3666 - Can The Left Build Real Power Before It's Too Late? w/ Yotam Marom

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Majority Report with Sam Seder

Episode #3666 – Can The Left Build Real Power Before It’s Too Late?

Guest: Yotam Marom (Author: For Louder Days: Reaching Beyond a Politics of Powerlessness)

Date: June 15, 2026

---

Episode Overview

This episode’s central theme is the challenge of building and sustaining leftist political power in America when many movement participants are haunted by a sense of powerlessness. Sam Seder and guests (primarily author and organizer Yotam Marom) zoom in on the lessons from Occupy Wall Street, examine the pitfalls that beset progressive movements, and discuss how left movements can overcome internal and external barriers to construct real, durable power. Marom, whose new book is both a memoir and a guide for activists, draws on personal and organizational experience to outline how the left can move “beyond a politics of powerlessness.”

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. News Recap and Irreverent Banter

• Brief recap of international and domestic news (Trump-Iran deal, Israel-Lebanon conflict, G7, UK social media ban for under-16s, etc.) [(05:52)].
• Lively Knicks championship discussion sets a casual and relatable tone [(03:12) – (05:41)].

---

2. Introduction to Yotam Marom & The Wildfire Project

• Marom highlights the Wildfire Project’s origins post-Occupy Wall Street, focusing on training and facilitating movement organizations to build infrastructure and group dynamics to enhance activist effectiveness.
  • “Our movements don’t have a lot of infrastructure, don’t have a lot of institutions. We need to train.” — Yotam Marom [(21:41)]
• Wildfire boosts new movement orgs with skills in political education, strategy, and leadership development.

---

3. The Legacy of Occupy Wall Street

• Occupy changed America’s political conversation about class, popularizing the “99% vs 1%” frame.
  • “The big thing is… [movements] change the public’s common sense about something… What Occupy Wall Street did was change the common sense about class.” — Yotam Marom [(24:48)]
  • “You don’t get a Bernie Sanders run without that shift.” — Yotam Marom [(24:48)]
• Occupy’s refusal of formal leadership made it both intoxicatingly democratic and structurally fragile — its openness energized people, but lack of strategy and accountability led to burnout and lost opportunities.
  • “All the things that made Occupy Wall Street this magical thing were also its self-destruct mechanism.” — Yotam Marom [(28:40)]
  • The allergy to leadership was both an act of resistance to the hierarchical status quo and a trap.

---

4. The Politics of Powerlessness

A) Where Powerlessness Comes From

• Movements that expect to lose become conflict-averse, avoid crafting real strategies, and focus inward on interpersonal dynamics (sometimes to a fault).
  • “I think it comes from a feeling that we're not going to win anyway… If you don't think you're going to win, there's a lot of stuff that's easier not to do, like the hard work of crafting a strategy.” — Yotam Marom [(33:09)]
• When the chance of victory seems remote, internal fights, purity tests, and anxiety around leadership flourish.

B) Group Dynamics and Negative Feedback Loops

• “If we're too far from the enemy to do them any real damage, then we find enemies in the room instead.” — Yotam Marom [(36:03)]
• Movements can devolve into therapy or self-validation spaces, rather than mass movements capable of changing the world.
  • Emma Vigeland: “It's like you're on an elliptical as opposed to hiking a mountain.” [(38:23)]

---

5. Solutions: How the Left Can Build Real Power

A) Truth-Telling and Hard Choices

• Strategy requires ruthlessly honest self-assessment, setting priorities, and being willing to leave some battles unfought to win meaningful victories.
  • Story: Chinatown/Queens tenant org that made the painful strategic choice to abandon some campaigns to concentrate efforts for bigger impact, eventually fueling victories for DSA candidates [(40:22)].
  • “Strategy…really requires being in conflict with each other and being able to make one choice over a bunch of other options.” — Yotam Marom [(42:42)]
• Fear of loss—disappointing allies, abandoning constituent groups, and risking organizational cohesion—is often what blocks this honesty.

B) Acknowledging Leadership and Power

• Every movement, no matter how “horizontal,” has power structures; pretending otherwise prevents accountability and growth.
  • “It's way worse to be in an environment where people are not honest about the power dynamics than one in which people are honest…” — Yotam Marom [(48:06)]
• Embracing, rather than hiding, leadership roles allows for the training of new leaders and the healthy transfer of power.

C) Identity and Inclusion

• Identity politics is a double-edged sword—vital for understanding oppression and building inclusive movements, but dangerous when wielded as a tool for internal policing rather than coalition-building.
  • “Movements that are, feel powerless…tend to use identity as a way to bludgeon each other.” — Yotam Marom [(51:43)]
• Mass movements must resist using identity as a gatekeeping tool that shrinks rather than grows their base.

D) Belonging as a Means, Not an End

• Real belonging is essential, but mustn’t become the sole focus—healthy movements create belonging in pursuit of external, transformative goals, not just for internal warmth.
  • “A movement that's healthy, that's interested in power, it understands that people do need to feel connected and belonging and our spaces do need to feel healthy. But real, actual belonging and dignity and connection and…survival in our society is going to happen because we can build mass movements that actually win.” — Yotam Marom [(59:19)]

---

6. Love, Truth, and Movement Culture

• Marom advocates for “turning towards each other” (courageous honesty and enduring solidarity) as an act of love, even when it’s uncomfortable.
  • “When you love something, you take responsibility for it…we really just have to learn how to tell the truth.” — Yotam Marom [(63:48)]
• Strategy, internal health, and the ability to win all depend on this ethic.
• Seder explores why the right can be organizationally dysfunctional and still effective—their goals require only narrow, top-down coordination, not deep mass buy-in as the left must cultivate [(65:05)-(67:25)].

---

7. Electoral Politics and Movement Organizing

• Electoral wins (e.g., NYC DSA candidates) require both street activism and movement groundwork—each is symbiotic, not separate.
  • “You don't get a Zoran [Mamdani] without movements laying the ground for that. And you also definitely don't win this agenda without movements in the streets fighting the opponents…” — Yotam Marom [(72:49)]
• True left power means never “settling in” after small wins, but always pushing forward.

---

8. Role of Independent Media

• Independent media, like Majority Report, is a crucial part of the movement “ecosystem”:
  • Changing common sense
  • Telling the truth and going deeper than mainstream media
  • Supporting movement strategy by fostering honest public conversation
  • “Ultimately it comes down to being able and willing to tell the truth. And I think that's a big role for our media.” — Yotam Marom [(78:00)]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “All the things that made Occupy Wall Street this magical thing were also its self-destruct mechanism.” — Marom [(28:40)]
• “If we're too far from the enemy to really do them any real damage...we find enemies in the room instead. We find enemies in each other. Sometimes enemies in ourselves.” — Marom [(36:03)]
• “Strategy…really requires being in conflict with each other and being able to make one choice over a bunch of other options.” — Marom [(42:42)]
• “It's way worse to be in an environment where people are not honest about the power dynamics than one in which people are honest…” — Marom [(48:06)]
• “Movements…that don't have an orientation towards power…start to feel like the most important thing is our feeling and sense of belonging and safety inside our spaces. Movements that are healthy, that are interested in power, understand that people do need to feel connected…But real belonging…is going to happen because we build mass movements that actually win shit.” — Marom [(59:19)]
• “When we decide to love something or someone, then we tell it the truth.” — Marom [(63:50)]
• “You don't get a Zoran [Mamdani] without movements laying the ground for that. And you also definitely don't win this agenda without movements in the streets fighting the opponents…” — Marom [(72:49)]

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [21:41] – Introduction of Yotam Marom and Wildfire Project
• [24:48] – Occupy Wall Street legacy
• [28:40] – The “politics of powerlessness” and Occupy’s internal contradictions
• [40:22] – Story: Tenant organizing, strategic honesty, and DSA victory
• [48:06] – Power, “rank,” and the problem with hidden hierarchies
• [51:43] – Identity politics as tool or bludgeon
• [59:19] – Belonging, atomization, and movement-building
• [63:50] – The importance of love and honesty in group dynamics
• [72:49] – Electoral politics and symbiosis with movement-building
• [78:00] – Media’s role: changing common sense and telling the truth

---

Conclusion

This episode is a thoughtful, often personal exploration of why leftist movements so often sabotage their own power—and, crucially, how they can break the cycle. Through stories and analysis, Marom offers a toolkit for activists and organizers: embrace truth, make hard, strategic choices, acknowledge real power structures, intentionally grapple with identity, and forge belonging rooted in outward struggle, not just inward comfort. Only by doing so can the left move “beyond a politics of powerlessness” and build the durable power needed to shape society.

