Chapter 37.
In the relentless battle against oppression, the simple act of speaking truth to power emerges as a formidable weapon. Thor Halvorssen, the Venezuelan-born human rights advocate, film producer, and founder of the Human Rights Foundation, keenly observes a profound paradox: dictatorships, despite their outward projection of strength through military parades and cultivated celebrity endorsements, are inherently “terrified” and “weak.” Their deepest dread, he asserts, is the spread of truth, which he vividly describes as “contagious.” This inherent fragility underscores that even seemingly immovable authoritarian regimes can crumble with startling rapidity, a testament to the enduring power of conviction.
Halvorssen emphasizes that while governments may deploy state media, fear-mongering, and a barrage of online bots to control narratives, the innate human desire for freedom and the recognition of fundamental rights are deeply ingrained. He believes that the sheer courage displayed by those who dare to speak truth to power is intoxicating and inspiring, acting as a potent counter to the manufactured strength of dictatorial regimes.
The very existence of forums like the Oslo Freedom Forum, which Halvorssen also founded, serves as a vital space where activists and dissidents connect, share their truths, and collaboratively strengthen the collective understanding of each dictatorship’s vulnerabilities. This exchange of information and solidarity directly challenges the isolation and despair that dictatorships relentlessly seek to impose, fostering a spirit of enduring hope.
The notion of “speaking truth to power” has long been a foundational concept in the fight against oppression, echoing through the philosophies and actions of countless human rights advocates. As articulated by the American Friends Service Committee, it embodies the moral imperative to confront injustice with unwavering honesty, regardless of personal risk.
Figures like Mahatma Gandhi, with his “truth-force” of satyagraha, powerfully demonstrated this, leading mass movements that exposed the moral bankruptcy of British colonial rule in India, ultimately securing the nation’s independence through public non-cooperation and the stark revelation of colonial exploitation. Václav Havel, the playwright and dissident who became president of Czechoslovakia, consistently used his essays and plays to subtly, yet profoundly, expose the absurdity and lies at the heart of the communist regime, contributing significantly to its eventual, peaceful dismantling. His work illustrates how even veiled truths could chip away at totalitarian control.
Nelson Mandela’s own autobiography, Long Walk to Freedom, offers a powerful testament to this. It details his unwavering commitment to exposing the injustices of apartheid and his belief in a democratic, free society where all live in harmony with equal opportunities – an ideal he dedicated his life to achieving, even if it meant death. Mandela’s journey from prisoner to president highlights how his relentless pursuit of truth and reconciliation ultimately dismantled a deeply entrenched system of oppression, inspiring global change.
Archbishop Desmond Tutu, through his relentless advocacy against apartheid, and Martin Luther King Jr., through his leadership in the American Civil Rights Movement, both masterfully used moral appeals and the stark presentation of injustice to force a reckoning with uncomfortable truths, leading to historic strides in civil rights and equality.
Michel Foucault keenly observed the inherent peril in such an endeavor, noting that those who courageously pursue truth to power often risk their liberty or even their lives. This theme is explored in works like The Cambridge Foucault Lexicon, which addresses the inseparability of power and resistance.
The human rights movement, championed by organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, continues to build upon this foundation, achieving tangible victories. Their meticulous documentation of abuses—such as Amnesty International’s detailed reports on political prisoners and extrajudicial killings, and Human Rights Watch’s investigations into war crimes and systemic discrimination—serves to publicly disseminate facts and advocate for victims. This directly challenges official narratives and upholds the belief that transparency and factual information are indispensable for achieving justice and fostering change.
The strategic power of truth is further elucidated in theories of nonviolent resistance, most notably in Gene Sharp’s extensive work, particularly his three-volume work The Politics of Nonviolent Action. Sharp’s analyses demonstrate how exposing the truth of injustice, both to the oppressor and the broader public, systematically eradicates a regime’s legitimacy and support.
In the Philippine “People Power Revolution” of 1986, the widespread dissemination of information about the Marcos regime’s corruption and electoral fraud, often through independent media and word-of-mouth, galvanized millions to nonviolently resist, leading to his eventual overthrow and a triumphant return to democracy. Methods of nonviolent action frequently rely on generating awareness and fostering moral persuasion, ultimately influencing public opinion and even, in some cases, shifting the attitudes of those in authority.
