I have just today come across Tad Stoermer (YouTube’s algorithm isn’t all bad, ’twould seem), who describes himself as a “historian of resistance”, and have been doing a bit of a catch up of episodes:
- “Why B_non_n’s Third Term Talk Isn’t Bluster: A Historian’s Warning About Constitutional Fragility” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74gdn_GJ5N4 “The same man who predicted Brexit, orchestrated Tr_omp’s 2016 upset, and packed the federal courts is now talking about a third Tr_omp term. Too many are dismissing it as rage bait. They're making a potentially fatal error. I’m a resistance historian. I don’t predict the future - I study how power consolidates and institutions fail, and see what the record actually shows about B_non_n’s track record, and why the Constitution offers less protection than you think. This isn’t about fear. It’s about recognition. In every historical crisis, the “alarmists” who took threats seriously survived. The optimists who needed more proof didn’t. The Constitution doesn't enforce itself. ... Not trying to inspire. Trying to instruct. Because the record shows that seeing clearly what others refuse to see is where resistance actually starts.”
- “Resistance Dispatch | Did the n_oz_s Start With Deportation?” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4Q7KAUwlrc “The n_oz_s didn’t start with deportation. They started with law and engineered social consent over a long period. What made the Nazi regime so devastatingly effective wasn’t how fast it moved or how quickly it moved towards abrupt measures like deportation. It’s how gradually it tightened its grip”
- “Can We Still Teach World War II the Same Way? | Resistance History Dispatch” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jzMt8baJCI “I’ve spent years studying resistance. The people who acted when authority became unbearable—who sabotaged, defied, and refused to comply. World War II always offered a rare kind of clarity. There were lines. You could name them. But now? Some of the very tactics we taught as unforgivable—starvation, collective punishment, destruction of civilian life—are being used again. And justified. In the name of the Holocaust. Public historians—especially those of us who teach memory—need to be asking this out loud. What if “Never Again” is conditional?”
- “Has A New “Long, Twilight Struggle” Begun? The End of World War II History” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1btBm-081A “... the question that stayed with me: how long will this last? I told them to strap in. This is a generational fight. The institutions have failed. The judiciary is captured. Congress might become irrelevant. Cultural capture looks like institutional paralysis—people protecting positions, hoping storms pass. But these students didn't perform despair. They wanted to know how to build.”
- “Why We Should All Learn What the 1930s Can Teach Us About Right Now | Resistance Dispatch” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzuzFAPN5-g “It should “feel like the 1930s”. But the danger isn’t in saying that—it’s in not taking it seriously. Let’s spotlight why the structural conditions that enabled National Socialism—a slow collapse of democratic norms, legal manipulation, and institutional complicity—are reappearing in plain sight. Drawing on work in both American and European resistance history, we should talk about why the U.S. is particularly vulnerable today, and why historians of authoritarianism need to be part of the public conversation. This isn’t about dramatic analogies. It’s about understanding where we are—and what we do next.”
- “Gandhi and the Uncomfortable Truth About "Peaceful" Protest | Resistance History Dispatch” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FprhmWfnm8 “... we start to break down the messy, costly, and far more instructive reality of how Indian independence was won, and how Gandhi’s strategic genius has been deliberately misunderstood. We raise some tough questions: - Was Gandhi's strategy actually nonviolent, or was it designed to provoke violence? - How did armed struggle and mass strikes contribute to independence? - Who benefits from the "violent vs. nonviolent" binary we hear so much about today? - Why do those in power praise a sanitized version of protest history? From the strategic provocation of the Salt March to the hard-nosed political leverage of the Quit India Movement, this is the history of resistance you weren't taught in school—a lesson in how sustained, multi-front withdrawal of consent forces change”
- “The Real Reason Republicans Like David Brooks Are Grieving: The Collapse of the American Myth” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n62YSa57HAk “David Brooks says he feels “moral shame.” But what he’s really feeling is the collapse of a story—one that elite white Americans have told themselves for generations. This isn’t about the death of democracy. It’s about the death of the myth of American innocence. In this video, I break down how we’ve reached the point where the patriotic identity itself is cracking—on the right and the left. Because the Revolution didn’t mean what you think. Independence wasn’t fought for freedom for all. And those lofty words from 1776? They were never meant for most of us. Now that the mask is slipping, maybe—just maybe—we can start building something better. But first, the myth has to fall.” and also
- “What the Founders Really Built: A White Republic, by Design This isn’t revisionist history. It’s their own words. ... The men who wrote the Constitution didn’t just tolerate slavery — they designed a republic that depended on it”, “Resistance Dispatch | When the Federalists Tried to Destroy American Dissent ... And Lost” - and the parallels to conditions in the USA now, and what resistance worked, “The Other Declarations of Independence: How Black People Fought—and Took—Their Freedom ... the real declarations weren’t written. They were lived. Between 1775 and 1783, tens of thousands of enslaved Black people took action. They ran toward British lines, pushed Dunmore beyond his limits, turned Clinton’s Philipsburg Proclamation into a weapon, and forced a second war into existence: a war for Black liberty. And the result? New Black communities across the Atlantic world—free people living by their own terms, in places like Nova Scotia, the Bahamas, and Sierra Leone. And that’s what Independence really looked like” - see also this;
- “Why the Founders Feared You: The Real Story of Violence and the Constitution” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Nkf6geWNN4 “Is violence un-American? Is it un-American to deploy troops against citizens? The answer to both is no. ... there’s nothing about the Constitution that was inevitable at all. ... the United States was operating effectively, if not efficiently, under the Articles of Confederation” Then Shays’s Rebellion occurred
Possible flaws
Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:
- there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”;
- I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.
If you appreciated this post, please share it. I am now on SubStack,
and you can support me at PayPal (or PayPal Repeating Support Options) or Ko-Fi
Any and all support will be greatly appreciated, and will aid me in continuing this work
Remember: we generally need to be more human being rather than human doing, to mind our Mӕgan, and to acknowledge that all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk & accept that all insistence on the use of “trans” as a descriptor comes with commensurate use of “cis” as a descriptor to prevent “othering” (just as binary gendered [men’s and women’s] sporting teams are either both given the gender descriptor, or neither).
#PsychicABetterWorld and may all that I do be of value and actively BPM used for and by the nonphysical BPM because #KindnessIsThePoint
Note that I am cutting back on aspects of my posts - see here, and Gnwmythr is pronounced new-MYTH-ear
Copyright © Kayleen White 2007-2025 NO AI
I do not consent to any machine learning aka Artificial Intelligence
(AI), generative AI, large language model, machine learning, chatbot, or
other automated analysis, generative process, or replication program to
reproduce, mimic, remix, summarise, or otherwise replicate any part of
this post or other posts on this blog via any means. Typo’s
may be inserrted deliberately to demonstrate this is not an AI product.
Otherwise, fair and reasonable use is accepted under Creative
Commons 4.0 on an Attribution-ShareAlike basis https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
.jpg)