For more, check out Yotam Marom’s For Louder Days: Reaching Beyond a Politics of Powerlessness.

---

Transcript

[Sam Cedar]

The Majority Report with Sam Cedar. The destiny of America is always safer in the hands of the people than in the conference rooms of any elite.

[Yotam Marom]

They are unanimous in their hate for me and I welcome their hatred.

[Sam Cedar]

We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought by the military industrial complex. The Majority Report with Sam Cedar and I get the feeling you've been cheated. It is Monday, June 15, 2026. My name is Sam Cedar. This is the five time award winning Majority Report. We are broadcasting live steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, usa. On the program today, Yotam Meram, organizer, facilitator, writer. His new book for Louder Days, Reaching Beyond a Politics of Powerlessness. Also on the program today, Trump finally capitulates US And Iran strike a deal for a potential long term end to the war and a reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. Meanwhile, Israel refuses to end its assault and occupation of Lebanon, jeopardizing that said deal. G7 summit begins as our allies plan for a world with a completely rogue and unreliable us Keir Starmer says Britain will ban under 16 year olds from using social media. Mitch McConnell admitted to the hospital. Sure it's just a checkup us to lose its measles elimination status as a Utah outbreak. It's about to hit 1 years old. TRUMP now insists that the same save act must be attached to the FISA renewal. DOJ okays the Paramount Warner Brothers merger, State AG still to have their say as well as European regulators. Trump's White House cage match a dud but for a few Paramount plus members and of course their owners, people like Trump for instance, who own a part of the ufc. Trump picks another one of his personal defense attorneys to the DOJ heading the Southern district of New York. And lastly the Knicks. All this and more on today's Majority Report.

[Yotam Marom]

It is.

[Emma Vigeland]

Go new york, go new york, go. Anyway,

[Sam Cedar]

Casual Monday. Some people have not stopped drinking.

[Matt]

Nothing about that was casual.

[Emma Vigeland]

I made the sunglasses choice at the last minute, at the last minute to have Mike Breen on the call, Patrick Ewing have this weight lifted off of him. You get Spike Lee to see it in real time before he passes. Clyde gets to see it all. Larry David gets to see it all. People will say that the spurs collapsed but the Knicks came back from me but down double digit leads. They came back with all all playoffs against the Cavs across the board they were clutch. Jalen Brunson on another level, mentally Towns finished with with the highest plus minus in a single postseason in NBA history. OG Anunoby. Relentless Bridges, efficient, workmanlike, heart, energetic, passionate with rebounding. Shout out to Jose Alvarado. Shout out to Mitchell Robinson. Shout out to Landry Shammit. Shout out to the whole bench. Everyone contributed. Fox and castle were like 4 of 25. The Knicks are champions.

[Yotam Marom]

So.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yeah, that's all.

[Sam Cedar]

So that's the ufc. Is that the UFC you're talking about? Well, there we go. Hey, thanks for joining us today, folks. And we'll see you tomorrow. People are asking if you're okay. So Emma wanted to start with the Knicks. We didn't pull a clip for the start of the Knicks, but now we've got that. There we go.

[Matt]

My friend texted me that it sounds like you're making a case to a judge.

[Emma Vigeland]

And you know what? I won the case. I won the case. I'm off scot free, baby. I know what crime I'm being charged with. Loving my my team and my city and the people in my life. Persecuted Knicks fan on the cross no more. I am reborn.

[Sam Cedar]

We all right.

[Emma Vigeland]

I'm done.

[Sam Cedar]

Okay.

[Matt]

Or you get used to it. Once you get closer to 18 of them.

[Sam Cedar]

Yeah, yeah, exactly. It starts there.

[Matt]

Start to expect it.

[Sam Cedar]

Yeah, it's true. It's true. Now this is fun. I remember. I remember back in the. What was the 1950s. Yeah. JoJo White era. Yeah. Oh, read JoJo. Bob Cousy, greatest ball handler all time. All right. Okay, let's get to some of the other news. The parade will be on Thursday. All right, let's go into this. So Donald Trump has announced and JD Vance has claimed that the United States has digitally signed an agreement with the Iranians. The Iranians, however, I mean, this is the only way that I even

[Yotam Marom]

are

[Sam Cedar]

entertaining the belief that this is somewhat real, that the Iranians have announced that they'll be assigning on Friday in Switzerland on this agreement. Still, I mean, we had an agreement once, so it's hard to know what this is going to mean, but for the time being, it is good news. Here is Pete Hegseth just yesterday claiming that none of this was even necessary because we already controlled the strait of hormones. By the way, I think your viewers need to remember Project Freedom never stopped and we've run 125 million barrels of oil through the straits and Iran couldn't

[Emma Vigeland]

do anything about it.

[Sam Cedar]

How many ships from Iran have transit our blockade? 0.

[Emma Vigeland]

0.

[Sam Cedar]

We have controlled the straits this entire time. You're going to negotiate with them to immediately and gradually. So, okay, so We've controlled it the entire time. We had nothing to negotiate with them except for we've negotiated it and now opened it up. Because of course the Iranians also had control over the straight of Hormuz.

[Emma Vigeland]

That's why Trump truthed out like that. Open the effing strait and threats to essentially annihilate Iran because we had controlled

[Yotam Marom]

it the whole time.

[Matt]

Told you, totally bought into it.

[Sam Cedar]

Jeremy Scahill over at Drop site had been reporting over the past couple of days that the Iranian negotiating team was meeting with a team of psychiatrists and psychologists, I should say, to give them a sense of how to approach Donald Trump. And according to Scahill, the Iranians, without any sort of irony or contrary to their s posting on different sites, were not relaying that this was their strategy as a way of owning Donald Trump, but rather that they believe that they're dealing with someone who has diminished mental capacities and this was just the best way to get to a deal. And it seems to have worked. Perhaps we could do something like that domestically too, but that remains to be seen. Here is Donald Trump yesterday at 4:30 announcing on truth Social the deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran is now complete. Congratulations to all. I hereby fully authorize the toll free opening of the Strait of Hormuz and simultaneously herewith authorize the immediate removal of the United States naval blockade ships of the world. Start your engines. Let the oil flow. President Donald J. Trump, he's very happy about.

[Emma Vigeland]

They should give him a little outfit like the way that the Nobel Peace Prize was given to him to make him think that he actually won the Nobel Peace Prize. They should give him like a little toll booth outfit you are. You get to control the Strait of Hormuz, buddy.

[Sam Cedar]

A ceremonial like toll gate that he can lift for himself.

[Matt]

I also authorized the open of the strait yesterday, but nobody seems to be talking about that.

[Sam Cedar]

The and you know, it's the objective truth of this and while I hesitate to say it, and it's not like Donald Trump is watching this show and is going to be embarrassed, but this was a total failure in every imaginable way possible, of course, starting with the killing of thousands of Iranian civilians. God knows the implications of some of the early bombings, particularly the ones that blew up the petroleum facilities outside of Tehran. It was incredibly costly for the United

[Yotam Marom]

States,

[Sam Cedar]

those who are terribly concerned about our weapons arsenal. It was incredibly costly for our weapons arsenal which we can be sure that we're going to be paying to rebuild in the coming years. And it has probably we'll have to see what the actual deal says. But we'll end up providing for Iran access to their billions of funds. I've seen reports up to $25 billion. It's their money. But from the perspective of supposedly the agenda of those who wanted to wage this war, it is complete, utter beyond failure. Even if it is legitimate for Iran to have access to their money, from the perspective of those who thought this was a good idea, total failure. And even from the perspective of keeping Iran from their nukes, here is Jonathan Karl reminding everybody, which we all knew from the very beginning, this is number two, agree never to have or make a nuclear weapon. But whit, there is nothing new about that. In fact, in the very first paragraph of the nuclear agreement that was negotiated by President Obama more than a decade ago, Iran makes that promise. That was an agreement, of course, that President Trump tore up in his first term.

[Yotam Marom]

Whip. All right, John, our thanks to you tonight. Now, to the history.

[Emma Vigeland]

There you go.

[Sam Cedar]

I mean, and I will say this. You know, kudos to ABC for adding the bare minimum context to all of this, which is the supposed goal of this war was to get us back to where we were in terms of Iran's nukes 10 years ago. And we were only in this place where there was a fear that they were restarting a nuclear weapons program because Donald Trump had tore up the deal. I mean, so all of this, the inflation, the coming potential food crises around the world, the ongoing inflation that may come from the sort of like, secondary products that come out of the Strait of Hormuz or products that are, that use the products that come out of the Strait of Hormuz, all of this a complete and utter waste of time. The only thing it did maybe was to get the Epstein files off the front page.