The profound philosophical connection between truth and freedom has been explored by thinkers across centuries. Pope John Paul II emphasized that “in truth are freedom and excellence,” viewing the public proclamation of truth as the most effective cultural resistance against violent oppression. This was a consistent theme throughout his pontificate, as his direct critiques of totalitarian systems in Eastern Europe resonated deeply with oppressed populations, contributing to their eventual liberation.
Baruch Spinoza’s more complex ethics, with its distinction between illusory “free will” and achievable “freedom,” hints at a liberation found through a deeper understanding of reality. More recently, Miranda Fricker’s concept of “epistemic injustice,” explored in her influential book Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing, highlights how power structures can actively suppress knowledge and discredit voices. This can be seen in how authoritarian regimes attempt to erase historical atrocities or silence whistleblowers, making the very act of seeking and recognizing truth a critical ethical and political imperative.
The historic democratic transitions, from Portugal’s Carnation Revolution in 1974 (where a relatively bloodless military coup was supported by widespread public demonstrations against the authoritarian regime) to Spain’s peaceful transition after Franco’s death in 1975, and the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union after years of internal dissent and public exposure of systemic failures, often reveal the catalytic role of internal dissent, leading to profound and positive societal transformations. This dissent is fueled by access to alternative information and a growing awareness of the true, often brutal, nature of their regimes.
Marcel Dirsus, in his book How Tyrants Fall: And How Nations Survive, offers a detailed examination of the mechanisms behind regime collapse. He often highlights how the truth, when effectively communicated and widely embraced by a populace, can expose the fundamental weaknesses of even seemingly invulnerable dictatorships, leading to their ultimate downfall and the emergence of more just societies. Dirsus’s analysis often delves into how economic stagnation, internal divisions, and the loss of external support—realities often concealed by state propaganda—become undeniable when dissenters manage to break through the information blockade.
He illustrates how the truth about a dictator’s abuses or inefficiencies, once revealed, can erode their legitimacy, leading to a loss of public trust and ultimately, the withdrawal of support from key pillars of the regime, such as the military or security forces. Dirsus might analyze how the true extent of economic hardship or the scale of human rights violations, once impossible to ignore, can turn a population from passive endurance to active resistance. His work provides a rigorous framework for understanding how the collective awareness of a regime’s true nature, rather than its carefully constructed façade, can be the ultimate determinant of its downfall.
Kenneth C. Davis’s Strongman: The Rise of Five Dictators and the Fall of Democracy vividly portrays the ascent and eventual vulnerabilities of powerful autocrats. He showcases how their carefully constructed illusions of strength often unravel when confronted with inconvenient truths, paving the way for democratic progress. Davis meticulously chronicles how these dictators, despite their initial successes in consolidating power through propaganda and repression, ultimately face challenges when their lies are exposed and their control over information wavers.
He demonstrates that while strongmen rely on projecting an image of invincibility, the underlying truth of their misgovernance, corruption, and brutality can eventually penetrate even the most tightly controlled societies. He might detail how public knowledge of a dictator’s personal excesses amidst widespread poverty, or the verifiable accounts of political assassinations, chip away at the narrative of a benevolent or infallible leader. The book underscores that the suppression of truth is a temporary measure, and that the long-term sustainability of any regime is fundamentally undermined when its citizens or key institutions cease to believe in its fabricated narratives. The erosion of a ruling power’s credibility through the undeniable exposure of corruption, repression, and economic failures frequently precedes widespread unrest and, ultimately, regime change, demonstrating truth’s ultimate victory.
The vital role of whistleblowers, and their profound impact on institutional integrity and the broader pursuit of empowerment within society, is a specific and potent manifestation of speaking truth to power. The courage of individuals who illuminate hidden truths is often the linchpin of true societal progress and the achievement of meaningful, positive outcomes that benefit all. A whistleblower is an individual who exposes misconduct, alleged dishonest or illegal activity occurring in an organization, whether private or public. Their actions are often driven by a deep moral imperative to protect the public interest, a conviction frequently forged from the pain of witnessing profound injustice. This pain can then ignite into a righteous anger, which serves as a potent source of courage, empowering them to bring to light practices that might otherwise remain concealed. Such revelations are critical for maintaining transparency and fostering accountability, which are foundational pillars for any healthy and trustworthy system.
