ANS -- It' Our Revolution to Have

We are at a turning point in history.  We must save ourselves.  I think we will.  

This is an article worth reading, and I am adding what I commented at the end.  

--Kim

Rachel Hurley

 

ooepdrsntS954g10t3656t7h918fh4a8lul1ma1i119c47clm8f454a36ha2 ·

I just watched a video from historian Tad Stoermer that really hit home.

Tens of thousands of people marched through Minneapolis in -35°F windchill over the weekend. Negative thirty-five. That's "your eyelashes freeze together" cold. That's "frostbite in ten minutes" cold. And they showed up anyway - for a general strike, for protests at the airport, for standing watch outside schools where ICE might grab kids.

So Stoermer has a question: If the people are willing to freeze their asses off for this, why does it feel like resistance is failing?

Stoermer teaches resistance history at the University of Southern Denmark. He wrote a book about it. He's been studying how ordinary people challenge abusive governments for years. And he just dropped a video that should be required viewing for anyone wondering why all this energy isn't translating into results.

His answer is brutal and simple: the problem isn't bottom-up. It's top-down.

Here's what he means. Congressional Democrats function as what political scientists call a "loyal opposition." That's not an insult - it's a technical term. It means they oppose policies while accepting the legitimacy of the government making them. They contest within the boundaries. They play by the rules of a system that assumes everyone's operating in good faith.

And then he points to the receipts.

Last week, House Democrats made a big show of opposing ICE funding. The vote was 220-207. Almost all Democrats voted no. Sounds like resistance, right?

Same day. Different vote. The other funding bills - the ones that keep the rest of this government running - passed 341-88. That's 149 Democrats voting yes. To fund the same administration they say is "out of control." The same week ICE shot two American citizens in Minneapolis.

Stoermer's not saying Democrats are evil. He's saying they're structurally incapable of leading actual resistance. That's not their job. Their job is to be the loyal opposition - emphasis on loyal. They oppose, but only within limits. The loyalty comes first.

So who does lead resistance when the official opposition can't?

This is where it gets interesting. Stoermer points to what's actually working in Minnesota: neighborhood networks tracking ICE in real time. Parents standing watch outside daycares. A church delivering 12,000 boxes of food to families too scared to leave their homes. Over a thousand labor unions endorsing a general strike. Citizen journalists documenting what's happening while network cameras wait at the capitol for someone in a suit to give them a quote.

The infrastructure. The unsexy shit. Hand warmers, coffee, legal aid, supply runs. That's what lets people stay in the fight once they're in it.

He compares it to the American Revolution - which, fair, historians love to do. But his point lands. The colonists spent over a decade expecting the British system to fix itself. Looking to their official representatives for help. It took them that long to realize they needed to build parallel structures outside the system. Their own leadership. Their own institutions.

"That's where we are now," Stoermer says. "The looking elsewhere part. And for some of us, the being it part."

The American Revolution started with nine guys in a distillery. Not in Parliament. Not in official channels. In a room full of people who decided the system wasn't going to save them.

Minnesota is showing what that looks like in 2026. The question is whether the rest of the country is paying attention - or still waiting for Chuck Schumer to fix it.

#ratcclips

My comment:

Kim Cooper

Let me tell you of the runoff, the side effects, of the Minnesota Martyrs. We went to town today for errands and grocery shopping. Everyone was unusually polite and courteous and helpful and pleasant and smiling. I noticed it and wondered at it, and, as I got back into the car it hit me that this was people reacting to the situation in Minneapolis. I started to cry, I was so moved, and then as my spouse got into the car, I mentioned it, and my spouse said, "Yeah, I noticed how everyone is acting." I knew to connect the kind behavior with the disaster because of Rebecca Solnit's book, *A Paradise Built in Hell*. America is in this together -- I'm in Washington state. How are things in your neck of the woods?

ANS -- A Short Biography of Mathilda Gage

This is a short biography of Mathilda Joslyn Gage, a name we should know but mostly don't. She was a champion of women's rights.

--Kim

Story - 1 ·

Follow

ersdptoSno3 c mff9gahfu8596a39 151ia9u0:P60 ymJlM58t071rt4ng ·

She was too radical for her own movement, embraced by Indigenous women as an equal, and remembered only after history finished erasing her.

