Resisting Defeatism: Ways to Foster Social Change in Everyday Life

Four practical suggestions for contributing to positive social change in everyday life. Part four of a series of posts exploring humanities and social change.

The fallacy of “Demanding Perfection” undercuts constructive efforts to enact moral excellence and contribute to social progress. The fact we will fail to perfectly achieve our ideals is not a good reason to give up on combating suffering, ignorance, and injustice. We should reject perfectionist rationalizations for apathy and inaction, and make best use of our resources to do the good we can.

But what does it look like to combat injustice and honor human dignity, without insisting on perfection? Below I present four ways we can support social change in daily life without succumbing to perfectionism:

1. Educate ourselves and support independent scholarship and media.

2. Engage members of our community in genuine dialogue, get civically engaged in those communities, and actively participate in politics.

3. Attend to the ends of life, working to ensure our daily lives and choices exemplify our core values.

4. And honor the important role music has in sustaining our individual ethical efforts and larger movements for social change.

These are not presented as “silver bullet” solutions that will “solve” injustice. Promises of a panacea are often disingenuous or simply mistaken. These suggestions are offered in the hope of stimulating critical thought, genuine dialogue, and principled action. Above all, they are offered as a defiant rebuke to those who would have us shrug at the knowledge of human denigration and resign ourselves to unjust and inane suffering.

1. Getting Educated and Supporting Independent Media

What we are capable of doing will depend on contingent factors including available resources, capabilities, and opportunities. One way most of us can contribute to a just, ethical society is by educating ourselves on matters of importance, and then communicating those informed judgments to others. Evaluating sources and fact checking claims has never been more important as we all navigate the 21st century media landscape. We must also be aware of the corporate interests and their often invisibilized influence over media discourse.

We should support independent journalism, scholarship, and varied media as a means of enhancing our knowledge and engaging a range of ideas. Humanities in Revolt, for example, expends considerable time ensuring that factual claims and attributed sources are both accurate and accessible. This means seeking out and reviewing primary source documents, and consulting with reputable secondary sources. It also means ensuring that supporting links and documentation are provided to the reader.

The importance of independent media is showcased by The Lever’s recent scrutiny of the Biden administration's inadequate response to the Norfolk Southern toxic train disaster. On February 3, 2023, the company’s train, containing harmful chemicals, derailed in East Palestine, Ohio. Residents reported a range of detrimental health effects from the chemicals released into the environment from the derailment and subsequent controlled burn-off of vinyl chloride, an important ingredient for making plastics with recognized negative health effects. The toxins released from the derailment have caused the deaths of more than 40,000 aquatic creatures including fish and amphibians.

Drone footage shows wreckage from the derailment on February 6. Source.

Not only did the administration take more than three weeks to visit the site of the disaster, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg initially claimed that the government was limited in its options to impose safety regulations on trains carrying hazardous materials. The Lever’s ongoing reporting shaped national media coverage and presented the administration with regulatory experts who disputed Buttigieg’s claims. The independent news site’s reporting likely contributed to the administration’s newly adopted confrontational posture to the railway industry, which fought regulations that would have potentially prevented such disasters. Indeed, Congressional lawmakers explicitly referenced the publication’s reporting when they introduced new rail safety legislation at the end of February 2023.

The Norfolk Southern derailment also highlighted the ways in which corporate media is often a vehicle for elite economic interests. Near the end of February 2023, CNN featured political commentator, David Urban, during a primetime roundtable discussion on the Norfolk Southern train derailment. The network failed to disclose that Urban was, until 2020, a lobbyist for Norfolk Southern. Unsurprisingly, Urban, who makes a living advocating for special economic interests over public interests, did not criticize Norfolk Southern or their lobbying efforts to thwart government regulation and public safety measures during his time on air.

Meanwhile, the corporate media outlet, Politico, recently published railway industry advertisements, attempting to shape media narratives around railway regulation, in its newsletter for Capital Hill insiders. As The Lever has documented, media outlets like the New York Times, Washington Post, and Vox previously published railway industry advertisements that were designed to look like news content. These ads ran under headings like, “How deregulation saved the freight rail industry.”

We must also vigilantly examine the corporate media content that shapes the wider public discourse and inevitably informs our understanding of current events.