The path of a whistleblower is frequently fraught with significant personal and professional risks. Empirical research, notably by scholars like Marcia P. Miceli and Janet P. Near, consistently documents the high rates of retaliation and negative career impacts faced by individuals who speak out. As C. Fred Alford extensively explores in Whistleblowers: Broken Lives and Organizational Power, such actions often lead to immense personal and social costs for those who dare to reveal concealed information.
Recent events further underscore the precarious position these individuals often find themselves in. There have been instances where individuals have reported undue pressure to alter critical reports, only to face severe retaliation. The disappointing ruling in the case of WHO whistleblower Dr. Zambon, who reported pressure to alter a key COVID-19 report, sets a troubling precedent for protecting those who speak out in the public interest. Despite evidence of retaliation and internal WHO findings supporting his claims, the International Labour Organisation Administrative Tribunal failed to recognise Dr. Zambon as a whistleblower.
This exposes significant gaps in protection mechanisms across international institutions and highlights a concerning lack of transparency and accountability within UN internal justice systems. Organizations like the Government Accountability Project (GAP) regularly document these systemic failures, emphasizing how inadequate protections undermine the very principle of accountability they seek to uphold. Such outcomes create a chilling effect, discouraging others who might otherwise speak out in the public interest. Yet, the very act of documenting these failures and advocating for change is itself a testament to the unwavering commitment to truth.
Amidst these ongoing challenges, the landscape of whistleblowing also offers powerful examples of individuals whose courageous actions have directly spurred positive systemic change. A notable case is that of Antoine Deltour and Raphaël Halet, whose revelations in the ‘LuxLeaks’ scandal exposed widespread tax avoidance schemes facilitated by Luxembourg’s tax rulings. Despite initially facing prosecution, their disclosures sparked international outrage and directly contributed to the impetus for the EU Whistleblower Protection Directive, a landmark piece of legislation aimed at providing stronger protections for whistleblowers across the European Union. Their story underscores that even in the face of significant personal risk, the steadfast pursuit of truth can indeed lead to profound policy reforms and enhance public accountability on a global scale, proving the power of individual courage.
The work of organizations like Transparency International (TI) stands as a vital counterweight amidst these pervasive challenges, demonstrating the powerful impact of collective action in fostering transparency and accountability. As a global civil society movement with chapters in over 100 countries, TI has not only meticulously documented the systemic failures in whistleblower protection but has also been a leading force in advocating for robust reforms. Their influence extends to shaping international policy, notably contributing to frameworks like the EU Whistleblower Protection Directive.
Transparency International provides tangible support to individuals, offering crucial advice and assistance through its Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres (ALACs) worldwide. By publishing widely recognized tools such as the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), TI galvanizes public and political will, translating awareness of corruption into a global call for action. This sustained engagement exemplifies the efficacy of civil society in translating moral imperatives into tangible progress, serving as a beacon for institutional integrity and collective empowerment, showing what can be achieved when truth is collectively championed.
Protecting whistleblowers is not merely a matter of individual justice; it is fundamental to safeguarding institutional integrity and preserving public trust, particularly during times of global crisis. Ethicists like Sissela Bok, in works such as Secrets: On the Ethics of Concealment and Revelation, have long argued that transparency and the willingness to reveal concealed information are vital for a functioning society.
Establishing robust protections that align with international best practices, such as the UK’s Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA), which amended the Employment Rights Act 1996, and those advocated by influential bodies like the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), is therefore not merely an ethical choice but a societal necessity. Ultimately, empowering whistleblowers is an essential step towards a more just, transparent, and accountable world, allowing collective decisions to be driven by data and ethical design rather than obscured by fallibility, reinforcing the steady march towards progress.