[Emma Vigeland]

And again, now they're in the front row at the UFC events.

[Sam Cedar]

Exactly. And, and, and, and again, you know, let's be clear. Who knows? I mean, I'm hesitant to even report this stuff because there's no, you know,

[Emma Vigeland]

because Israel is saying they're not, they're publicly posturing saying we're totally independent of the United States. The problem is that Iran has held firm and strengthened its position as it relates to Lebanon, where it wants a cessation of Israel's bombing of Lebanon. But additionally, they can hold the line in negotiations to ask for a withdrawal of ground troops from southern Lebanon, which would be just another strengthening of Iran's position and more that they would gain strategically versus the US And Israel than they would have prior to the war. And let's not forget, we also killed thousands of Iranians for Nothing, including over 100 girls at that girl school, kids at that girls school in Iran, like. And the environmental impact of the, of the war. We're immiserating our own population for this. But also the level of destabilization and blood that has been spilled for this because of Trump's own ego. I mean, it's just astonishing.

[Sam Cedar]

But let's hope that the deal holds and we're done with this. But time will tell. In a moment, we're going to be talking to Yotam Meram. He is an organizer, a facilitator, a writer of a new book entitled For Louder Reaching Beyond a Politics of Powerlessness. First, a couple words from our sponsors today. This episode is brought to you of the Majority Report, brought to you by Wild Grain. What is Wild Grain? It is fantastic. Wild Grain is the first baked from frozen subscription box for artisanal breads, seasonal pastries and fresh pastas. I don't care what box of food you have ever gotten. This is just really, I don't want to say life changing, but it's sort of life changing. Wild Grain will ship you frozen baked goods and fresh pasta. All you gotta do, you take it out of your freezer, you preheat your oven, you pop it in and it bakes the most amazing breads, cookies, croissants.

[Emma Vigeland]

Those croissants are unreal.

[Sam Cedar]

Crazy. It's really, really crazy. They're delicious. And there is nothing better than something that is fresh baked unless it's something that is fresh baked and you didn't have to actually do any of the mixing or any of that other stuff. Unlike many store bought options, Wild Grain uses simple ingredients you can pronounce, a slow fermentation process that can be easier on your belly, richer in nutrients and antioxidants. There's no preservatives, there's no shortcuts. Plus, all items conveniently bake in 25 minutes or less with no thawing required. It is so easy to have these fresh baked breads and what do you call biscuits and. Oh, it's, it really is amazing. I pop it in. I my big thing for now with Saul is to make him fresh baked croissants like within 10 minutes after you put it in. It takes about like 16 or 18 to 20 minutes, I think with the croissants, but within 10 minutes your whole apartment. I guess if you have a house, I don't know if the whole house, but the kitchen smells like Fresh baked breads. It's crazy. They have a gluten free box, they got a variety box, they got a vegan box and they have a new protein box. Imagine having fresh baked quality bread, bakery quality bread, I should say pastries and pasta at home without any trips to the store. Don't just take my word for it. They have over 40,000 five star reviews. They've been voted best food subscription box by USA Today for three years in a row. For a limited time, Wild Grain is offering you $30 off your first box plus free Croissants for Life when you go to wildgrain.com majority. Start your subscription today. That's $30 off your first box and free Croissants for Life when YOU visit wildgrain.com majority or you can use the promo code Majority at checkout. We started using Rocket Money. My sister first started using Rocket Money a while back and she's like, this is amazing. I can't believe how many subscriptions I have. And I went through the exact same thing. But I will say I have so many subscriptions over the course of so many years that I didn't pick up. That was like charging me. The really sneaky ones are like half year ones where you can, you know, you look back on your credit card for three months, you don't see it and then you get dinged. Rocket Money and we can't tell Brian's story anymore, but Brian used it to graze.

[Matt]

Well, I do have one. We can tell.

[Sam Cedar]

Okay.

[Matt]

When I started here, I was so nervous about like trying to find the right sources that I signed up for so many free trials of substacks. And then once we got me Rocket Money, I realized I've been paying for like probably 10 or 12 substacks that I've never read.

[Sam Cedar]

Rocket Money can track subscriptions and it has the ability to cancel unwanted ones with the with within the app. Literally with a few taps and you can save over it saved users over $880 million in canceled subscriptions. The app will also consolidate checking, savings, loans, investments into a single dashboard to give you a clear view of your financial picture. It is fantastic. I will say like a lot of the models of these subscriptions is basically hope that you sign up for it, forget that you have it, you cancel eight months away. Rocket Money is a personal finance app that helps you find and cancel unwanted subscriptions, monitors your spending, helps you lower your bills so you can grow your savings. Let Rocket Money help you reach your financial goals faster. [e-mail] Majority that's RocketMoney.com Majority Rocket Money.com Majority Quick break. When we come back, Yotam Maram, organizer, facilitator and author of For Louder Days Reaching Beyond a Politics of Powerlessness. We are back. Sam Cedar, Emma Vigland on the Majority Report. It is a pleasure to welcome to the program Yotam Marom. He is an organizer, facilitator, author of Four Louder Days. Reaching Beyond a Politics of Powerlessness should also say one of the founders of Wildfire Project. And I think this audience is familiar with Joshua Kahn Russell, who we've had on the program for years and years, was a facilitator with Wildfire. And tell us just let's just start with what is Wildfire, the Wildfire Project, just so that folks can get a notion of your background and from where you are writing this from.

[Yotam Marom]

Sure. Well, first of all, thanks for having me. I'm a huge fan. Wildfire, okay. I mean, Wildfire is in a bunch of transitions, but its role basically was to facilitate and train movement organizations that were coming up. I mean, it started at the sort of tail end of Occupy Wall street, basically identifying that, okay, this was a huge moment. There's a lot of momentum happening, but our movements don't have a lot of infrastructure, don't have a lot of institutions. We need to train. The organizations that were coming up in that time, like Occupy Homes in Minnesota was like an organization that was supporting people to basically resist the fork their foreclosures by using direct action. So we, you know, a bunch of organizations like that and we were doing political education and group, group dynamic work and stuff like that. That's most of my work as a facilitator now is supporting movement groups through their strategizing and their sort of group stuff.

[Sam Cedar]

Well, let's move I want to lose move into the book because I just want to give people an understanding because I'm not sure, I mean, I'm not sure how widely people understand that there is an infrastructure for the infrastructure. The book is about how to in many ways enhance the infrastructure and not necessarily the capital I infrastructure, but infrastructures that exist. And it's also a I think it's fair to call it like a part memoir. A lot of the lessons are filtered or almost all of them are filtered through your personal experience and that of others in developing the infrastructure of the movement. And the premise of the book is what happens to a movement when members of that movement accept their powerlessness. Let's just start, though, before we get into that broad Thing. Let's start with Occupy Wall Street. For much of what's been going on today, Occupy Wall street was sort of the beginning of that. I mean, I remember pre Occupy Wall street, and I know you were involved in, like, the marching against the Iraq war, and that movement was frustrating because it did not seem like it made a difference how many millions of people were brought out there. George W. Bush was like, I'm not. We're not running a focus group here, which is literally what he said. But talk about Occupy Wall street. And you had a sort of almost a dry run of Occupy Wall street in the weeks or I guess the months before. Just talk about that and then let's get into what was both effective and problematic about Occupy Wall Street.

