from disinformation, authoritarianism, and the organized efforts of white nationalist and paramilitary groups have only grown. This year, the potential for violence or intimidation at ballot drop boxes is particularly concerning. It is imperative that we manage these attempts at disruption to keep our communities and our democracy safe.

This resource guide from Western States Center is for anyone who supports democracy, rejects bigotry, and believes that every eligible voter should be able to vote safely and without intimidation. It covers some of the most prominent threats from bigoted and anti-democracy groups, makes projections for what we may expect in the coming weeks, and provides suggestions and resources for individuals and organizations to take action.

What You Need to Know

Over the last two years, influential figures in anti-democracy movements have been building power by casting doubt on the 2020 election results. The ad-hoc “Stop the Steal” coalition that first came together in 2020 is now formalized. We are in a new era of heightened coordination around election disinformation, voter intimidation and the targeting of elections administration.

An important driver of this anti-democracy coalition is True the Vote (TTV), a group that has used false and dangerous claims to cast doubt on our free and fair electoral processes since 2009. TTV’s latest false conspiracy theory is that individuals brought falsified ballots to dropboxes in order to manipulate the 2020 election results. Election-related conspiracy theories like this help anti-democracy groups build political power, sow distrust in democratic institutions, and lay the groundwork for contesting the election and mobilizing people to engage in voter intimidation. This anti-democracy coalition has also increased its institutional power, and now includes some county sheriffs. Sheriffs recruited through the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association falsely claim to have the power to override state and federal law and to intercede directly in electoral processes. Protect America Now, another sheriffs’ group which is best-known for working with anti-immigrant groups, has similarly gotten involved.

Perhaps the most concerning new threat in 2022 is the concrete planning from anti-democracy groups to 1) install their supporters in formal election observer structures in many states with the explicit goal of undermining the election, and 2) organize supporters to monitor ballot drop boxes on a much larger scale. Anti-democracy organizers are referring to this monitoring as “tailgating,” and some have publicly claimed to have groups of people ready to monitor ballot drop boxes in shifts in 18 states.

What We Might Expect

Increased potential of voter intimidation
While the 2020 election had isolated incidents of voter intimidation, in the two years since, anti-democracy groups have worked to normalize voter intimidation and recruit large numbers of people through disinformation. This is only the second election since the expiration of a 40-year-old consent decree preventing partisan poll-watching. Republicans have openly organized to expand poll-watching. This will likely involve anti-democracy activists “tailgating” in shifts around drop-boxes, and then filming or confronting voters who they believe are vulnerable to intimidation.

Escalating intimidation against election workers
Election officials, who have faced many threats since 2020, are warning about continued targeting by anti-democracy groups. This raises the possibility of contentious protests during vote counting, as well as digital attacks and doxxing against election workers.

Unpredictable paramilitary mobilizations driven by misinformation
Since 2020, monitoring has shown that many paramilitary groups mobilize in response to rapidly spreading rumors on social media. This has made it especially hard to predict where and why they may show up. While data from the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project shows that paramilitary activity peaked in 2020, ACLED has also recorded rising anti-LGBTQ+ activity from these groups. This is a warning sign that such groups may be ready to mobilize in response to misinformation about elections.

Potential manipulation of electoral processes from within
In some locations, people who have publicly doubted or denied the 2020 election results are now in official roles, making key decisions on elections administration, ballot counting, and election certification. Especially where results are close, we may see a renewed effort at procedural gambits like lawsuits, refusal to certify valid elections, and other manipulations in an effort to delegitimize electoral results.

Candidates may not concede in the event of a loss
Former President Trump is reportedly laying the groundwork to challenge midterm election results in multiple swing states, advocating the use of cynical lawsuits to subvert democracy through the courts. Some candidates, like Arizona governorship candidate Kari Lake, have already signaled that they may not be willing to concede. Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson’s campaign is paying a law firm — that was associated with the 2020 scheme to reverse the election — for “recount consulting.”

