RevolutionZ

Episode 376 of RevolutionZ, like other recent episodes, has two main themes, not one. First, what happens after Trump and how do we fight Trump in a way that prepares to continue to struggle after his end? There is a fork in the road—either remove Trump to drift back to the “normal” that bred the crisis or build to remove Trump and win a worthy future rooted in diversity, solidarity, equity, self‑management, and ecological sanity. From there, the episode moves on to its second fous, another in our series of excerpted interviews from the forthcoming book, The Wind Cries Freedom. The oral history's interviewer, Miguel Guevara, sits with Reverend Stephen Sharp, who describes his path from climate awakening to anti‑capitalist ministry, including renovating charity to become a doorway to empowerment and refining outrage into focused, collective action.

Stephen shares the moment that changed him—a confession from a young woman surviving rape and prostitution who displayed her plight and made him feel deeply how personal pain is generated and manipulated by policy and profit. Stephen also describes how faith communities shifted posture to offer unconditional aid while inviting learning, organizing, and public courage. He describes, that is, how revolutionary participatory society aspirations developed a sharp line between coercive charity that demands conformity, and informed solidarity that protects dignity and agency. He describes as well other aspects of religious renovation that complement political strategy: to open all roles to women, to democratize church authority and change the character of roles to be worthy of women who are welcomed, to audit and redistribute institutional wealth, and to confront the tribal reflex that turns adherents of different traditions into enemies.

The discussion also examines the rise of Christian nationalism as a loyalty cult wrapped in scripture, and how multi‑faith marches, youth pressure, and grassroots organizing pulled rituals toward justice. Stephen wrestles candidly with the power and peril of ritual—how it can bind communities and teach virtue, yet harden into control and regimentation. Looking ahead, he imagines a plural, innovation welcoming, protected religious landscape in revolutionary participatory societies where no faith seeks to conquer another and where belief is measured by the love it lives, the justice it advances, and the peace it secures.
Support the show

Episode 375 of RevolutionZ has as guest Kathy Kelly. When journalists are barred and killed, doctors are targeted, and mountainous rubble hides unexploded ordnance, a society is violated twice—physically and narratively. Our guest, Kathy Kelly, connects what headlines obscure: how U.S. weapons shipments function as political green lights, how “ceasefire” rhetoric papers over daily violations, and how displacement in the West Bank is driven by soldiers, settlers, and a structure designed to make staying impossible.

Kathy brings the human scale back into focus. From a makeshift white flag walk into Jenin to evenings with families in Gaza, she shares the intimate choices people make under siege—protecting elders, scavenging firewood, teaching children to read the sky for drones. These stories resist the flattening of body counts, revealing what war does to witnesses and perpetrators alike. Kathy explores how international law erodes when powerful states flout norms, why nuclear ambitions can spread under the guise of “civilian” programs, and how those choices ricochet into U.S. life through policing exchanges, PTSD, and the quiet normalization of force.

Kathy also talks strategy. She tells how student encampments and divestment campaigns pried open university endowments and hedge fund ties. How cultural voices amplify names and memories that institutions try to erase. How growing activism keeps movements alive and oriented. Kathy reflects on practical commitments—from tax resistance to hospitality—that shift resources away from violence and toward care and building a revolution of values sturdy enough to change institutions: living more simply, sharing more fairly, ending the reflex to eliminate those who resist subordination to “national interests,” and actively organizing sustainable resistance. Her message: read and remember, organize locally, join boycott and divestment efforts, and align daily choices with the future you want. 
Support the show

Episode 374 of RevolutionZ starts with a snowfall and notices forecast overshoot. Then it asks why so many reporting, predicting, and evaluating “mistakes” lean the same way? It unpacks one‑sided errors—how weather hype, skewed invoices, and media framing teach the public to accept bias as normal. And then, via The Wind Cries Freedom's oral history it connects such patterns to the sports arenas and fields where bodies, money, and myth collide, and connects sports to larger surrounding movements as well..
Miguel Guevara introduces us to interviewee Peter Cabral, himself an athlete and revolutionary. Then Peter describes his own transition into activism and the shift from star‑driven gestures to athlete‑led organizing. He describes the pressures that keep players quiet—family expectations, early pedestal treatment, and career‑long dependence on gatekeepers—and how physical harm, perverse pay, community harm, and desires for actual dignity and rational life forced athletes to break with business as usual. From Colin Kaepernik’s kneel to coordinated boycotts and especially campus organizing, Peter takes us to the moment when Revolutionary Participatory Society's solidarity turned into structure and its isolated individual courage became collective strategic activism.

The conversation digs into college athletes organizing and how their methods not only learned from but also taught the pros. It explores seeking and then winning Olympic reforms: moving events across multiple cities, reusing facilities, redirecting revenue to athletes and neighborhoods, and refusing to play when hosting means displacement. It describes practical programs Peter was part of to protect communities, honor but not unduly enrich competitors, and to move the drama and excellence of sports back to the field from stock markets and media madness. Peter also wrestles with pay schedules: should luck-born athletic gifts command outsized wealth? He argues in the RPS mode instead for pay to be anchored in duration, intensity, and onerousness—and for celebrating excellence but without creating hierarchies. He describes how such desires for sensible equity and real respect emerged and began to dominate athletes' aims in place of owning mansions on a hill. 

Threaded throughout Miguel's questions and Peter's replies is a call for media literacy and especially institutional redesign across all domains. When incentives reward spectacle and bargaining power with owners on top, “errors” keep tilting one way. Peter's response: When we organized from pressrooms to locker rooms we helped advance athlete activism, Olympic accountability, equitable pay, and the fight against creeping authoritarianism, WE became part of something much larger. Peter describes the kind of personal feelings and collective actions and programs that, in his time and in his experience, fueled concrete wins that pointed toward an unfolding next American Revolution. Finally, Miguel elicits from Peter how he expects sports to change in a fully developed participatory society, both for the athletes and for fans.
Support the show

Episode 373 of RevolutionZ hears about people trained to perform deciding to build power. Celia Crowley—actor, organizer, and then California’s governor but later to become Vice President—to unpacks how a quiet coalition inside Hollywood traded optics for organization and turned celebrity into a conduit for collective action. From a first awkward meeting in a palatial living room to strikes that rebalanced power on set, Celia lays out some moves that mattered: an intensive “social school” for film workers, a high-stakes push for pay transparency, and films that funnel surplus revenue into real campaigns.

Perhaps most revealingly, Celia dismantles the myth of artistic exceptionalism with great clarity. Creativity doesn’t need hierarchy to thrive. It can do still better with equity, shared decision-making, and room for many voices. She discusses how democratic planning can fund cultural work without dictating its content, how balanced jobs expanded total creativity, and how evidence from RPS-style productions challenged the old game of genius-for-power. She also gets personal about beauty as currency, the risks behind the red carpet, and the hard line to draw between admiration and structural privilege.

Along the way, she answers questions about a pivotal Oscar night, a landmark industry strike, and the steady rise of worker councils across sets and studios. The episode provides a template with lessons for journalism, sports, and any field where a few have long held center stage. Celia provides reason to rethink who decides what gets made, who gets paid, and how audiences become stakeholders. Her experience offers strategy, examples, and proof points to use whatever your work and passion may highlight.
Support the show

Episode 372 of RevolutionZ urges that every activist choice we make—what to say, what to do, and who to do it with and for—can be usefully guided by one clear calculation: will this or that option grow the movement’s numbers, deepen members' commitment and means, and increase pressure on those in power? How might that logic of choice  affect how we write, organize, and work with others among other daily choices we face?

To start, the episode considers our choice of words to speak or write. When an episode or an article describes pain that the system around us imposes, and even how the system works, and we do it over and over, how much does that help with growth, commitment, methods, and pressure? Given our need to grow in numbers, and enrich in methods, doesn't the proposed measuring stick say we should speak where the reachable are, keep our language as simple as accuracy allows, and always include and even emphasize vision and strategy? Do we do that? If not, why not? Can new ideas, concrete proposals, and credible plans invite hesitant people off the sidelines more than for us to say or write, yet again, that how bad things are? Strategy-focused words become a tool for converting attention into action. Do pain focussed words that tell people what they already know do likewise?

Then we consider choosing tactics by considering the now surfacing debate over how to fight against ICE. The pull toward confrontation is real. We feel it. But if we use our one yardstick, our simple proposed logic to weigh violence against mass nonviolent disruption, what we feel isn't our guide. Instead it is to consider consequences of competing choices for growth, power, and impact. If we do that, what emerges? 
The episode suggests that nonviolent tactics done at scale impose costs on elites while attracting allies and improving commitment. Our goal isn’t to feel fierce or righteous. Our goal becomes to win over and commit more people, more often, for longer.

Who to relate to, who to support, gets similar treatment. The simple logic suggests that purity shrinks, coalescing grows. Shying away from what doesn't agree perfectly with oneself fragments. Listening and even learning from what doesn't agree with self, can grow. To support campaigns that win tangible gains and build capacity, even if they don’t include every preferred demand, isn't that what we ought to do, but is it what we do do? 
Do we frame differences as due to character flaws to dismiss or as disputes over expected outcomes to test and explore? Which can create enlarged unity? Do we seek out and onboard  unions, students, faith communities, and neighborhood groups who can bring fresh energy and legitimacy though we don't all see all things the same way? Do we join with and support even what we hope will include more of our favored priorities in time?

Finally, as a kind of afterword, the episode considers catalysts that can accelerate initial momentum: visible local wins like Mamdani's, regular actions that build efficacy like the efforts in Minneapolis, and also less often sought, bold engagement from cultural figures and labor leaders able to reach large audiences. We invite Taylor Swift, Stephen Curry, and Caitlin Clark as examples. Also school teachers and university faculty. Come fully on board. Why? Because when artists and athletes, labor leaders and educators with access to large audiences speak out clearly, very loudly, and consistently militantly, when they donate time and resources and  seriously show up, their doing so can communicate widely and make participation feel hopeful to audiences that are otherwise not yet hearing the call. Pair that with steady organizing and you get a movement that compounds power.

Does the simple but powerful norm for choices offered this episode make sense to you? 
Support the show