[Yotam Marom]

Sure. Okay. Yeah, it is a fascinating time to be talking about Occupy Wall street again. Like, when I was writing the book, I was like, does anybody give a shit about Occupy Wall Street? And then. But yeah, there is this way that what we're seeing now is really only possible because of some of the stuff that happened there. So, yeah, I was involved in student movement stuff leading up to Occupy Wall street, and then part of a crew of people that had a street occupation called BLOO outside of City hall to try to stop the budget cuts that Bloomberg was ramming through summer of 2011. Like, really brutal. Schools, hospitals, clinics, firefighters. I mean, just like kind of everything across the map. And it was, you know, a failure, similar to what you're. How you're describing the anti war movement, which of course was important. And it was what radicalized me and brought lots of people into the movement and did a lot of things, but it didn't stop the war. And, you know, I sort of came up in a movement that felt generally like we were always going to be the underdogs and we were never really going to win and we were never really going to have power. And we can talk more about what that does to you when you feel that way and what it does to movements that feel that way. That's like what the book is about. But Occupy was this. Because I was around in the lead up to it, I ended up playing, you know, like a leadership role. Don't tell anybody because we didn't have leaders, but, you know, a role there. And it was my first experience feeling powerful, first experience, like feeling that a movement could be popular. And yeah, I mean, we can talk about that. Also failed in all sorts of ways, but it also succeeded in a bunch of ways. I think the big successes of Occupy brought many thousands of people into the movement, trained lots of leaders, set up a bunch of organizations that exist today, like I think laid ground for kind of a decade of movement moments since then that all also learned from our experiences in some ways doing things better than us. And I think the big thing is this is what movements are often really good for, is they change the common sense. They might not win clear tangible gains right away, but they change the public's common sense about something. And what Occupy Wall street did was change the common sense about class. I mean, the frame of the 99% versus the 1% is like a pretty big contribution to American society's conversation about politics. And you don't get like Bernie Sanders run without that shift. And I don't think you get a zoron win without that kind of shift.

[Emma Vigeland]

Go, go ahead, Sam then.

[Sam Cedar]

Well, I just want to say like in many ways the chickens have come home to roost. I mean, and you know, a 16 year arc in that respect. But the, and it's hard to sort of say, you know, with that knowledge and what you've just said in terms of like, you know, what it did in, as almost like a training program really in a networking event. I mean it, it, it's taken a long time, but it's initiated. And also the messaging was huge. I mean, for, for five or six years, seven years, that 99% sort of, I guess construct was employed by, by, by Sanders and Warren in particular. But others. And. But what was the. But there was also an absence of any other way to measure it because there wasn't necessarily an agenda associated with it. At the time I felt like that's okay because, you know, it is getting a message out. But talk about the sort of like how the either lack of leadership or the allergy to leadership that created a sense that there was no leaders. I mean, it's confusing in that sort of like little nexus.

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah, absolutely. Well, I mean, I think all the things that made Occupy Wall street this magical thing were also kind of its self destruct mechanism. And the book is very much about this thing I call the politics of powerlessness, which is this ambivalence about power, this kind of conflicted relationship that we have with power and leadership and identity and all this kind of stuff that in our movements where, you know, for, for pretty good reason we're suspicious of leaders, like the leader usually is like the President that's dropping bombs on like a bunch of babies and these billionaires and the boss and all that stuff that we like kind of hate and Then we have this complicated dance that we do inside of our movements where we're. We really don't want to replicate that. We often come to our movements to kind of escape a lot of the way the dominant society functions. And then we do kind of dumb shit as a result. And so, you know, like, we pretend. So at Occupy, we did it in a pretty extreme way where we said out loud that there were no leaders and pretended that there were no leaders. And again, in some ways, that was a stroke of genius and magic because what part of what movement moments are incredible about is they welcome people in and they. They let them just use their own agency and their own creativity to flourish. So, like, that's how you get this thing like Zuccotti park, which is just like a random park. And then suddenly there's thousands of people in this place. And then this person is a doctor, so he starts a medical clinic, and she's a librarian, so she starts a library. And there's food being distributed in her yoga class and this and that. People are just, like, doing, just doing because nobody's in their way and they're feeling. They feel inspired and moved and sort of transforming. But yeah, when you pretend that there are no leaders, then when obviously leaders do start to find their place and get connected with each other and start making decisions, there isn't any structure to hold them accountable. There isn't any way to intentionally train some leaders to sort of level up. There isn't a way for us to grow. It's hard to make decisions. You can't really have a strategy if you don't have any. A way of sort of exercising leadership and direction. If you can't have. If you don't have a strategy, then you're not going to win. Like, if you don't. If you know, if you don't know how to say what winning is going to be, then you're not going to get there. And that's another one of those things that's like, yeah, it was incredible to say we're not speaking in the same language that the mainstream media wants us to speak about with the 10 demands that they're going to then make fun of. We're speaking beyond that. We're saying, like, we want a whole system transformation, and that's really entrancing. But, like, the trance goes away after a little while, and we never managed to convert that into something that was, like, durable enough to win something and get concessions from the opponent and, like, wield power.

[Emma Vigeland]

Right. Well, you said leader. You said Leadership or direction. And I had just written down leadership versus direction, because that's, I think, something interesting to look at with Occupy. Obama took a lot of the energy out of Occupy. He took a lot of energy out of the activist left more broadly. That also, you know, it was a part of him winning, but not something he wanted to really be beholden to when he was governing. And I think when you bring up Zoran Mamdani in this current moment of, I would also say, class consciousness, the importance of winning, political power is really, I guess, essential to underscore here because that creates such a snowball momentum that now we're seeing Dariel Issa's campaign, Claire Valdez's campaign. Democratic socialism as an electoral force in the state of New York is a real thing. And so that's where it's like, you know, sometimes I think there's this impulse with activists that are, you know, skeptical of things like hierarchy, or that we've been so politically disenfranchised on the left for so long that there's this inclination to abandon electoralism, as they say, altogether. But you see how once a win happens, how much more. How much easier it is for other electoral wins to happen. But even if electoralism isn't your thing, that's the oxygen that it creates for activism to flourish as well.

[Yotam Marom]

No, I think that's really right. I mean, I really think that the thing that I'm describing, that you're describing this sort of, like, aversion to power and hierarchy and direction and all that stuff, I think it comes from a feeling that we're not going to win anyway, which was certainly the feeling that I came up in the movement with. I basically was in the movement as, like, I'm moved by this and it's the right thing to do. But I didn't think, like, it was like Bush 2 and it was like surveillance state and flags everywhere. Like, it really felt like, oh, this is like 1984. We're never going to win. This is what we have to do. But we're not going to be powerful. And if you don't think you're going to be powerful, if you don't think you're going to win, then there's a lot of stuff that's easier to not do, like the really hard work of crafting a strategy. Because crafting a strategy really means making hard choices and saying no to most of your options so that you can say a really strong yes to something that you really have leverage about that it's easier not to Tell the truth inside our groups because our groups are kind of, they're special to us and we don't want to hurt each other, but if you don't tell the truth, then you can't have a good strategy. And also like all the sort of like identity relationships and you know, these things, like we, we end up having sort of like small minded, internally focused groups. These are all, I think, reactions to a feeling that we're not going to win. But as soon as you feel like you are going to win or you could win, there's potential to win. And that's what I think what you're describing right now. We have this feeling of like, oh, we could, like we could win, we could win things. Maybe not the whole thing all at once or whatever, but we can, we can win things. Then suddenly, like, you know, you get that same feeling that you get in the beginning of a movement moment, which is like, I want to grab everything I could possibly grab to throw at this thing. Like, you know, a movement that doesn't think it's going to win. It doesn't really work that hard to recruit everyday people into it because that's hard and complicated and like it's, it's more uncomfortable to stay like kind of in our, in group. But a movement that thinks it might win, it grabs anybody and everybody. It wants everybody to be a part of it. It knocks on every door. And that is a winning movement. So like you're saying the sort of winning generates the kind of political orientation to power and losing generates the orientation to powerlessness.

[Sam Cedar]

I want to talk just a little bit more about that powerlessness before we go through some of the examples you give of how you get out, of how you correct the implications of that feeling of powerlessness. But talk just a little bit more specifically about that powerlessness. Essentially, if you can't win the greater fight, you end up looking for smaller fights that are more often than not within the context of the movement itself. And just talk about that path. That too often happens.

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah. I think the thing is people really actually hate feeling powerless. And so if, so if we, if we don't believe we can win because our opponent is enormous and vicious and violent and because climate change, because of like, just like if we're really, if, you know, sort of fear and despair, then we want to exercise our power on the things we have control over and that tends to be our spaces. So then suddenly you turn, we turn away from like our opponent. We turn away from the public that we're supposed to be Organized and we turn in towards each other and often against each other. And you know, so then how can, so, you know, if, if we're too far away from the enemy to really like do them any real damage. They don't even really know we exist. They don't really give a shit about us. That's how we often feel in our, in our movements and down moments. Then we find enemies in the room instead. We find enemies in each other. Sometimes enemies in ourselves. Like the way we sort of. So that can look like attacking our leaders. It can look like internal conflicts about identity. It can look like sort of litmus tests for, you know, in a lot of spaces, spaces that want to grow movements that are healthy. Like we were saying before, they want to recruit people. What they do is. And I have like a story about this in the book that's actually about my pickup softball league or spaces that don't feel threatened, they welcome you. They have a sense that you're joining. Like your joining is what's going to lead to transformation, not the other way around. Movements that are in a small minded, scared posture, what they do is they expect you to be perfect before you can join. And that's like, you know, most people, nobody's. Nobody's perfect. So then our movements end up being pretty small and on the margins. And they feel, they feel that way. They feel marginal. And so, yeah, anyway, I guess what I'm saying is when we feel, when we feel powerless, we actually hate that feeling. And so we look for feelings of power, but inside of our movements where we actually are big enough to do things well.