High alert for post-election violence in multiple election scenarios
Due to a high volume of vote-by-mail ballots, it is likely that we will not learn all election results on Nov. 8th. This may create a window of time for anti-democracy groups to act out, especially if candidates fail to concede or claim their election was rigged. Polling places where votes are being counted could be targets. This raises the possibility of an uncertain post-election period in which multiple extremist factions could attempt to exploit and heighten the chaotic situation to interfere with the count of every American vote.

What Can We Do?

Document and report voter intimidation.

To document, capture links and/or screenshots of activity you see online or videos and photos of activity you witness in person, if safely possible.

To report voter intimidation:

• Contact NAACP Legal Defense Fund through this form;
• Use the nationwide, nonpartisan voter protection hotlines from the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law:

English: 866-OUR-VOTE
Spanish/English: 888-VE-Y-VOTA
Arabic/English: 844-YALLA-US
Asian Languages/English: 888-API-VOTE

• Voters with disabilities who face voter intimidation and/or accessibility problems can use resources from The Arc:

Call The Arc’s hotline at 866–687–8683
Use this form for online reporting

• The ACLU advises reporting incidents to your local elections office;
• If it’s in the Pacific Northwest or Mountain West, and involves bigoted or anti-democracy groups, you can also give Western States Center a heads up at info@wscpdx.org.

Work to prioritize a free and fair election.

As organizers and activists, we recognize the importance of aligning civil society and local government for election protection and community safety. In the last weeks of the election, we’re working to assist our community partners in the following constructive ways:

• We must lead with statements of our values. Speaking clearly and collectively about our values is important to set community expectations, as in this past Oregon example.

Paramilitary and anti-democracy activity poses a challenge to our values of inclusive democracy. We won’t be intimidated by groups that use threats, intimidation, and even violence to chill democratic practice, threaten community safety, and undermine civil society.

We believe in a country that includes everyone, and protects the right of every person to live, love, work, and worship free from fear and bigotry.

We value accountable democratic practice, and commit to working together to defend democracy and protect our democratic institutions.

We value human rights, human dignity, and human life, and those values are more important than our ideology.

• Organize to ask for proactive statements condemning voter intimidation and political violence from law enforcement, prosecutors, mayors, governors, and other local leaders. Leaders should speak forcefully about values of democracy and inclusion, provide clarity around the process of reporting voter intimidation and incidents of violence (including for voters who may not be comfortable calling 911), and commit to using the power of their offices to counter these threats. For example, we were glad to see this press conference in Philadelphia in 2020, and this recent article about plans for election protection in Maricopa County, making it very clear that election protection is the priority and voter intimidation will not be tolerated.
• Work toward alignment among local government leaders and civil society. Unity among government and community on issues of voter intimidation and political violence can significantly reduce anti-democracy activity. It is not necessary to reach full agreement on every issue in order to clearly stand up for election protection, insist that election results must be respected, and denounce voter intimidation. Community-based organizations should also consider how they can send messages of support to elections administrators and elected officials who make proactive statements.
• Prepare your base for safety measures around voting as part of GOTV efforts. Reach out to ensure everyone knows the rules about behavior at polling places, and where to report vigilante or paramilitary activity and voter intimidation as listed in our Resources section below. You may want to consider organizing March to the Polls events, ballot parties or a buddy system for safety.
• Plan ahead for a response to political violence. Strengthen relationships among community groups, faith communities, business leaders, and elected officials so that if political violence occurs, it is possible to draw on those relationships for a more unified response that prioritizes de-escalation, safety, and defending democracy.

Additional Resources

• The Georgetown Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection has fact sheets on key laws preventing voter intimidation and dealing with unlawful militias for each state, as well as a new resource discussing “Constitutional Sheriffs” and Elections to debunk the idea that sheriffs have the power to intervene in elections.
• Information Gaps and Misinformation in the 2022 Elections, Brennan Center for Justice
• Midterms 2022: The Poll Observer Landscape, States United Democracy Center
• A Bid For Power: Mapping the Electoral Far-Right in the Midterm Elections, Political Research Associates
• Strengthening Local Government Against Bigoted and Anti-Democracy Movements, Western States Center
• Violence Prevention & De-escalation Resources for State & Local Officials, 2021, Bridging Divides Initiative and partners
• Hate in Elections: How Racism and Bigotry Threaten Election Integrity in the United States, 2020, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
• Building U.S. Resilience to Political Violence: A Globally Informed Framework for Analysis and Action, 2019, Over Zero

ONE FINAL THING…

Take a deep breath, and remember: What we are seeing is the backlash against our enormous victories. It is a testament to how much change we have already made, and how much more we have the power to create. If you are feeling anxious, revisit stories and songs that give you hope. Some of our favorites:

• Our Inclusive Democracy Culture Lab cohort’s Spotify playlist
• Something is Happening Here: The Emergence of a Movement, Eric K. Ward
• We also love Joy to the Polls and their awesome Instagram page!