While the theoretical and historical power of truth-telling remains foundational, its practical application, particularly through public protest, faces increasing challenges in contemporary democracies. The film The Line We Crossed, a potent British story of dissent from the frontlines of climate resistance, vividly traces the quiet unraveling of protest rights in the UK. This film challenges audiences to deeply question what truly makes dissent effective and where the line of acceptability is drawn in a democratic society. The right to nonviolent protest is, after all, a fundamental pillar of democracy and enshrined in many international laws to which the UK government are signatories. Yet, as the film starkly portrays, this right has come under increasing threat.
Environmental defenders, in particular, are being targeted, facing silencing in court, criminalisation, and disproportionate punishments for nonviolent protest. Liz Smith, the film-maker, powerfully writes: “In the UK, over the last two years we have steadily been losing our right to protest. While environmental defenders have been the main target of these anti-protest laws, those law changes affect us all: if your cause falls out of favour with the authorities they can clamp down on you too now.” This clampdown, heavily influenced by recent legislative changes, forms the backdrop against which the film portrays the actions of the P&P project.
The government has progressively tightened laws restricting protest, building upon the Public Order Act 1986. This framework has been significantly reinforced by two major pieces of legislation. The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts (PCSC) Act 2022 notably expanded police powers, broadened the definition of “serious disruption,” removed distinctions between static and moving protests, and increased penalties for certain offences. Between June 28, 2022, and March 31, 2024, at least 473 protests in England and Wales had conditions imposed under these new powers. Of these, 411 (95%) were environmental protests, indicating a disproportionate application of these powers to environmental activism. During this period, 277 people were arrested for breaching conditions at processions or assemblies.
This was followed by the Public Order Act 2023, which introduced new criminal offenses like “locking-on,” “tunnelling,” obstructing transport, and interfering with national infrastructure. It also enabled Serious Disruption Prevention Orders (SDPOs) and lowered the threshold for police intervention, making it easier to curtail protests. Further Criminal Justice Bill amendments have targeted specific actions, including powers to arrest protesters wearing face coverings or using pyrotechnics, and critically, the removal of “reasonable excuse” defences for certain disruptive acts.
These legislative changes are highly controversial. Critics, including human rights organizations, argue that the combined measures will have a “chilling effect” on the right to protest, discouraging legitimate peaceful demonstration due to the increased risk of arrest and disproportionate penalties. A University of Bristol report found that British police arrest climate and environmental protesters at nearly triple the global average rate, with 17% of UK eco-protests leading to arrest, compared to an international average of 6.3%. Only Australia has a higher arrest rate for climate protests at 20.1%. While the UK has a very low rate of police violence in response to climate activism (0.2%) and no recorded killings, the high arrest rate and lengthy sentences are seen as a form of repression. The broad framing of new offenses and the lowered threshold for “serious disruption” are seen as open to misuse and potentially criminalizing ordinary protest tactics. The government, conversely, asserts these measures are necessary to protect the public and businesses from the “unacceptable actions” of a minority of protestors.
The Just Stop Oil campaign, the focus of the film, is one of personal stories of bravery and passionate motivation set against this unyielding state. One such powerful account comes from Sam Griffiths, who wrote on November 9, 2023: “I was remanded to Wandsworth Prison because I walked slowly in the road with about 40 other supporters of Just Stop Oil and we were there for a maximum of 20 minutes. I will be in here at least until my court date of November 30th. 28 days in total. Apparently we breached section 7 of the new public order act. I am shocked at how willing the police and the courts are to embrace this authoritarian and repressive legislation. Where is their moral backbone? Who are they serving? And who do they protect? It’s clear that they still believe we can arrest our way out of the climate crisis without actually taking any positive action to address the underlying issue.”
This personal testimony exemplifies the very concerns raised by critics regarding the escalating laws. In another instance, five Just Stop Oil activists received sentences ranging from four to five years in 2024 for conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for organising direct action protests on the M25, though some of these sentences were later reduced on appeal. The rhetorical question posed in the film, “Why did the Government relentlessly pursue a retired social worker on the charge of contempt of court?”, resonates deeply within this context, highlighting the severity and perceived disproportionate application of these new legal tools against individuals engaging in protest. Liz Smith uses clips from some of the footage she shot for the documentary film “The Environmental Defenders” and talks with Jolyon Maughan, founder of Good Law Project, and Trudi Warner. Sam Griffiths, a graphic designer, received a 16-month sentence for “reckless and culpable conduct.”
The significance of this screening in Newcastle was amplified by its status as the public premiere, attended by Liz Smith (the film’s author), Trudi Warner (featured in the film), and Sam Griffiths’ mother, who proudly represented Sam as he himself was unable to attend. These three stayed for a powerful Q&A session after the screening, engaging directly with the audience on a range of critical topics. Discussions touched upon the need to defend our jurors and protect their independence.
Michel Forst, in the film’s interview, expressed deep concern that judges in the UK would “ask the jury to leave the room and to discuss with the defendant,” preventing protestors from presenting their full defence and explaining their motivations to the jury – a practice he finds “difficult to understand how a democracy would not be able to allow the defendant to present the events properly.” He also expressed shock at the arrests for holding signs near courts stating “juries have the right to hear the whole truth,” noting he had “not seen that in other countries in fact.”
Sam’s mother spoke of a forthcoming book, written from the perspective of him answering the questions from fellow prisoners, offering a unique, powerful and personal impact of these escalating laws. The controversial “terrorist” label sometimes applied to climate activists was a key point of discussion. Forst noted politicians, including those in the UK, using terms like “eco-zealots” or “eco-terrorists,” stating this aims to “vilify the cause” itself, not just the individuals.
The role of the Climate Media Coalition in countering mainstream narratives was also explored. Forst highlighted his concerns about the increasing number of journalists being arrested while covering protests, like the film’s author, and the rise of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) targeting journalists who uncover corporate or government collusion. Concerns were raised about informing disinformation and the government’s irresponsible approach to these issues.
Forst noted a clear disparity in how protests are policed, citing examples of farmers in other European countries blocking roads for days with no arrests, while climate activists using similar tactics face severe repression. He emphasized that international law, specifically the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Article 21 and Human Rights Committee General Comment 37, explicitly covers civil disobedience and accepts disruption as part of legitimate protest, provided it is non-violent. He stated that the UK “apparently is not fulfilling all the obligations” under the treaties it has ratified. Furthermore, he revealed that the UK government had failed to reply to his official “Letters of Allegation” regarding complaints from UK environmental defenders, leading him to issue a public statement and consider referring the cases to the Aarhus Convention’s Compliance Committee, which could have further political implications for the UK at the UN.
Participants explored the potential of alternative media and alternative democracy models. The environmental and political activist group Youth Demand and their urgent call for action. The discussion also covered the challenges of censorship, noting that no one wanted to touch the film so Page75 Productions had to self-distribute, and the need for robust checks and balances in alternative media. The conversation broadened to include the human rights hypocrisy observed in the UK’s stance, the alarming trend of escalating laws, and the collective sentiment that “this isn’t okay.” Ultimately, the dialogue consistently returned to the importance of defending justice, with a clear recognition that “the hammer is coming down hard because protest is working,” implying that the state’s aggressive response is a sign that protest is indeed effective and therefore perceived as a significant, and ultimately surmountable, threat to the status quo.
Beyond traditional forms of activism, the digital landscape has provided a powerful new arena for the dissemination of truth and the mobilization of collective action, transforming the very nature of democratic participation. While some may be skeptical, dismissing online efforts as the realm of “keyboard warriors,” the tangible impact of digital activism is undeniable, demonstrating its vital contribution to progress. As one friend, hailing from a “Facebook-free zone,” acknowledged, even in the absence of a pervasive social media presence, the underlying mechanisms of online activism offer a dynamic and effective means of engagement.
Feedback from prominent campaign groups like Avaaz highlights the extraordinary reach and influence of online activism. Avaaz, boasting nearly 25 million members and growing by over a million each month, demonstrates the awakening of a “sleeping giant” across the planet, empowering millions, young and old, to mobilize online and reject corruption and injustice with remarkable success. In Brazil, the Avaaz community was directly cited by the Senate. This culminated in a vote to empower citizen petitions with over 500,000 signatures to directly introduce measures to the government, a powerful shift towards 21st-century democracy where online petitions like the 1.6 million strong demand to oust a disgraced Senate President actively push for transparency and accountability and achieve tangible results.