[Emma Vigeland]

And also I would imagine that the structure, the lack of hierarchy sometimes, and the lack of structure can also mean that it acts more like group therapy or like a validation of one's own, like emotional response to injustice, which is valid in and of itself, but it is like you're on an elliptical as opposed to hiking a mountain.

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah, I think that's right. I mean, I think all these things, they come from somewhere pretty understandable. Like we want to feel a sense of belonging inside movements. It makes sense that we want that. And movements that are only focused on themselves and each other and how it feels to be in the space. First of all, clearly they don't win because they're not really paying attention to what's outside themselves. But they also don't feel that great ultimately. Like groups that don't have momentum and are not looking out together, they don't end up actually offering real belonging in the long run. People don't most people don't want that. They don't want small and self referential.

[Sam Cedar]

Tell us the story of. And then that's just like tracking the book, that premise. You then give us examples of how you deal with the the problem associated with that feeling of powerlessness. You start with the idea of being able to be truthful in the context of an organization in terms of just like how you're going to maintain and develop a strategy. Use the example of a or one of them of a tenant organization in Queens and in Chinatown. Exactly. And tell us about that. Because a lot of that energy ends up years later showing up in the context of DSA and in the Mamdani camp.

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah, absolutely. Well, I mean, so again, sort of connected to what we were just talking about, belonging. If our groups are primarily for us to feel good and safe, they're a place for us to be because we don't really think we're going to win anyway. Then we end up being pretty conflict avoidant because we think that the way to kind of maintain this little family is to avoid hard things. And that is kind of a death sentence to strategy. Because strategy really requires like getting to the bottom of something, being really honest about our opponent, about ourselves. Not what we wish we were and how good we wish we were and what we wish we could be, but really what we are. What like usually very small piece of leverage we have against our opponent and what is true about this moment. And it usually requires being in conflict with each other and being able to make one choice over a bunch of other options. So organizations that are kind of riddled with a feeling of powerlessness don't have the incentive to have that hard conflict with each other because they don't think they're going to win anyway. But organizations that are really interested in power, that are like, no, we have to do this either because they're clear about what it means for them to survive, or because they think there's really potential. Then they start to move towards conflict and they start telling the truth to each other. And they start telling the truth about strategy and they can make hard choices about it, but they also start telling the truth about other stuff, about their internal dynamics, about how they deal with identity, about how they deal with belonging, all that other stuff. And they become healthier organizations that can actually win stuff. So the story in the book is about this organization called cav which organizes Chinese and Bengali tenants in New York, Chinatown and in Queens. And they're expanding. And you know, this, the scene, you know, the book is very much made, like you said, of. Of stories, my stories, being in the movement. Stories of being a facilitator and being alongside these, like, kind of, you know, incredible organizations. And this story is, you know, we're having a retreat years ago, I don't know, five, seven years ago, strategy retreat, where something's not clicking in their strategy. It's just not panning out there. They don't think they're going to win. The campaigns that they're in the middle of, and we're adjusting, and basically, they make a decision, a hard decision, through some conflict and some acknowledgment of loss. They make a hard decision to prioritize in one place over a bunch of other places. And it's hard for them to do it because they have to basically say, okay, we're gonna. We're gonna give up this campaign. We're in the middle of. That means we're gonna give up these tenants that were organized. We're gonna have to go over there and tell them, like, we're not gonna win this campaign, and we're actually gonna move our resources elsewhere. Like, just hard stuff. And there's a moment in this retreat where there's sort of. There's doubt of should we do this or not. And one of the people says, no, we absolutely have to cut this, and we have to make this choice. And the person who's saying it is a person who is likely to lose her organizing job because of it. This kind of brave moment of like, no, we have to make the hard choice for the sake of the strategy. And they make that decision. And in some ways that I chart out in the strategy, it sort of clicks over time and adds up to. In a pretty direct way, adds up to their sister organization, KAV Voice, being one of the very first endorsers of Zoran Ramdani. Like, really before that took off and they became like, a pretty central part of organizing Xoran's Bengali base and Chinese base alongside a bunch of organizations like DRUM and dsa.

[Sam Cedar]

Tell us, what's the fear in that? I mean, because it's another way of saying, like, you know, a person's got to know, or an organization's got to know their limitations. And once they can sort of, like, confront their own limitations, they're able to deploy their resources in a way that provides them the biggest opportunity to win. And that win creates a momentum, and you can start to expand, et cetera, et cetera. What's the fears, though, when you start to get down and make it, like, More. There's humans and there's groups and there's people who you don't want to let down. You don't want that group to feel abandoned. And. And also the fear of, like, the implications of abandoning that, you know, that fight.

[Yotam Marom]

Absolutely. I mean, I think. Yeah, I think. I think often it's fear of loss. Like, we. If we're gonna. If we're gonna make a choice, then we're gonna have. This is true just in life, right? It's like, if you're gonna make choices in your life and then you're gonna give up on a bunch of other versions of your life, you know, and in our movements, we like to, you know, because. Because everything feels so dire. Like, we're in it to, like, God, we're facing, like, real, like, you know, potential, like, extinction of our species. It's like a pretty serious. Pretty serious thing. It's hard to say no to any of these big things we got to do. And it's also hard to say no to each other again because so much of our. So much of our life in these organizations is also about our own fulfillment and our own connection to each other. So often people. The way people make a strategy is like, okay, well, this person wants to do this, and this person wants to do this, and this person wants to do this. So the strategy will be this plus this, plus this. But that's not a strategy. That's just a list of. A list of shit. Like, a lot of our organizations, really, they just have, like, lists of stuff that we want to do or things we believe in or values or visions or mission statements. I've written a bunch of these things myself, like, just over the years, like, fluff. Like stuff that doesn't have a choice baked into it, because the choice is hard because if we choose one of those three things, then, like, maybe two of these people are going to leave and maybe the group will collapse. And that's where I find meaning. And maybe these people who, you know, in this space, at these projects in Queens, like, they're gonna be upset. And also they need us. And like, how. How could we. You know, And. But. But there's this. When you have an orientation to power, then you. You start to say, okay, like, we have to do. We have to narrow, because that's the only way we can actually win. And that's more important than us sort of appeasing each other, feeling good or, you know. But yeah, there's a lot of risks. There's also risks, you know, with funders disappointing Our funders disappointing our partners. There's, you know, all these sort of pressures to stay on the surface, to kind of bullshit each other. You know, I can't help but think.

[Sam Cedar]

I mean, I, you know, throughout the book, like, I'm reminded and it doesn't. It was not. I didn't learn of this phrase in the context of social movements, but rather sort of like the democratic establishment, the iron law of institutions where people will. Would rather be in, you know, come in second, but maintain their authority within a group than to, you know, come in first and maybe at the expense of their own sort of rank. And this cuts that sort of idea. It's a little bit different in the context of this, but it's a similar impetus. People may be more generous in terms of, like, rather, it's not just about my rank per se, but it's about my feeling like we're helping these people and these people don't feel like they're alone, even though we can't win in this fight if we, you know, spread our resources too thin. But let's talk about rank and power and leadership. There's an allergy just tied, I think, on some level to the ideological underpinnings of a lot of these social movements, which is more participatory, making things more democratic, which if you followed down that path, becomes like, there is no leader. We just. We vote on every single thing. But that is. It's very hard to get stuff done in that way. But talk about that, Those pitfalls.