Many mainstream journalists and their media resources are “captured” by an elite culture with narrowly defined material interests. This elite capture significantly affects the kinds of thought and expression deemed permissible. As I wrote in “Going to the Movies…with the Pentagon,”

“Though journalists [in the United States] are not hindered by government censors, they are hindered by spoken and sometimes unspoken rules about the points-of-view they are expected to adopt. Those who adhere to the values and interests of those in positions of power, within the organizations and ownership hierarchy, are more likely to succeed and flourish. Those who think and report independently are less likely to do so.”

MSNBC's termination of Phil Donahue for airing voices critical of the Iraq war on his popular news commentary show is a prime example. An internal memo at MSNBC stated, “He seems to delight in presenting guests who are anti-war, anti-Bush and skeptical of the administration’s motives." Leaders at the network feared the Donahue show would become “a home for the liberal antiwar agenda at the same time that our competitors are waving the flag at every opportunity." Donahue was fired on February 25, 2003, in the lead up to the Iraq war, even as his show had the highest ratings on the network.

“Yet such firings are often unnecessary since those who rise to such heights of success have usually internalized the values and behaviors that are more likely to sustain their adherence to the dominant belief system, along with developing the circles of human relationships that reinforce that worldview.”

Mindful of the shortcomings and limits of these legacy media outlets, we can contribute to the public good by supporting fiercely independent media organizations and thinkers such as

Ryan Grim

,

Matt Taibbi

,

Seymour Hersh

,

Chris Hedges

,

Ralph Nader Radio Hour

,

Glenn Greenwald

, The Intercept, Democracy Now, Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar, Bad Faith with Briahna Joy Gray, and others.

Substack in particular provides a unique platform for independent media and genuine dialogue between varied journalists, thinkers, and the wider public. Especially important is that the forum offers readers the opportunity to explore works reflecting a spectrum of political and philosophical orientations. This stands in stark contrast to mainstream media's reinforcement of intellectual homogeneity, which is so corrosive to democratic society.

2. Dialogue, Civic Action, and Political Engagement

We can also do good through our relationships with our parents, children, siblings, friends, coworkers, neighbors, and/or community members. By engaging the people in our life in authentic dialogue, seeking understanding and also presenting our best, most informed arguments we pave the way for collaboration, compromise, and the resolution of conflict.

My experience as a college professor has taught me that people defy simplistic categorization. I have learned, again and again, of how much there is to learn from, especially those with whom we have so many important disagreements with. Authentic dialogue may not always resolve deep-seated disagreement; but it rarely fails to generate mutual understanding and empathy. In a word, dialogue is humanizing.

We can promote this humanization by enacting and promoting “Rules of Civil Conversation.” These include approaching conversations with intellectual humility, striving to articulate coherent arguments, avoiding all-too-easy to commit fallacies, refraining from personal attacks, and extending charity to others as we prioritize mutual understanding over intellectual conquest or defeating the “other” side.

Conventional two-party partisan media tends to a) offer strawman representations of views its audience does not favor, reinforcing political and social polarization, and b) inadequately explores significant overlaps of opinion among those on the political left and right, on issues of importance.

We can combat political polarization and promote democratic discourse by viewing and supporting current event shows emphasizing rational dialogue between opposing views. Three examples include Breaking Points with Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti, Rising with Briahna Joy Gray and Robby Soave, and Counter Points with Emily Jashinsky and Ryan Grim.

Each show features two journalists or commentators, one highlighting a distinctly conservative viewpoint and another highlighting a political progressive view. We are offered the opportunity to better understand arguments we do not support, potentially improving our case against them or, perhaps, modifying our own.

We are also given the opportunity to explore often overlooked common ground. Political disagreements on issues ranging from tax policy to abortion are discussed. Yet the hosts take time to identify common ground on a range of topics from government transparency, corporate corruption, and abuses of political power. The programs also tend to acknowledge areas in which large swaths of the public agree, from increasing the minimum wage to support for policies addressing housing affordability.

We can also contribute to fostering a just society by participating in nonpartisan civic action in our communities, ranging from volunteering to ensuring local government is addressing the needs of our community. In 2019, I helped bring together members of my small community to combat our city council's plan to close the one and only public pool in the city. City officials had unilaterally decided to close the pool, without public comment or discussion. I started with a petition garnering more than seven hundred signatures opposed to the pool closure. I then helped organize a write-in campaign and “save the pool” rally. We also attended city council meetings, presenting testimony and educating our elected officials on the value of the pool to those with special needs, the local public high school, area families, and senior citizens.