“I think we learned a lot from the experience. I was really happy that in the end, after going through this pressure-cooker experience, we were able to win. That was very, very significant. It gave people in the community at least a moment of respite. And the campaign changed the direction of my life.”

~ Thalia Zepatos

In nine months of No on 9 Remembered, we’ve discussed the historical context of this vicious ballot measure and what was at stake. We’ve revisited the deadly violence. We’ve told stories from many diverse communities — from African American, Latinx, and Asian Pacific Islander leaders to police officers, journalists, faith leaders, and Republicans. We’ve profiled some of the many cultural, educational, and organizing innovations from that time.

But we haven’t yet told the story of what it was like to be inside the campaign as a full-time staff organizer. Or the story of the lawsuit that eventually shut the Oregon Citizens Alliance down. This month, we finish our project with movement heroes Thalia Zepatos, Catherine Stauffer, and Charlie Hinkle, and offer a recap of voices from all 30 stories.

STORY 28: TOWARDS MOVEMENT-BUILDING CAMPAIGNS

While many in the community and the campaign were fiercely debating whether to focus narrowly on winning 50%+1 on Election Day — or more broadly, on ending homophobia and securing everyone’s civil rights — there were some who worked hard in every moment to find ways to do both. Thalia Zepatos believed it was possible to build a long-term movement to secure and defend civil rights through the unchosen crucible of short-term ballot measure campaigns. For four decades, she has worked to make that vision a reality. Read more.

STORY 29: THE LAWSUIT THAT SHUTS DOWN THE OCA

Lawsuits couldn’t prevent the costly political campaigns required to defeat the Oregon Citizens Alliance’s hateful measures at the ballot box. But a lawsuit brought by Catherine Stauffer — a 22 -year-old radical activist — ended up holding the OCA accountable, sending Lon Mabon to jail for 42 days, and eventually shutting the organization down. Read more.

STORY 30: MANY VOICES, ONE MESSAGE

Thirty stories for the 30 years since we defeated Measure 9 — look back on the many voices that helped us remember.

“We have to become a movement that understands the long arc of history. Learning from earlier struggles teaches us discipline and helps prevent the sin of despair. In a time where some seek to erase or deny our nation’s history, remembering the stories that are part of the movement for inclusive democracy is a powerful act of resistance and redemption.”

~ Eric K. Ward

A year ago, when Eric first suggested that we commemorate the 30th anniversary of this epic campaign, we knew it would be deeply relevant to today’s fight for inclusive democracy. We didn’t know that relevance would grow frighteningly deeper every day — with rising political violence and attacks on trans and queer rights, once again, building power for a white Christian nationalist vision of America.

As we offer this final month of stories, we thank and honor all who gave so generously of their time, their insights, and their hearts as part of No on 9 Remembered. It wasn’t easy for any of us who lived through that time to revisit it. But with each conversation, we tasted the courage and creativity, the depth of commitment, the breadth of solidarity — and it all felt worth it, once more.

These stories from 30 years ago illustrate that every one of us has a stake in defending inclusive democracy — grounded in our values and what we choose to affirm through our courage and visibility. We hope that No on 9 Remembered encourages you to be brave. To take action and take heart.

To remembering the past and shaping the future,

Holly J. Pruett, Senior Fellow
Eric K. Ward, Senior Advisor
No on 9 Remembered Co-Curators

1992’s hateful anti-LGBTQ Measure 9 mobilized the LGBTQ community like never before. But it also activated a huge cross-section of straight people.