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah, well, I mean, I think the thing is that. So the concept that I talk about in the book is rank, but it really just means power. Who has power in the group to make the thing happen. And the thing that we often don't like to admit in our movements is that everybody has rank, everybody ranks. Every group has some kind of rank system, whether they admit it or not. It makes sense in our movements that we want to be more participatory and we want to be more democratic. We want to embody the values of the world. We want more. It makes sense, especially because we come from a really hierarchical society that's like, hurt a lot of us and isn't the society that we want to recreate. So it makes sense. But often what ends up happening then is we want to blur the lines. We don't want to talk about who's in charge, in part because it's like, we don't want to. It's part of that conflict avoidance that we have in our groups on a bunch of Levels. So one of the things we like to avoid conflict about is power. I mean, it's like power is just so fundamental to our lives. It's so like tied up with our value, our own sense of our self worth and obviously like the ability of the project to do anything. So what often happens is we pretend we don't have leaders or we acknowledge that we have leaders, but like, nah, that's not really how we run things. Like, yeah, there's an org chart, there's an ed. But like really we're all kind of like in it together. And again, makes sense why we do that. But once we start doing that, things get, it's way worse. It's way worse to be in an environment where people are not honest about the power dynamics than one in which people are honest about them. When you start being honest, I mean, a lot of my work as a facilitator is with groups basically supporting them to tell the truth about what's actually happening in their organizations. Sometimes that's about strategy and sometimes it's about leadership and power. And as soon as they start telling the truth about it, they have so many more tools. Often what's actually happening is the power dynamics are good, they just are being buried. And as soon as they start talking about them, they're like, oh, this is actually like fairly healthy. But now that we're talking about it, I can give you feedback and you can give me feedback and we can actually make adjustments. We can build structures around it, we can make choices about our leadership structure, we can support lower ranking people to increase their rank, we can, you know, all that kind of stuff. That when you're pretending that there isn't, that there aren't power dynamics in your group, you can't do that. You can't have those conversations about anything. Can't really make any choices about any of it.

[Sam Cedar]

Let's talk about identity. Because that also gets into one of the sort of. Over the past 16 years, I mean if we're going to peg it to Occupy has been the. I mean there's been real sort of like emancipatory movements that have had success like marriage equality. And we had the largest protests in the history of the country in 2020 for BLM. But there's also been sort of a backlash or a competing. There's always been sort of a competing, I think sort of like sense within similarly aligned ideological spaces to the extent that they are. And there is quite a bit of overlap. There's certainly some identity politics that we call that are sort of co opted and used for other purposes. But where does identity play within the context of movements which their fundamental premise is we can't do this as individuals?

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah, yeah. Well, I mean, I think again it kind of breaks down in whether our groups and our movements have an orientation towards power or powerlessness. And organizations and movements that have an orientation towards power, they see identity as a contribution to our movements in the sense that they can help us understand how systems function and who they fuck over and who they exploit and how we can support people from marginalized identities to take leadership in, in the unraveling of the system and all that kind of stuff. Movements that are, feel that feel powerless, that don't really think they're going to win, that are afraid of the enemy, they tend to use identity as a way to bludgeon each other. And so, you know, I've been, I have been bludgeoned and also been a bludgeoner. Like when a movement is in contraction, it tends like, like we were talking about before, like you don't want to feel powerless, so you use, you look for where you can exercise power in the space. Identity is often like a channel through which we do that and you know, it cuts every which way. And the story that I tell in the book, like one of the sort of main arcs of that chapter is about me as a leader in an organization, you know, tokenizing a woman of color who I worked with very closely and her eventually sort of pushing back and breaking our relationship. And it taking me years to understand why and learn that. And you know, I did, I did hurt her and I hurt the project. And like those, that's real stuff that a focus on identity can like help us fix. We should be better in our movements. And our movements should be liberatory for all people, including people who are especially targeted by the system or maybe most. And like, you know, I've also been in movements where because of this feeling of powerlessness I got the message that because I'm a white dude I should actually minimize myself. That the biggest contribution I could make to our groups is to kind of disappear because in some way I was like a, like a conduit for the enemy. And that is a losing movement because like, yeah, a multiracial working class movement is going to include everybody, including white dudes. And like you said in the very beginning, like, we're not going to do this alone. That's that actually mass movements are, they're complicated and they're going to need to include everybody. And so if we're walking around in our movements making people feel like they shouldn't be here, then we're going to lose.

[Sam Cedar]

Is it the difficulty in that? Specifically, in terms of. When it comes to white dudes, the challenge is how, like, how much does white dudes, for lack of a better term position in society, implicate how much power they should have within a group? Insofar as that, like, you know, you're. That's the tough part, right? It's not just, like, just in and of itself. It is fine to say, like, everybody, you know, we should all be equal here. That is the idea. But we're not doing this in a vacuum. The implications of when we all leave our meeting room, we're all gonna have a very different experience. And statistically speaking, we can make some presumptions as to what those experiences are gonna be when we walk out the door. And I'm thinking in the context of. I mean, this is more sort of electoral, but there's a broader sort of sense of, like, we've got to accept a certain amount of bro culture or whatever it is, but it. It ends up. I mean, it has to be constantly monitored, doesn't it? On some level?

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah, I think so. I mean, I think. Look, I also think different groups can have different cultures and different movement moments, have different sort of, like, appeals to. That's also okay. But, yeah, I mean, I think that's kind of where I started with identity. You know, on a good day, with the right orientation, like, identity politics are a huge contribution. They can really. They can really show us. Identity doesn't determine how we behave. But it is a pretty good. It's a pretty good lens through which to see things alongside a bunch of other lenses. And yeah, often, like, as a white. As a white dude, I have definitely perpetuated, like, a lot of the sort of, like, white supremacist, patriarchal values that the system put in me. Like, it wanted me to do that. It trained me to do that. It takes a lot of work to untrain yourself. We make a lot of mistakes and all that. And I needed, like, people to challenge me and give me feedback and hold me accountable. And that's what groups are good for. That's why we should all be part of groups, because that's where you get feedback. That's how you transform. That's the vehicle for which you can make change in the world. It's also the way where you can find connection with other people and, like, dignity and belonging and all that kind of stuff that People really yearn for. And yeah, so like a lot of my work as a facilitator, even though I have this, you know, I clearly have this like, position about what it means to what I. How, how identity politics can like turn us in against each other or towards each other. But really a lot of my work as a facilitator is supporting groups to like talk honestly about their identity or whatever. So, like, I really agree with what you're saying. Like, yeah, we actually, this is the thing we need to be intentional about for sure.

[Emma Vigeland]

Well, it's so important to emphasize this because there's this impulse I think right now where it's like, stay away from what is called the culture war stuff or stay away with so called identity politics, which, you know, like, I think any real movement includes an acknowledgement of difference. And a multiracial coalition that acknowledges that difference is much more durable than one that says, hey, you can maybe be a part of our group, but don't bring up like your trans crap. I don't want to hear that. Or like your issues with systemic racism. It's just a very different orientation. And I mean, I would include white women in this as well, who also are privileged in spaces like this. It's also an acknowledgement of who gets to participate in activism or who has the ability often to participate in activism because maybe they have fewer financial burdens or had an easier upbringing. That that acknowledgement of difference also allows for the movement to be stronger because it makes it so that those, that those same hierarchies aren't replicated.

[Yotam Marom]

I think that's right.

[Sam Cedar]

Let's talk about belonging, because I think this is also. It's fascinating because these movements are. We have a big problem, I think, in our society writ large with the idea of we no longer have the sort of institutions in some ways of where people can join. We have, you know, famously, I think sort of we've lost the third spaces. In many respects, the Internet and technology has sort of atomized us. And so these movements both provide belonging, but that can't be the ends of it. That is a means, right? Will you talk about that sort of dilemma or paradox?

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah, absolutely. So, I mean, where you're starting is absolutely right. I mean, also the right has gone to war against our civil society. People are just generally part of fewer institutions and neighborhood associations and whatever. And also people are less religious and people, you know, there's like a lot of, A lot of. In the Internet, whatever, everything you said. And so people are looking for connection and belonging and some people find it in our movements. And that makes sense. It makes sense to. It makes sense to look for that and want that. I want that. Like really a lot of my belonging is in the movement. I mean, this whole book is like a love letter to the movement because it's like my, in a way, my home, you know, and that makes sense. But again, movements that don't have an orientation, movements and groups that don't have an orientation towards power, they then start to use that drive for belonging. It stops there. And we start to feel like the most important thing is our feeling and sense of belonging and safety and connection inside our spaces. Movement that's healthy, that's interested in power, it understands that people do need to feel connected and belonging and our spaces do need to feel healthy. But real, actual belonging and dignity and connection and not to mention like survival in our society is going to happen because we can build mass movements that actually win shit from our opponent and change the system. And so that the belonging that we want in our movements is important, but part of a bigger. Of a bigger thing, that we're only really going to feel that feeling. We're only going to really get the fruits of that in a society that is transformed, not in our little spaces. And so, you know, movements that feel that way and think that way, they welcome you because they want to be big. And that's complicated and hard work. So movements that don't believe they can win don't do that.