On March 24, 1826, Matilda Joslyn Gage was born in Cicero, New York, into a household that treated justice as a daily practice. Her father, Dr. Hezekiah Joslyn, was an abolitionist, and their home served as a stop on the Underground Railroad. As a girl, Matilda handed out antislavery pamphlets and listened to Frederick Douglass speak. She wanted to become a doctor. Medical schools refused her because she was a woman. So she chose a different path. One that threatened far more than professional norms.

In September 1852, at the National Women's Rights Convention in Syracuse, a 26-year-old Matilda walked to the podium without an invitation. She was the youngest speaker present. She did not ask permission. She announced herself. "Let Syracuse sustain her name for radicalism," she said. Her speech was the only one printed in full by the newspapers.

For the next forty years, she stood beside Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton as part of what was known as the movement's Triumvirate. She served as president of the National Woman Suffrage Association. She co-wrote the first three volumes of History of Woman Suffrage. Anthony stayed so often at Gage's home in Fayetteville that the family called the guest room the Susan B. Anthony room.

But Gage was never content with narrow victories.

Anthony focused on the vote. Gage focused on the system that made women subordinate in the first place. Law. Economics. Culture. And most dangerously, religion.

She wrote about coverture laws that erased married women as legal persons. A wife could not own property, sign contracts, control her earnings, or claim guardianship of her own children. She wrote about forced motherhood, arguing as early as 1868 that women had never been granted control over their own bodies within marriage.

She wrote about witch trials, not as superstition, but as organized violence against women who threatened male authority. In 1893, she published Woman, Church and State, the culmination of twenty years of research. The book argued that women accused of witchcraft were often healers, scientists, and independent thinkers, and that their persecution was a deliberate attack on female knowledge. She documented wife beating, child abuse, the unequal punishment of women versus men for sexual behavior, and the systematic theft of women's intellectual labor.

It was a direct indictment of church and state.

And it was too much.

By the late 1880s, Anthony and other suffrage leaders wanted alliances with Christian organizations to gain political respectability. They believed women voters would strengthen moral order. Gage saw this as surrender. In 1890, when the movement merged into the National American Woman Suffrage Association, Gage and Stanton opposed it. Anthony supported it.

Gage walked away.

She founded the Women's National Liberal Union, dedicated to secular government and full equality, not partial reform. The movement she helped build left her behind.

But another society did not.

Gage had spent years studying the Haudenosaunee nations of upstate New York, including the Mohawk. She observed a matrilineal culture where women controlled property, lineage passed through mothers, and clan mothers held political authority, including the power to remove chiefs. She wrote that under Indigenous women, government reached a level of justice unknown in Western civilization.

When she once tried to explain the idea of an illegitimate child to a Haudenosaunee woman, the woman was confused. How could any child be illegitimate?

In 1893, the same year Woman, Church and State was published, the Wolf Clan of the Mohawk Nation adopted Matilda Joslyn Gage as one of their own. They gave her a name, Karonienhawi. She who holds the sky. It was one of the highest honors they could give a non-Indigenous woman.

Five years later, on March 18, 1898, Gage died in Chicago at the home of her daughter Maud and her son-in-law, L. Frank Baum. Baum would later write The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. Scholars believe Gage's ideas shaped his vision of powerful female figures and the radical concept of good witches, echoing her argument that women healers had been demonized to preserve male control.

After her death, the erasure began almost immediately.

Anthony and Stanton outlived her and shaped the historical record. Both destroyed personal papers before their deaths, leaving History of Woman Suffrage as the primary insider account. Conservative suffragists repudiated Woman, Church and State in 1913. The book was banned under the Comstock laws. Gage's name faded. The Triumvirate became a pair.

In 1993, historian Margaret Rossiter named the pattern of denying women credit for their work the Matilda effect. She named it after a woman who had spent her life documenting that injustice, and then suffered it herself.

In 1995, Matilda Joslyn Gage was inducted into the National Women's Hall of Fame. Her Fayetteville home is now a museum. Her gravestone bears her creed: There is a word sweeter than Mother, Home or Heaven; that word is Liberty.

She was not erased because she was wrong.

She was erased because she was early, uncompromising, and complete.

She understood that the vote alone would never be enough. That freedom required confronting every institution that justified women's inferiority. That equality could not be built on theology that sanctified submission. That Indigenous women already lived what white society claimed was impossible.

She co-founded a movement that later distanced itself from her. She was adopted as She who holds the sky. She inspired a world of powerful women behind a curtain. She named the crime of erasure, then became its example.

History is finally catching up.

Say her name.

Matilda Joslyn Gage.