Leisure Square pool supporters protest the closing of the city’s only public swimming pool before a City Council meeting at City Hall on Tuesday, July 16, 2019, in Vero Beach. Source.

Our sustained campaign brought together people across the partisan political spectrum and garnered significant local news coverage. We flummoxed and frustrated some local officials as residents filled up City Council chambers. Many standing arm-in-arm, clamoring to save the pool, were ardently opposed to one another on everything from guns, abortion, to presidential and gubernatorial politics.

We argued the mayor's criticism of the pool on grounds it was not profitable made as much sense as asking how profitable the police and fire departments were. The aim of such city expenditures, along with holiday decorations, memorials, parades, or parks, was to enhance the quality of life of people living in a community, not to generate a profit.

Against the odds, we forced city officials to change course. We saved the pool, developing important community relationships along the way. And it's worth noting that this success could not have been achieved had our organizing efforts not prioritized shared values and local interests over conventional partisan labeling.

To say that we should be able to communicate and work with those outside of our political worldview is not to say we can or should avoid overt political activism. Politics, in the most basic sense, has to do with wielding power within organized society. Those of us who apathetically fail to participate in politics are akin to children sitting in the backseat of the car hoping the grownups drive choose a nice destination for us. The freedom of political participation is more than an abstract idea. The quality of our lives depends upon activating this right by lifting our voices and developing our agency.

Those living in a democratic society also have the responsibility of participating in the electoral process. We can do so as informed voters, advocates for our favored candidates, and even candidates running for office. Following my efforts to help to save the local pool, I was drafted by community members to run for city council. Though I lost my bid for local (non-partisan) office, the campaign gave me the opportunity to advocate for the common good and shift the discourse of the city politics in favor of protecting community resources.

We too often fail to appreciate the potential for successes and gains that exist outside of conventionally defined objectives. Building relationships in our communities and growing support for foundational ethical principles are valuable outcomes, too. Indeed, such efforts often preceded and pave the way for subsequent conventional success, like winning an election. Cultural change is an essential component of political change.

It should go without saying that political engagement is not confined to voting. We can participate in broader movements that advance our core ethical commitments through the alteration of government policy. We can also join pressure campaigns to direct elected officials to address the needs and demands of their constituents. Those committed to freedom of expression in higher education, for example, can support the work of non-partisan groups like Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE). Those concerned with economic inequality, on the other hand, can support can support non-partisan groups like the Poor People’s Campaign. And those who believe the farm workers responsible for cultivating our food deserve more dignified working conditions and compensation can support groups like the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW). If we cannot monetarily contribute to these organizations, we can participate in calls to action such as the CIW’s two-mile solidarity march in support of farm-workers rights on March 18, 2023 in Palm Beach, Florida.

3. Lived Values: Putting Our Time and Money Where Our Hearts Are

We can also combat suffering and injustice by contributing to worthwhile charities. And we need not let apprehension about misguided charitable behavior prevent us from doing so. We can utilize reputable third-party evaluators such as Charity Navigator and Charity Watch to ensure our contributions of time and/or money are effectively and ethically used.

Those claiming that they are not obligated to give to charities because some charities have been found to engage in imprudent if not overtly corrupt practices are guilty of demanding perfection. As with all things in life, we must expect a certain degree of dysfunction and, yes, even corruption. That does not mean that we cannot distinguish between generally credible and generally non-credible organizations.

The mundane, perfunctory choices we make in life forge our character, our disposition, which in turn shapes how we feel, what we care about, who we relate to, and what we do.

Perhaps even more importantly, we can educate ourselves on ethical product certification and purchase humanely sourced and produced goods to the fullest extent possible. This could entail purchasing as many goods as possible from owner-operated businesses and cooperatives, and buying goods, whenever financially feasible and materially possible, that are free of animal cruelty, and/or Fair Trade, Fair Food, and Small Producers certified.

Though we would do well to recognize the limits of consumerist approaches to social change, as the Slovenian philosopher, Slavoj Žižek cautions us to do, we should reject those who claim that we are under no obligation to make ethical choices as individual consumers.

In the first place, there is no good reason for being forced to choose between these two mutually exclusive options:

• a) recognize that many social injustices require structural fixes, and are thus not morally obligated to take individual action, or

• b) recognize that most injustices are due to individual wrong-doing, and thus reject structural efforts to remedy human suffering.

We can opt for a third option

• c) recognize that much human suffering is indeed due to social structures and that we can and ought to do our best to combat and mitigate that suffering through the available resources and opportunities afforded to us.