Many straight folks joined the No on 9 struggle, regardless of the risk of being perceived as LGBTQ. And it was a risk. Homophobic hate crimes were soaring and being fired or denied housing for being gay was perfectly legal in most of the state.

“People would call me homophobic slurs for years afterwards, in rural areas where I travelled to speak, accusing me of running the secret homosexual agenda. I considered it a point of pride.”
~ Eric K. Ward

“Straight But Not Narrow” buttons were commonplace during the No on 9 campaign. Some straight allies believed that message reinforced homophobia, adding potency to the idea that you wouldn’t want to be thought of as gay. Others saw the buttons as an important form of solidarity, making visible that it wasn’t just gay people who supported LGBTQ rights. For some, it was simply a safer, more comfortable way to take a small stand against discrimination.

“The buttons represented people grappling with their own homophobia,” Eric Ward remembers. “It was super important to have a starter step — but, at the same time, the popularity of ‘straight but not narrow’ was a measure of how open homophobia was, even among many who would vote No on 9. I watched some folks move to the full empowerment of wearing a pink triangle pin that signaled, ‘I no longer give a fuck if you think I’m straight or gay.’”

For some, having visibly straight people — church leaders, parents, business people — speak out against Measure 9 was essential to the defeat of the measure, and to building a stronger community consensus against anti-gay discrimination. Others felt that leaders in the No on 9 campaign were trying to silence, sideline, or sanitize voices from the LGBTQ community.

We explore these dynamics in this month’s stories about the common ground found and created by straight people taking up the attack on the LGBTQ community as an affront to their own values, a fight they could not sit out. Each story offers a unique prism on how this epic battle for civil and human rights can impart lessons for today’s fight for inclusive democracy.

STORY 25: STRAIGHT BUT NOT NARROW

“The OCA represents a much more fundamental threat to all of us. They have attacked reproductive rights. They have attacked affirmative action. That’s why I’m walking, even though I’m not a lesbian.” This statement by Kelley Weigel, captured for posterity in the documentary Ballot Measure 9, reflects one place on the continuum of reasons straight people joined the fight against Measure 9. Read more.

STORY 23: PFLAG

As more and more Oregonians came out in response to Measure 9, Parents & Friends of Lesbians & Gays (PFLAG) offered a supportive sanctuary for those whose own families rejected them, for parents struggling to understand, and for family members wanting to take action in defense of their gay kids. In Oregon, a few pioneering parents had already made their mark as activists in the 1970s. To honor the role of PFLAG during the Measure 9 campaign and today, during a new generation of attacks on trans youth and the LGBTQ community, we tell the story of Ann & Bill Shepherd and what they came to call their “life’s work.”

STORY 27: BUSINESS ALLIES

Measure 9 marked a turning point for the business community in Oregon, says longtime leader Eric Friedenwald-Fishman. “Folks who had been nervous during Measure 8, who thought they didn’t have any gay people in their workplace, had a visceral reaction against Measure 9. This is wrong. This is not who we are as a state.” Read more about how Eric’s fledgling business, Metropolitan Group, rallied support for the No on 9 campaign.

“Today when I go to the Businesses Against Discrimination luncheon… the feeling is that we’re in a state where you’d think every business has always shown up to support their employees, and said, ‘This is what we stand for.’ That was not always the reality, of course. But the dynamic has clearly shifted from ‘I don’t know about this,’ to ‘This is a fundamental thing, to stand with all people in our community.’”
~ Eric Friedenwald-Fishman

These varied efforts 30 years ago illustrate that every one of us has a stake in defending inclusive democracy — grounded in our values and what we choose to affirm through our courage and visibility.

To each person committed to defending democracy and all who are wondering what is asked of us in these fractious times, we hope that No on 9 Remembered encourages you to be brave. To take action and take heart.

To remembering the past and shaping the future,

Holly J. Pruett, Senior Fellow
No on 9 Remembered Co-Curator

P.S. Next month marks the end of our 10-month narrative history project. Catch up on the stories you may have missed. Big thanks to ShoutOUT, the digital news outlet now serializing No on 9 Remembered in weekly posts, and to GLAPN, the Gay & Lesbian Archives of the Pacific NW, for organizing a series of No on 9 commemorative events.