[Sam Cedar]

That they, you know, so much of. Of of the book, it feels like it also. And. And could apply to almost just like a. A relationship like, like it. There's. There's a. So much of. We're talking about like this truthfulness and this awareness of like what my limitations might be in the context of this relationship and boundaries for, you know, to use a more hip term, I guess, but. And you tie it up at the end about love with the parenthetical. At the risk of seeming ridiculous. And this is like where, you know, for me personally, a lot of the like. And I've grown in the context over the years to sort of like appreciate all of these dynamics. I think sort of just in my interpersonal relationships we talk about how love. How you can, you know, talk about love in the context of the social movement. And also it not be sound ridiculous and maybe like. Let's just start with why it might sound ridiculous to people.

[Yotam Marom]

Well, I mean, it sounds. So it's a borrowing from Mache quote where he's like, at the risk of seeming Ridiculous. So you're like even like the most baller revolutionary in history has to like caveat anything he wants to say about love. Because it feels squishy and kind of soft, you know. And like we want to be, you know, we want to win things, we want to feel powerful where, you know, we're hard nosed or strat, we talk strategy, political parties and whatever and you know, so it makes sense to. I felt very like I didn't when I started writing that chapter. I didn't really know I was writing a chapter about love. I thought I was writing a chapter about the way the movements, the movement split after October 7th and what we can learn from that. And I think there's like some juicy stuff in there. But. But it ended up. But through the writing of it I ended up realizing like, oh yeah, that's actually what I'm talking about is. I mean, there's a couple things to say about love. One is I think that when you love something, you take responsibility for it. And we often in our society think about love as this like kind of, you know, Hollywood Disney esque like bullshit where there's like this like arrow from Cupid and then you like swoon for each other and then the story ends. But really, like most of our relationships, actually that's only the beginning of it. And having long term relationships often means making a choice to struggle with somebody forever or for however long.

[Emma Vigeland]

Or with a sports team, for example.

[Yotam Marom]

Or with a sports team. Or with your movement. Yes, big week for us to be struggling with our. And so when we decide to love something or someone, then we tell it the truth. We tell the truth about ourselves, we tell it the truth about it. I mean that's the sort of like really opening premise of the book. And then I think where it ends up, kind of where you're landing, Sam, is like, Often in our movements and in our lives in general, we make the choice to turn away from each other because it's simpler and it feels easier. And what I'm encouraging us to do is to always turn towards each other. And like really it connects back to the same kind of like refrain of. Almost every chapter is like, look, you want this to be different. We really just have to learn how to tell the truth. You want better strategy? We have to learn how to tell the truth. You want healthier dynamics around rank and leadership and power? We have to tell the truth. You want to talk seriously about identity? We have to tell the truth, like all this kind of stuff and so the turning towards each other Rather than away from each other is like an act of love. And it's complicated and it's scary and we think we might be better off if we don't do it. But really if we don't do it, we stay on the surface instead of going deeper.

[Sam Cedar]

Why? I mean, and why is it, why is it in your opinion, that the right, despite having none of these attributes, like just like, honestly, like it just sort of, I just, you know, my experience with like the people on the right who fight these fights are so far off the scale of dysfunction and yet they are successful in a lot of their agenda. It's the difference in agendas, isn't it?

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah, I mean, I think part of it is like we have really completely different projects. And their project doesn't rely on us being collectively strong. Right. It relies on violence being exercised on a handful of billionaires making choices and stuff like that. And we live in a society that's like, it's hard for all of us to kind of recognize our agency that really, if we took our agency away from the system, it would collapse. But there are lots of reasons why we don't do that. And so their project is just easier than ours. But I also think, listen, I mean, they're much more strategic than us. They make 40 year plans that are coming to fruition. We see the results of them now, of them basically running the courts. That's part of a 40 year arc. They made choices about where to prioritize and they got rich people to put money in those choices. And that's one thing. And I think, you know, I don't think that people long term feel the kind of belonging that we're, I think, hoping for and describing in right wing movements, but they do have often shorter, simpler entryways for people than our, than our movements do. And what do you mean by that?

[Sam Cedar]

Explain that concept.

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah, like, like evangelical churches often these are enormous institutions, right? And part of the reason that they're enormous is that people there really want you to join. They don't expect you to be perfect before you join. They trust the power of their institution to transform you once you stay.

[Sam Cedar]

That's part of the promise. On some level. The entry is like the more effed up you are, the better because we fixed you.

[Yotam Marom]

That's our job. So they give you a big parking lot and they give you childcare and they give you bingo night and they give you like the reading club and they give you the sermon and they give you all these things, they offer you all these different ways to connect and feel part of a thing, to feel that belonging and the belonging leads to purpose. And as opposed to what often we do in our movements, not always, but often what we do in our movements is the opposite. It's like you have to prove that you are down and then you can join. And also you're always on thin ice. You can always get called out and we can always turn on each other and the group can always implode. But movements that are interested in power, like the canvases that are leading to these democratic socialist victories, they're like, we're gonna knock on every fucking door and we're gonna get everybody to knock on every door with us and we're gonna give you a pin to show to make you feel awesome about how you were there. And then we're gonna, you know, all these things that make it feel, that make you feel, feel connected and feel inspired and invigorated and want to be a part of the thing. And over time, people, you know, if we do our work right, over time people develop more politically and they get, they, they join like long term institutions like DSA or these are community organizations or, or workplace, you know, unions, neighborhood organizations, you know.

[Sam Cedar]

Who is this book for? Like, I mean, because, I mean, because obviously if I'm running an organization or I'm in the leadership of an organization, if I haven't worked with you or folks in your orbit, obviously I want to read this. I mean, it's also, I mean, I imagine too for folks who are looking to organize across the country, whatever it is, the people in your building because of tenant issues or you know, there's a lamppost down the street that is a problem and the kids can't play at night, it's out. All this be incredibly helpful. What if I'm somebody who's like, I don't want to lead anything, I want to be a partisan, but I want to lead it. How would this information help me?

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah, it's a great question. I mean, look, you said earlier that a lot of this is really just about relationships. And I think that's true. I mean, I've gotten like, I do think that there are some like really pretty specific, useful lessons for people in movements and wanting to play leadership roles or even just stay in movements long term. But I also think that there's stuff in here because it's all about stories and it's all just, I mean, some of the stories are about movement stuff, but some of the stories are like I said, from my pickup softball league from My relationship with my wife and my kids, they're characters in the story. And it's really all about us sort of like growing and transforming. And I think it's relevant to anybody, certainly anybody who's near movements, who cares about the world, who wants things to be better. I mean, I got some feedback from. I'm getting a lot of feedback from people who are starting to read the book now. And, like, they're saying, first of all, they're saying it reads like a novel, which I didn't say.

[Sam Cedar]

I will confirm.

[Yotam Marom]

I appreciate that. And I'm like, that's a fucking great compliment. And that people are feeling moved, like, emotionally moved, moved by it. And I also know some people who are, like, not, you know, in the dead center of movements who are reading the book. And what they were like is like, what one of them told me was like, yeah, this rank shit, like, that's totally happening in my workplace. Not movement or, you know, these are just, like, dynamics that groups have, you know, and the groups that I care about the most are the ones that are, you know, driving movements to transform society. But I think, like, yeah, I think there's something different.

[Emma Vigeland]

Cults are like, the inverse of this or religious fundamentalism. This is the theme is the need for belonging and, like, kind of creating a community around that need for belonging. And I just think under capitalism in particular, we're so atomized. We're so told that the way for us to kind of express our individuality or our need for purpose is through consumption or purchases. Or even some more liberal forms of protest are about boycotting, which has its place. But the power of a group with a sense of belonging that's moving to a broader purpose, that it's not insular like a cult would be, which is to bring everybody in and isolate a group with a purpose that is about bringing change and pushing it outward. And having an external goal as opposed to an internal one is what makes. That's what makes political movements powerful.

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah, totally. Yeah.

[Sam Cedar]

Let me ask you, just lastly, like, electoral politics, obviously it's not. What is the relationship from, like, the movement? Are they just two separate tracks or is there a. Like, what should the dynamic. What should we be looking for in our elected leaders? And maybe on some level, this is just about applying that sort of truth meter, like, what they can and cannot do, and so that we have a sense of what expectations should be or what.