Those who argue we are individually alleviated of moral obligations to change personal behavior, since social structures are the primarily producer of injustice, seem to overlook how those within these power systems are just as likely to embrace such fatalistic logic. They are inclined to say that they are also “caught up in the system,” that it is bigger than them and beyond their control. More still, they have even more to lose by combatting that system since they are currently benefited by it. And so the rationale for our inaction becomes the rationale for inaction for all. By refusing to suspend or postpone the pursuit of justice in every faucet of our lives—our homes, workplaces, communities, political organizations—we discredit the rationalizations of power that “nothing can be done.”

On this point the humanities helps us appreciate the importance of ensuring our means and ends cohere. In a word, we ought to strive for integrity. The ideal ends we seek, which for some of us includes significant political transformation, are formatively shaped by the ongoing choices we make, the means we deploy on behalf of our foremost values—our ends. The mundane, perfunctory choices we make in life forge our character, our disposition, which in turn shapes how we feel, what we care about, who we relate to, and what we do.

Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. challenged us to appreciate that the means and ends of life are often bond-up together. In his 1967 “Christmas Sermon on Peace,” King said,

“We will never have peace in this world until men everywhere recognize that ends are not cut off from means, because the means represent the ideal in the making, and the end in process, and ultimately you can't reach good ends through evil means, because the means represent the seed and the end represents the tree."

Suppose a parent wants to raise children who think critically and use rational and empathetic communication rather than force and manipulation to solve their problems. The parent pays lip service to these “ends” or values but behaves dogmatically and manipulatively in their interaction with the children. Will anyone be surprised to hear that the children end up imitating the behavior of the parent rather than the professed values? Of course not. Ideals are intrinsically shaped by the means we deploy to achieve them.

Those of us who wish to see broader structural changes in society ought to exhibit, in our everyday decision making, the kinds of principled choices we wish to see on a larger scale. Failing to do so suggests inauthenticity, a lack of integrity, and an irrational expectation of the plant without the seed.

Living a life of conscious consumption may well create the conditions for larger social-political transformation, provided we are not ignorant to the larger structural impediments to dignified living and justice. We ought to keep the existentialist credo in mind that we are what we do and not merely what we profess we are or plan to do. Along these lines, radical feminists of the late 1960s into the 1970s insisted on realizing the political import of women's personal experiences, life circumstances, and decisions. The “personal is political” in the sense that the ebb and flow of power is affected by not only our votes and overt partisan campaigning, but also how we live our lives.

Simple choices in day-to-day life have significant implications. This is clear enough from something as simple as dairy milk consumption. In 2019, consumers in the U.S. drank just 0.49 cups of milk a day compared to 0.96 cups in 1970. Meanwhile plant-based milk consumption is on the rise, with significant implications for not only the agricultural industry but also animal welfare. In the United Kingdom, consumer demand for Fair Trade food and drink products rose by more than 13% in a single year. The effect being that more of the food supply chain is subjected to third-party certification and increased likelihood of workers being treated with some modicum of respect.

Yes, life is infinitely complex and we are doomed never to permanently succeed in vanquishing suffering. Still we ought to stand in solidarity with those who suffer, resisting absurdity's temptation to abandon our most basic sensitivities.

The power of combining civic action and ethical consumer practices is evident in the CIW’s “Fair Food Program.” The worker-initiated, monitored, and enforced program is a partnership between tomato purchasers, producers, and consumers. Grocery store and fast food buyers pay an extra penny per pound to growers for the produce they buy. Growers pass that money on directly to their laborers. To receive the stamp of “Fair Food” approval, growers must commit to a “code of conduct” that includes providing workers with protective equipment, maintaining accurate time-keeping of work hours, taking precautions to prevent worker exploitation, and provide reasonable protections from pesticides and threatening environmental factors such as lightning and heat. Growers also submit to a rigorous third-party auditing process.

The results of the program, 12 years since its inception, include more than $38 million paid out to workers, thousands of workers educated on their labor rights, and thousands of worker complaints being addressed. The CIW is currently campaigning for the fast-food restaurant Wendy’s and grocery stores, Publix and Kroger, to join current participants such as Burger King, McDonald's, Subway, Chipotle, Walmart, Whole Foods, and Trader Joe's. We can support these efforts by joining CIW actions and by redirecting our consumer dollars.