The grassroots effort to defeat the hateful anti-LGBTQ Measure 9 in 1992 reflected a profusion of creativity, commitment, and courage that collectively reached thousands of Oregonians, solidifying No votes and in some cases, changing hearts and minds.

New organizations sprang up as vehicles for those who wanted to take a different approach to the entire campaign. Others were created to focus on a particular strategy or audience. Some initiatives, like the extensive organizing within the labor movement and the collaborative Oregon Democracy Project, tapped into the skills and relationships of existing organizations.

Eric K. Ward was involved in several of these educational efforts — speaking on panels and radio programs, writing intersectional analysis, and helping to sponsor the Walk for Love & Justice.

“I saw firsthand how campaigns can help to develop leaders and build a movement. Personally, I Iearned how to speak to the public, in part through speaking out against Measure 9. Being invited into this statewide and regional progressive movement gave us, as a group based in Eugene, a lot of added credibility. More importantly, the interplay of all these organizations and efforts created cross-community solidarity and provided folks a broader understanding of the authoritarian attack on civil rights and democracy.”
~ Eric K. Ward

This month’s stories are about bridge-building — the courageous risks and personal truth-telling that helped to defeat one of the harshest antigay measures ever put to American voters. Each story offers a unique prism on how this epic battle for civil and human rights can impart lessons for today’s fight for inclusive democracy.

STORY 22: ORGANIZING ORGANIZED LABOR

“I was so proud to be out and loud in my union,” Robert Doyle told us through our Contact Form. Learn more about how Oregon’s public employee unions helped lead the fight against Measure 9, through our conversations with union leaders then and now, and our reprint of organizer Beckie Capoferri’s section in NGLTF’s 1993 Fight the Right Action Kit.

STORY 23: EDUCATIONAL OUTREACH

“Teaching people to just think about it,” was the heart of the work, Anne Sweet says. “Helping them to make a personal connection, how Measure 9 would negatively impact them if this passed.” Read about some of the forms that outreach took, including the anti-oppression awareness Anne and others fostered in trainings and community settings; Elaine Vasquez and Barbara Bernstein’s video, “Fighting for Our Lives;” the Oregon Speak Out Project; and the Coalition for Human Dignity’s intersectional publications.

STORY 24: WALK FOR LOVE & JUSTICE

The Walk for Love & Justice proclaimed, “We will walk proudly and with purpose — taking the agenda out of the hands of the OCA and going directly to the people of Oregon, asking them to stand with us for justice and against hate.” Read more about this landmark event in our conversation with organizer Anne Galisky and participant Kelley Weigel.

“You are out on the front line of our movement. This Walk is about moral and spiritual values. You are walking in the tradition of the civil rights movement. You are not alone — every one of the 25 million American gays, lesbians, and bisexuals marches with you today.”
~ Urvashi Vaid (1958–2022), then executive director of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, at the kickoff of the Walk for Love & Justice

This effort 30 years ago illustrates that every one of us can do something to be part of defending inclusive democracy — grounded in our values and what we choose to affirm through our courage and visibility.

To each person committed to defending democracy and all who are wondering what is asked of us in these fractious times, we hope that No on 9 Remembered encourages you to be brave. To take action and take heart.

To remembering the past and shaping the future,

Holly J. Pruett, Senior Fellow
No on 9 Remembered Co-Curator

P.S. A big shout out to ShoutOUT, the digital news outlet now serializing No on 9 Remembered in weekly posts. Western States Center also thanks GLAPN, the Gay & Lesbian Archives of the Pacific NW, for inviting us to share No on 9 Remembered at their “Lessons of Measure 9” event last month. Wish you could have attended? Watch the event recording where we provide an overview of Measure 9, followed by a fantastic panel featuring Kathleen Saadat, Ramón Ramírez, Anne Galisky, and Pat Young (all featured on our site). Follow the GLAPN Calendar for other No on 9 commemorative events.

The cultural power of music and humor was essential to surviving the attack of Measure 9 and surely earned some No on 9 votes. This month we remember some of the performers and satirists who gave us a break from the deadly seriousness of Measure 9; the Portland Gay Men’s Chorus and Portland Lesbian Choir whose visibility lifted spirits and opened hearts; and the origins of Artists for a Hate Free America.