[Yotam Marom]

I like that idea. I hadn't thought of that. Sort of demanding the truth from them in this sort of, like, division of labor, you know, I think, look, I think the sort of, like, electoral. I do think that these are, like, parts of a movement together. The sort of, like, street protest and the organizing at the doors and the canvas to the electeds and the elected officials and all that stuff. I think these are like, part of an ecosystem together. I think, you know, healthy movements understand that different organizations and parts of the ecosystem have different roles to play. And, yeah, I'm, like, super psyched about, like, what's happening in New York and Zoran and like, this sort of, like, DSA wave and I'm a DSA member and I like, you know, like a fanboy and whatever. And I think. And also, like, most of my role is not there. Most of my role is in sort of movement organizations that are after sort of either material gains and concessions from, like, opponents or these kind of big movement moments that are meant to sort of change the weather. But those things are all have, like, a symbiotic relationship. And I think. I think people who do electoral politics in a way that I subscribe to understand that connection, too. They understand, like, yeah, you don't get a Zoran without movements laying the ground for that. And you also definitely don't win this agenda without movements in the streets fighting the opponents to that agenda. These billionaires like the electoral machine on its own, especially not at this young stage of the left having some amount of power. It does not win agendas on its own. I think he's amazing. I think this administration is amazing. And there's no way we could win the agenda that he's describing just from inside City hall, that's going to take movements of people fighting the billionaires who are dead set on not giving us that agenda. And they're going to use politics, and they're going to use money in politics, but they'll also use, like, guns and tanks if they have to. Like, at the end of the day, that's like, what history shows us. And so we actually need movements of people, is what get us these electoral wins in a long arc. The electoral wins then sort of, like, are able to actually wield some of the power and take and wield some of the power in a way that movements often can't do. And then movements are what pave the way for winning and in a relationship with that, with an electoral movement that is looking forward, looking constantly feeling like, I think this electoral drive on the left will be successful if we see ourselves as ascendant and in process and in conflict. We're always campaigning for more as opposed to, we won some things and let's circle around it and collect our gains, which are going to be really meager right now. You know, we're actually at the very beginning of a big fight, you know.

[Sam Cedar]

All right, let me put my own parenthetical. At the risk of being a little navel gazy. From the perspective of, like, you know, if politicians from a movement perspective are sort of assets, you know, at different times, and from a politician's perspective, it's important to have a movement behind you so that you can legislatively or executively deliver on this. Where do, like, people like us in a closet that is sometimes air conditioned, talking to microphones. Like, where is the value that we can add within the context of this ecosystem?

[Yotam Marom]

Do you want to tell me? You want me to tell you how great you are?

[Sam Cedar]

I'll take that, please. No, but honestly, you know, I mean, the idea is that we're always trying to improve. And I imagine, like, just even there are lessons that I think we try and do here, like, what are the limitations of what we can do? That's very important for us to understand before we can do anything that's decent. But what, like, what role should this. And I don't mean just this show, but this space that we weirdly operate in. Because there hasn't really been. There's been analogs, but there hasn't been a situation where the means of communication have been so democratized, despite the fact that, like, you know, Twitter is now owned by a billionaire and every other tv. But, like, we have no bosses here, right? Brian does, but I don't. I have the best boss in the world.

[Emma Vigeland]

I technically have a boss, but, sue, soon it will be me.

[Sam Cedar]

We don't have the constraints that, you know, we have the ability to reach a decent amount of people without the constraints that historically have been levied upon us. Outside of, like, how do we both deliver a message and retain an audience just based upon what the audience wants to hear?

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah, well, it's an awesome question. I mean, I think it's above my pay grade, but because you're the experts in your line, and I think, again, these are part of a big ecosystem together. And this show, what you're describing as a sector really of media in the hands of people, I think it's part of the movement. I think, you know, similarly to how movements are often what they're good for is changing the common sense. I mean, I think that is a big part of the job of sort of. I don't know if you Consider yourself independent media, if that's like the, you know, a fair terminology or whatever. I think there's something else that's coming up for me. Just because you're asking. I haven't really thought about it, but sort of in the context of the book, like the, you know, like I say over and over again in the book and in every story, like, ultimately it comes down to being able and willing to tell the truth. And I think that's a big role for our media, is to tell the truth, to tell us the truth, to force us to tell the truth to each other and to go a level deeper. It's like once we start telling the truth about stuff, we can make good choices about all sorts of things. And in the book, those things are in our movements. Those things are strategy and belonging and whatever else. But there's a lot of things we have to learn how to tell the truth about. So I think that's a big. That's a big job.

[Sam Cedar]

You have Gautam Marom. The book is for Louder Days, Reaching Beyond a Politics of Powerlessness. We will put a link to that. Real pleasure. Thanks so much for coming on. Appreciate the work you've been doing and thanks so much for joining us.

[Yotam Marom]

Thank you. Thanks for having me.

[Sam Cedar]

Appreciate it, folks. And also, let me just remind you that you can go to Canvas Socialist nyc. DSA in New York City is mobilizing, trying to get canvassers out for the DSA slate. You've got Claire Valdez, you've got Daria Chevalier, you got Aber Kwas running for state senate, other state assemblies. But we have two congress people at least that you can go out and canvas for. And we will put a link to that canvas. Yeah, two S's on Canvas Socialist nyc.

[Emma Vigeland]

Hold on. That's the link.

[Yotam Marom]

Yeah.

[Sam Cedar]

Canvas Socialist nyc.

[Emma Vigeland]

Okay.

[Sam Cedar]

Writing that down.

[Emma Vigeland]

No, I'm just. They gave me a different.

[Sam Cedar]

Oh, give me. Give me the one that you have.

[Emma Vigeland]

Well, I have DSA NYC gotv.

[Sam Cedar]

Okay, that's another one too. We'll put both up that hustle.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yes, yes, For New York, I guess. Specifically DSA NYCgeTV for get out the Vote.

[Sam Cedar]

So check that out as well. Also, before we go, we have a message from our sponsor, what we call a post role. I have a very weird relationship with my cat. I generally am like, well, not that weird. What do you mean?

[Emma Vigeland]

Why don't you elaborate? You could just leave. You're leaving it open to interpretation.

[Sam Cedar]

I. He wakes me up every morning at 5am and so there's a certain like low grade resent there. But then over the course of the day he's very friendly to me, which I react well towards. So I'm conflicted. But I think the frenemies. Yeah, we're frenemies. But the. But things. He got a lot warmer to me when I started feeding him Smalls. And specifically, you know, like he obviously ate his food. He loves smalls. It's, it's a protein packed recipes all with ingredients that you would find in your fridge. So you're feeding your cat something healthy. But the broth stuff, I mean I give him the snacks too and he loves those. But the broth I really think changed his disposition towards me for some reason. I don't know what to say. Maybe it was just time, but.

[Emma Vigeland]

But it's tasty and especially with male cats, sometimes they need a little bit more hydration. They can have some kidney issues and stuff like that. And so the broth is a tasty way for them to get that.

[Sam Cedar]

I didn't realize but the. Yeah, I had a cat who had kidney issues but folks, stop serving your little carnivore a bowl of processed shortcuts for a limited time because you're a majority report listener. You get 60% off your first order plus free shipping and free treats for life cat treats when you head to smalls.com majority that is 60% off your first order plus free shipping, free treats for life when you head to smalls.com/majority. You should know Forbes ranked Small's best overall cat food bud feed. Buzzfeed said, my cats went completely ballistic for this stuff. 88% of cat owners reported overall health improvements after switching to smalls. So check it out. It's smalls.com majority 60% off. People are telling me that the cats are opportunity animals. I'm telling you it's changed his disposition. We'll put that in the podcast and YouTube descriptions. Also just a reminder, it's your support that makes this show possible. You can become a [e-mail] when you do, you not only get the free show free of commercials, we also get the fun half. You can imagine, you can talk about, you can IMs the prospects of the Celtics next year, whatever it is you want. Join themjorityreport.com Also just coffee.co op, fair trade coffee, hot chocolate. Use your coupon code majority, you get 10 off. What's that? Matt? Where is Matt?

[Matt]

No idea.

[Emma Vigeland]

Matt's in some is somewhere in Europe. I'm not sure if we should give out his assassination.

[Sam Cedar]

Oh, yeah, let's not do that. Yeah, he's. But. So the show have any idea?

[Matt]

On Friday, the Jackman show looks like it was Matt free, but David talks with Rio Grande Valley Valley organizer and policy research Etienne Roses about what's actually being built in Brownsville, Texas. And then a socialist response to Elon Musk's new status as the world's first trillionaire.

[Sam Cedar]

Here's a clue to where Matt is. He's, like, everywhere. All right, quick, quick break, and we'll head into the fun half.