Whatever else may be said about our relationship to Utopic goals, we must not ignore this simple truth: we are all sometimes in the position to make choices that improve others’ lives, however small, over others that fail to help or perpetuate practices that are worse. And this is not a power we should diminish or deny. Rather it is a power we ought to judiciously exercise and carefully cultivate.

Albert Camus’ 1947 novel, The Plague, helpfully makes this point through the character of Tarrou. Finding himself stuck in a quarantined town sieged by a lethal disease, Tarrou helps organize sanitary squads that assiduously work to contain the rapidly spreading plague. His colleague, Dr. Rieux, finds that very little can be done to help the sick. The two men do their best, recognizing that much of their work is minimally effective and, at times, quite futile. Reflecting on their situation and the larger human condition, Tarrou says,

“All I maintain is that on this earth there are pestilences and there are victims, and it’s up to us, so far as possible, not to join forces with the pestilences. That may sound simple to the point of childishness; I can’t judge if it’s simple, but I know it’s true.”

This profound proclamation is worth keeping near to heart. Yes, life is infinitely complex and we are doomed never to permanently succeed in vanquishing suffering. Still we ought to stand in solidarity with those who suffer, resisting absurdity's temptation to abandon our most basic sensitivities.

We are reminded that wisdom requires more than facts, analysis, and strategy; it also demands the visceral initiative to care, to refuse the desensitization, apathy, and rationalizations of defeatism and despair. I remind you of my simple thought experiment with a predictable result: one hundred children in a fire; you can save one or none. What do you do? We will wish we could alter the conditions that have led the building to catch fire. We will want to save everyone. We will not want to see a single innocent die. We may rightly believe these fires are the predictable result of government malfeasance and failed safety regulations. But faced with an imperfect world, limited choices, and a refusal to side with pestilence, we will save the one, today. And we will turn our attention to the conditions that stoked the flames, tomorrow.

4. Singing and Dancing Our Way to Social Change

Finally, we should remember the power of singing and dancing when it comes to creating social change. We ought to utilize art and music to honor our values, facilitate human connection, and sustain moral sensitivity.

The arts have often played an important role in fortifying the spirits of participants in social movements. Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. described the freedom songs sang during Civil Rights actions as “the soul of the movement." Activists engaged in often perilous protest sang songs like “This Little Light of Mine” and “We Shall Overcome” to shield themselves from hatred and fortify their resolve.

Songs like Sam Cooke’s “A Change is Gonna Come” (1964) honored the pain many suffered under racism while encouraging a defiant spirit of optimism.

“There been times that I thought
I couldn't last for long
But now, I think I'm able
To carry on

It's been a long
A long time coming, but I know
A change gon' come
Oh yes, it will.”

Many contemporary political analysts speak about social movements as though they are describing profit and loss balance sheets. They evaluate activist efforts in the strictest terms of wins and losses, ignoring the “soul” King spoke of. It is worth considering the value movement leaders like Rev. King placed on music. In the opening address to the 1964 Berlin Jazz Festival, King, explained that human musical creativity has helped us cope with the hardships of life.

“Jazz speaks for life. The Blues tell the story of life's difficulties, and if you think for a moment, you will realize that they take the hardest realities of life and put them into music, only to come out with some new hope or sense of triumph. This is triumphant music.”

King of course knew poignant inditements of white supremacist violence like Billie Holiday's “Strange Fruit” (1939). He would soon hear Nina Simone's first Civil Rights song, “Mississippi Goddam” (1964). King went on to say that jazz was vital to the U.S. “Freedom Movement.”

"Much of the power of our Freedom Movement in the United States has come from this music. It has strengthened us with its sweet rhythms when courage began to fail. It has calmed us with its rich harmonies when spirits were down."

Music has long been a source of joy and ethical-spiritual fortification among people involved in social change. Though the song "We Shall Overcome" become widely popularized during the Civil Rights movement, it began as a folk song of the labor rights’ movement. The folk singer and activist, Zilphia Horton, heard the song in 1946 during a tobacco workers' labor strike in Charleston, South Carolina. Folk singer, Pete Seeger is responsible for the version best known to us, today.

The Knights of Labor placed significant emphasis on music in their struggle for workers’ rights. In 1885 they published a book of songs, "Labor Songs Dedicated to the Knights of Labor.” In the late 1800s, Billy Pastor sang the "Eight Hour Strike." The chorus, in part, reads:

“striking for the right boys, striking for the right
Then close the ranks of labor up,
And show the world your might….
Eight hours a day and decent pay, It is for that they fight.”