One of the four pillars of Western States Center’s work is Shifting Culture — convening culture-makers to use culture as a vehicle for building power in non-traditional social change spaces. WSC Senior Adviser and recently transitioned Executive Director Eric K. Ward saw that modeled 30 years ago during the fight against Measure 9.

“Measure 9 was a cultural call to our values. It was culture that allowed us to organize for political power. Seeking the political power of a majority voting No on 9 was a way of expressing what most of us thought of as a cultural commitment.”
~ Eric K. Ward

Eric likens it to the Two-Tone Movement in British cities in the 1970s and ’80s “where the music you listened to, the shows you went to, were because of your values.” As a Black punk rocker in Eugene in the early ’90s, improv theater was not Eric’s primary scene. But he never missed a WYMPROV! show. “I saw WYMPROV! dozens of times,” he told me. “I didn’t care that it wasn’t a punk rock show — it was cultural space I needed to be in.”

“The culture was about sustaining us in the midst of horrifying things,” Eric says. “To remember what we were fighting for. The stories that were made in that moment are part of that.”

This month’s stories are about the culture-shapers amidst the chorus of Oregonians from all walks of life who, together, defeated one of the harshest antigay measures ever put to American voters. Each story offers a unique prism on how this epic battle for civil and human rights can impart lessons for today’s fight for inclusive democracy.

STORY 19: MAKING FUN

“There were some nights when it was just amazing to be alive,” says Gregory Franklyn, who performed at an iconic downtown Portland club and produced ground-breaking LGBTQ cable access shows during the fight against Measure 9. Read more from Gregory along with stories from another of the era’s out performers and producers, Howie Bierbaum, with archival material from WYMPROV founder Sally Sheklow (1950–2022) and the Special Righteousness Committee’s M. Dennis Moore (1952–2012).

STORY 20: SINGING FOR OUR LIVES

“You can’t expect everyone to be instantly transformed,” says Portland Gay Men’s chorus founding member Gary Coleman. “It’s not about that, but it’s about that visibility that’s consistent, and the message of love — which is what we always sing about — that cuts through.” Read about the choruses’ role in the No on 9 campaign, along with more memories from longtime Portland Gay Men’s Chorus members and a founding member of the Portland Lesbian Choir who now sings with PGMC.

STORY 21: ARTISTS AGAINST HATE

“We tried to figure out, how do we connect this incredibly outrageous story, of the Oregon Citizens Alliance, with the rest of the world?” remembers Sarah Stephens. Newly arrived in Oregon from her work with the Hollywood Women’s Political Caucus, Sarah helped to bring national celebrity and media attention to the campaign, leading to the formation of Artists for a Hate Free America. Read more.

The response to Ballot Measure 9 is a story of and for all Oregonians, but the big and small acts that may have gone unseen, the everyday gestures of kindness or courage that created more space for inclusion.

This effort 30 years ago illustrates that every one of us — not just the cultural icons we know and remember — can do something to be part of defending inclusive democracy. It’s a cultural commitment, grounded in our values and what we choose to affirm through our courage and visibility.

“It’s still important to be visible and your true self, no matter what the struggle is. Living your truth and being honest is still a core truth.”
~ Howie Bierbaum

To each person committed to defending democracy and all who are wondering what is asked of us in these fractious times, we hope that No on 9 Remembered encourages you to be brave. To take action and take heart.

To remembering the past and shaping the future,

Holly J. Pruett, Senior Fellow
No on 9 Remembered Co-Curator

P.S. The Moth Radio Hour ends every show with this disclaimer: “Moth stories are true as remembered and affirmed by the storyteller.” That can be said as well about the stories and editorial choices presented on No on 9 Remembered. Italian oral historian Alessandro Portelli explains discrepancies in historical memories as “not caused by faulty recollections . . . but actively and creatively generated by memory and imagination in an effort to make sense of crucial events.” Our hope is that the stories in No on 9 Remembered contribute to the meaning-making still so necessary as we grapple with the crucial events of our present time, connected as they are to what we saw during Measure 9. Read more.