The success of online activism extends to diverse global issues, proving its versatility and efficacy. In Bangladesh, following a devastating garment factory collapse, Avaaz leveraged its members on Facebook and created widespread media debate. This forced major retailers like H&M to sign enforceable worker safety plans. This swift action, prompted by digital pressure, encouraged over 75 other brands to follow suit, underscoring the undeniable power of consumer awareness driven by online campaigns to compel significant corporate change. Similarly, the European ban on bee-killing pesticides, a victory after two years of tireless campaigning by Avaaz, involved a massive online petition with over 2.6 million signatures, alongside offline protests. This demonstrates the seamless integration of online and offline tactics, where digital platforms amplify and coordinate real-world actions, leading to crucial policy victories.
Further examples from Avaaz’s extensive work illustrate the versatility of online activism. Efforts to stop the mass Maasai evictions in Tanzania saw 1.7 million online voices drawing international media attention and prompting the Prime Minister to pledge a permanent solution. The “War on Drugs” reform across the Americas was influenced by hundreds of thousands of online voices, leading to a historic declaration by the Organisation of American States to prioritize public health over military approaches, a shift directly acknowledged by Guatemalan President Otto Pérez Molina. Campaigns to end violence against women in India, the Maldives, and Somalia leveraged online pressure and public education to push for stronger laws and challenge outdated attitudes. Even the audacious attempt to stop an Icelandic tycoon from butchering endangered fin whales for dog food was thwarted by over 1.1 million online activists who pressured Dutch and German authorities to close their ports to whale meat shipments. More recently, the “Global Tax Scam” campaign, involving a massive petition and collaboration with NGOs, contributed to a historic G8 agreement to combat tax evasion, demonstrating how online collective action can influence high-level international policy and deliver real-world impact.
Beyond Avaaz, other platforms and initiatives reinforce the efficacy of online activism. 38 Degrees, a British non-profit with over a million members, exemplifies a multi-issue, people-powered movement. Their success in pressuring Olympic sponsors to abandon a controversial tax dodge through targeted online petitions showcases how digital mobilization can effectively hold powerful entities accountable. Their approach, integrating online petitions with offline methods like contacting MPs, underscores the hybrid nature of modern activism. Similarly, Care2, with its 22 million members globally, and Change.org, empowering millions to launch and win campaigns on diverse social issues, further demonstrate the massive scale and tangible impact of digital advocacy in empowering citizens globally. The ONE Campaign, backed by over 3 million members worldwide, leverages online platforms to fight extreme poverty and preventable diseases, successfully influencing G8 leaders to back Africa’s food revolution and promote financial transparency, showcasing consistent victories in global policy. Transparency International, though a monitoring organization, also leverages online tools to publicize corporate and political corruption, highlighting that their “politically non-partisan” stance and global chapters are amplified by their digital reach, as seen in their campaigns for extractive industries disclosure.
The very definition of internet activism, or “e-activism,” encompasses the use of electronic communication technologies—social media like Twitter and Facebook, email, and podcasts—to enable faster communication, community building, lobbying, and fundraising for citizen movements. As Sandor Vegh categorizes, it encompasses awareness/advocacy, organization/mobilization, and action/reaction. The internet serves as a crucial resource for independent activists, especially those challenging mainstream narratives, empowering them to bypass traditional gatekeepers and achieve widespread impact. Burmanet aptly notes that “Especially when a serious violation of human rights occurs, the Internet is essential in reporting the atrocity to the outside world,” enabling the distribution of news otherwise inaccessible in repressed countries. The historical trajectory of online activism dates back to early mass email campaigns, such as the successful protest against Lotus MarketPlace in 1990, demonstrating its capacity to halt controversial corporate practices. Further examples include the “Intervasion of the UK” in 1994, which used email bombing to protest the Criminal Justice Bill, and the pioneering cyber-dissidence of Dr. Daniel Mengara’s “Bongo Doit Partir” website in 1998, which foreshadowed the internet’s role in the Arab Spring revolutions.
The Mexican rebel group EZLN’s use of decentralized communications to build anti-globalization networks, and the Indymedia collective’s grassroots coverage of the WTO protests in Seattle, further highlight the internet’s transformative power in organizing and disseminating information beyond mainstream media, leading to effective grassroots movements. In the UK, the Professional Contractors Group’s success in organizing online and raising funds to challenge a new employment tax through e-petitions and flash mobs, even leading to parliamentary lobbying, provides a powerful local example of digital activism driving legislative change.
The sheer scale of platforms like Facebook, with billions of users, underscores the undeniable potential of social media for democratic engagement. While personal journeys into online activism may be gradual, as seen in Bregman’s own progression from a casual Facebook user to an active participant in campaigns like saving the NHS through Avaaz, the impact is profound and consistently positive. Avaaz’s success, driven by its democratic mission to close the gap “between the world we have and the world most people everywhere want,” showcases how a focus on individual issues, rather than rigid party manifestos, allows for widespread participation. Their underlying values emphasize shared human responsibility and hope, proving that collective dreams can indeed build a bridge to a better world.
The success of 38 Degrees in holding decision-makers accountable, as demonstrated by their role in shaping the NHS Civil Society Assembly, further validates the power of a “people-powered” movement to achieve concrete results. Other innovative platforms like Ushahidi, which facilitates crowdsourced mapping of events and human rights abuses, and Magpi’s mobile apps for data collection, epitomize the technological advancements that empower citizens to become “world-changers.” Meetup.com, by bridging the online and offline, demonstrates how digital tools can foster real-world communities unified by shared interests, amplifying their collective voice and capacity for action. Ultimately, the integration of online activism with traditional methods creates a dynamic and increasingly effective force for truth, transparency, and democratic change on a global scale, leading to continuous victories against oppression.
In his new book, “Moral Ambition: Stop Wasting Your Talent and Start Making a Difference,” Rutger Bregman argues that many individuals, despite possessing privilege, education, and innate talent, find themselves in unfulfilling or detrimental roles. He calls this “the greatest waste of our times” and urges readers to embrace “moral ambition”—the fierce will to make the world a wildly better place—a drive that has historically spurred significant progress.
Bregman finds profound and inspiring hope in humanity’s history of navigating truly scary and immoral periods, consistently overcoming them through courageous action. These challenging times, he suggests, were often overcome by countercultural revolts of elites challenging prevailing immoralities. This recurring pattern offers a blueprint for addressing current global challenges. He points to the British abolitionists of the late 18th century as a compelling example. This era was marked by immense political and social decay: rampant alcoholism in Parliament, widespread prostitution in London, and a notoriously immoral Prince of Wales. Yet, amidst this decline, a powerful movement emerged, successfully challenging deeply entrenched injustice. Led by figures like Thomas Clarkson and William Wilberforce, their goal was to “make doing good fashionable once again.” The fight against the transatlantic slave trade, abolitionism, was a primary project of this broader moral reawakening. This clearly demonstrates how a countercultural elite successfully rejected established, immoral norms, dedicating their privilege and influence to a cause far greater than themselves—a prime example of the moral ambition Bregman champions and its capacity for transformative success.
Bregman observes a similar dynamic in the United States, during its transition from the Gilded Age to the Progressive Era. The Gilded Age saw extraordinary inequality, with “robber barons” like the Vanderbilts accumulating insane wealth through monopolies, particularly in railroads. They spent this wealth ostentatiously, even recreating Venice with canals inside a New York mansion. However, this excess eventually spurred a powerful countercultural movement, again driven by elites, that successfully brought about significant reforms. Progressive presidents from the Roosevelt family and legal minds like Louis Brandeis, “the people’s lawyer,” actively challenged these injustices.
Alva Vanderbilt stands out as an inspiring figure from this era. Initially marrying into the Vanderbilt family to join New York’s exclusive “400,” she later divorced and transformed into a radical suffragette, fiercely advocating for women’s rights and donating vast sums to the movement, marking a profound personal and societal triumph. Her contributions resonate with the philanthropic efforts of modern figures like MacKenzie Scott. Alva Vanderbilt’s journey perfectly embodies “moral ambition,” where an individual with significant resources redirects their talent and wealth towards meaningful societal change, rather than letting it be wasted on trivial pursuits.
This recurring historical pattern—where periods of moral decline and extreme inequality are met by countercultural movements, often initiated by privileged individuals choosing to act for the greater good—is precisely what gives Bregman hope. His new book calls for a similar countercultural movement today, especially as current events feel increasingly dark and blatant immorality is evident. In the US, the Republican party appears to be in a state of moral collapse. As a parent of two young children, he finds that the distinction is no longer simply “left versus right.” When considering how he wants to raise his kids, he feels it’s essentially the opposite of how many people in power are behaving—so nasty and constantly acting like bullies.
Society has faced similar predicaments before, and history offers compelling examples of how they were overcome. When considering the slogan “Make America Great Again,” Bregman suggests its interpretation depends on one’s historical reference point. As an advocate for tax fairness, Bregman finds it inequitable that billionaires globally often have lower effective tax rates than working and middle-class people. He firmly believes this can be fixed, pointing to historical examples from the 1950s and 1960s where a more reasonable system of taxation existed, which importantly, also coincided with higher growth rates. Thus, seeking inspiration from the past to “Make America Great Again” is a project he sees immense hope in, aligning with the core message of “Moral Ambition” that individuals can, and should, strive for a better, more just future by learning from those who dared to make a difference before them, and ultimately succeed.
Next Chapter: Charity: The Agile Gift
Bibliography
Alford, C. Fred. Whistleblowers: Broken Lives and Organizational Power. Cornell University Press, 2001.
Bok, Sissela. Secrets: On the Ethics of Concealment and Revelation. Pantheon Books, 1983.
Bregman, R. (2025). Moral Ambition: Stop Wasting Your Talent and Start Making a Difference. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Davis, K. C. (2020). Strongman: The Rise of Five Dictators and the Fall of Democracy. Flatiron Books.
Dirsus, M. (2023). How Tyrants Fall: And How Nations Survive. Columbia University Press.
Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford University Press.
Mandela, N. (1994). Long Walk to Freedom. Little, Brown and Company.
Miceli, Marcia P., and Janet P. Near. Blowing the Whistle: The Organizational and Legal Implications for Companies and Employees. Lexington Books, 1992.
Sharp, G. (1973). The Politics of Nonviolent Action. Porter Sargent Publishers.
Vegh, S. (2003). Classifying Forms of Internet Activism: From ‘Awareness to Action’. In M. McCaughey & R. D. Ayers (Eds.), Cyberactivism: Online Activism in Theory and Practice. Routledge.
References
American Friends Service Committee. Speaking Truth to Power.
Amnesty International. (Various Reports). Reports on political prisoners, extrajudicial killings, and human rights abuses globally.
Avaaz. Campaigns and Impact Reports.
Burmanet. The Internet and Human Rights in Burma.
Care2. About Us and Campaigns.
Change.org. About Us and Campaigns.
Foucault, M. (Various works). See also The Cambridge Foucault Lexicon.
Gandhi, M. (Various works). On Satyagraha and Nonviolent Resistance.
Government Accountability Project (GAP). Various reports and publications.
Halvorssen, T. Statements and speeches on Human Rights Foundation and Oslo Freedom Forum.
Havel, V. (Various works). Essays and plays on totalitarianism and truth.
Human Rights Watch. (Various Reports). Investigations into war crimes and systemic discrimination globally.
King Jr., M. L. (Various speeches and writings). On Civil Rights and Nonviolent Protest.
Magpi. Mobile apps for data collection.
Meetup.com. About Us.
Mengara, D. (1998). “Bongo Doit Partir” website and related works.
ONE Campaign. About Us and Campaigns.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Various reports and recommendations on whistleblower protection.
Pope John Paul II. (Various Encyclicals and addresses). On Truth and Freedom.
Professional Contractors Group (PCG). Campaigns and achievements.
Smith, Liz. The Line We Crossed.
38 Degrees. About Us and Campaigns.
Transparency International. Various reports and publications on anti-corruption and whistleblower protection, including the Corruption Perceptions Index and details on Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres.
Tutu, D. (Various works). On Anti-Apartheid Activism.
Ushahidi. Crowdsourced mapping platform.