In 1912, Florence Reece wrote the first version of, "Which Side Are You On," at the age of 12 as her father took part in a coal miner strike. In 1931 she updated the song during the Harlan County strike by miners. During the same period many labor rights activists adopted the song “Solidarity Forever” as their anthem. The song was written by Ralph Chaplin, a member of the Industrial Workers of the World, around 1915. And in the 1940s Woodie Guthrie penned the iconic and subtlety subversive song, “This Land is Your Land.” In one of the frequently omitted verses from a recording of the song made between 1944 to 1949, Guthrie sings:

“As I went walking I saw a sign there
And on the sign it said, ‘No Trespassing.’
But on the other side it didn’t say nothing.
That side was made for you and me.”

The lyrical content of many popular musicians, today, prioritize consumerist themes and strictly individual concerns. Nevertheless, there are a range of contemporary artists who continue to follow in the socially-conscious footsteps of Billy Pastor, Florence Reece, Zilphia Horton, Pete Seeger, Sam Cooke, and others. One example is the renowned guitarist, Tom Morello. Through his band, Rage Against the Machine, and solo work, Morello has consistently put his ethical-political principles into music form. In 2021, Morello teamed up with the singer, Grandson, to perform an original song, “Hold the Line.” Against the backdrop of Morello’s muted but swelling guitar riff, Grandson sings,

“Nobody said it happens overnight
But if you're looking for a sign
Remember everybody that stood up before you
Oh, they hold the line
They wanna tell you, you're already free
Put these chains on and rob you blind
When they co-op the movement
Don't trip, just hold the line
Hold the line.”

The song not only calls for action but also directs us to draw confidence from the fact many of the transformations we now enjoy began in the trenches of struggle. (Give a listen to this short playlist, curated for this article: “Songs for Social Change.”)

Action > Novelty

Our culture has a bias for the new, forgetting that coming up with the right idea is only part of the difficulty we humans face. Arguably, the more difficult task is consistently exemplifying the best of ideas in the mundane moments and perfunctory practices of ordinary life. In a word, execution.

We would do well to recall that great thinkers have long understood true wisdom to be comprised of insight put into action. In Nicomachean Ethics (325 BCE), Aristotle noted that “most people” misunderstand the goal of philosophy by cutting off thought from action.

“It is well said…that it is by doing just acts that the just man is produced, and by doing temperate acts the temperate man; without doing these no one would have even a prospect of becoming good.

“But most people do not do these, but take refuge in theory and think they are being philosophers and will become good in this way, behaving somewhat like patients who listen attentively to their doctors, but do none of the things they are ordered to do. As the latter will not be made well in body by such a course of treatment, the former will not be made well in soul by such a course of philosophy.”

Genuine wisdom is exemplified not merely in “having” the right information, as a patient with the correct diagnosis, but in practicing or exemplifying—acting upon—that insightful guidance.

Getting What’s Coming to Us

It goes without saying that there are other ways we might do our best to foster an ethically good and just society. What ought to be constantly kept in mind is that those who dispute our efforts on grounds of their imperfection, the likely setbacks, and the potential for failure are guilty of irrationally demanding perfection. We should evaluate the efficacy or value of our efforts by a more reasonable rubric. Just as importantly, we should make honoring our deepest commitment to human dignity our primary aim. That may well mean following Lewis Hine’s path of daring to think, speak, and work on behalf of our values, even at the risk of “getting what has been coming” to us.

Please share and like this post by clicking the heart icon.

Invite Dr. Nall to Speak

Dr. Nall delivers energetic live presentations and engaging workshops on the subjects featured in Humanities in Revolt. Those interested in booking a workshop or talk can get in touch through Facebook or by leaving a comment.

Subscribe

Subscribers will receive periodic posts pertaining to the broad domain of humanistic inquiry, from the insights of great thinkers throughout human history, the meaning and importance of critical thinking and ethics, the underappreciated poetry in everyday existence, to contemporary cultural analysis and the ongoing struggle to combat human oppression and violence. You will also have the opportunity to engage the author and our online community in dialogue about each post.

Why get a paid subscription?

Paid subscriptions directly support Dr. Jeffrey Nall’s efforts to produce and share publicly accessible independent scholarship and analysis. Supporting donations can also be made through PayPal. For more about my work go to JeffreyNall.com and find me on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram.