When Do Protests Actually Work? — with Erica Chenoweth

Erica Chenoweth, political scientist and professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School, joins Scott Galloway to break down what actually makes protest movements succeed. They discuss why most movements fail, the four factors that drive real change, and why mass mobilization alone isn’t enough. They also unpack the “3.5% rule,” the role of business and institutional power, and whether economic resistance can be more effective than taking to the streets. Also, friendly reminder that we're live on Substack. Subscribe at profgmedia.com to get ad-free versions of all our podcasts, the full archive of Scott’s newsletters, and exclusive content including deep dives, livestream conversations, and subscriber Q&As. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:00Speaker 00

  Are your ad campaigns lighting up the dashboard? But not the pipeline? That's bull spend. And marketers are calling it out in dashboard confessions.

• 0:09Speaker 01

  My boss asked for results, so I opened my dashboard for the only positive sounding metric I had: impressions.

• 0:17Speaker 00

  Cut the bull spend. See revenue, not just reach. LinkedIn delivers the highest return on ad spend of major ad networks. Advertise on LinkedIn. Spend $250 on your first campaign and get a $250 credit. Go to LinkedIn.com/campaign. Terms and conditions apply.

• 0:31Speaker 02

  This episode is brought to you by Michelob Ultra. Good times mean competitions between you and your friends. Like seeing who can throw some pigskin the farthest or rush the field the fastest. Winner gets an ultra. Because it's not just a superior light beer, it's also giving fans superior access to their favorite sporting events. Superior is worth playing for. Visit michelobultra.com/superioraccess to enter. Enjoy responsibly. Copyright 2026 Anheuser-Busch InBev Michelob Ultra Beer, St. Louis, Missouri.

• 1:01Speaker 03

  This episode is brought to you by Welch's Fruit Snacks. Back to school season can be tough on parents. But choosing a snack you and your kids can both get behind doesn't have to be. Stock up on Welch's Fruit Snacks. Made with whole fruit and now made with no artificial dyes. It's a snack kids already love and one you can feel good about giving them. Go back to school with Welch's Fruit Snacks. Now made with no artificial dyes.

• 1:30Scott Galloway?

  Episode 391. 391 Broadway is a historic building located in New York City. True story, when I first moved to New York, my best friend Lee introduced me to a bunch of Broadway dancers. And I dated a Rockette. And I went to meet her in Chicago when she was on tour for the Christmas Spectacular. Came into her room where there was a little person cutting lines on the ass of a dancer. True story. No joke, true story.

• 1:59Scott Galloway?

  Go, go, go!

• 2:09Scott Galloway?

  Welcome to the 391st episode of the Prof G Pod. Didn't see that coming, did you? Didn't see that coming. What's happening in today's episode, we speak with Erica Chenoweth, a political scientist and professor at Harvard's Kennedy School, whose research focuses on political violence, civil resistance, and social movements. Professor Chenoweth is widely known for their work on the effectiveness of nonviolent protests, something we've spoken a lot about. We've even quoted their work many times in our newsletter, No Mercy No Mouse, specifically on the topic of resist and unsubscribe. Anyways, with that, here's our conversation with Erica Chenoweth.

• 2:52Scott Galloway?

  Professor, where does this podcast find you?

• 2:54Speaker 05

  I'm in Cambridge today.

• 2:56Scott Galloway?

  All right, let's bust right into it. You spent your career studying how nonviolent movements succeed or fail, and we've cited your work in our newsletter several times. We even launched our own economic resistance campaign earlier this year, but I want to make sure, well, I love your, just your insight. How would you describe what your research actually says in your own words?

• 3:17Speaker 05

  I think the most relevant research here is about what is it that makes movements more likely to succeed or fail? And I think the sort of synthesis I would offer from a huge range of research studies on this, my own and others, is that there are really four things that make movements more likely to succeed than others. The first is very large and diverse participation that builds momentum. The second is the ability to leverage that participation into creating defections within the opponent's pillars of support, whether those are the sort of political institutions, the social and cultural institutions, security forces, the business and economic elite that

• 3:57Speaker 05

  uphold, you know, and a sort of authoritarian status quo, if you will. The third is the ability to shift between methods of protest to methods of noncooperation, like your campaign, and methods of alternative institutions or building mutual aid networks and things along those lines. And then the fourth is the ability to maintain resilience and discipline even as repression against the movement escalates. And the movements that do those things well tend to succeed more often than the movements that struggle with one or more of those four factors.

• 4:33Scott Galloway?

  Where do you think most movements get it wrong? Because my sense is, becoming just a sophomore student in this recently and listening to you and Timothy Snyder and some other people, is that the vast majority fail. Which of the four hurdles do you think trips people up most often?

• 4:51Speaker 05

  I think getting defections is the hardest. In a study that I did with Zoe Marks and Andrew Hawking, we did a sort of computational study that ran three different types of strategies. The first is the mass mobilization strategy, just get as many people in the streets as possible, as quickly as possible, and hope for the best with regard to pillars defecting. The second strategy was what we called a naive pillar strategy, which is protest in a way that's trying to get those defections, but you don't know in advance which pillars are most likely to defect. You just go to the nearest one and protest and hope for the best. And then the third strategy is what we call an informed pillar strategy. And that's where the activists have some advanced information about which of the pillars

• 5:36Speaker 05

  are already kind of on the fence, and they focus on those first. And that then creates early defections in the movement that can create a cascade of defections. And that third strategy is by far the most likely to succeed in the least amount of time. And the first strategy, the mass mobilization strategy, is to get as many people into the streets as possible, as quickly as possible, and hope that the pillars defect is the least likely to succeed. And so I think part of it is just, it's actually very challenging, both to build a strategy that creates defections and to understand how to do that in a way that creates the cascade of defections, not just an occasional defection here or there because they happen to push

• 6:21Speaker 05

  the right button one day.

• 6:22Scott Galloway?

  So using those four criteria, evaluate the No Kings protests.

• 6:26Speaker 05

  Yeah, so I mean, my sense is that the No Kings protests

• 6:32Speaker 05

  And by this, let's just talk about the national days of protest, right? Which is not all that it is, but the protests themselves. I mean, we are seeing growth in numbers over time. We're seeing a diverse range of people from all walks of life coming out and participating in those protests. You know, you could argue it's building momentum in the sense that there are lots of protests that happen between those very large scale days of action. For example, my team at the Crowd Counting Consortium documented that June 2026 actually had the third most protest events in a month in the entire first and second Trump administrations.

• 7:13Speaker 05

  And that was largely in reaction to ICE in Minneapolis. But and the killings that happened there. But that just speaks to the fact that the pace of protests and the pace of protest mobilization is quite high and increasing over time, even between these big days of protest. And then when it comes to defections, you know, I think that there are some, there are kind of cases where we see that happening and there are cases where we don't and where you'd otherwise expect them to happen. And I think that's a pretty natural thing to expect at this stage of a movement, which is to say, you know, the mobilization against, you know, autocratic consolidation in the

• 7:56Speaker 05

  U.S. has been going on now for the entirety of the second Trump administration, but has, you know, the average movement takes about two and a half years or three years to sort of run its course in creating the defections cascades that are sort of necessary to bring about a pro-democratic outcome. And so I think it's sort of on pace, but still with a way to go. And then when it comes to diversity, we're sort of a broader range of methods of protest. So it's clear that the large scale days of action are important in both bringing in new participants to the movement and in encouraging existing and new participants about the power of their collective action.

• 8:39Speaker 05

  The key here is channeling it into. To political power through encouraging people then to meet in their communities, to build more community-based organizations, to channel it into electoral power, to potentially channel it into methods of non-cooperation and other strategies of dissent. And then the last thing I'll note is I think it probably is one of the most disciplined movements we've seen in recent years in terms of the ability to not overreact to provocations and to maintain basically nonviolent discipline, even as repression has been escalating in a way that signals that the movement is both prepared for that repression and that when that repression happens,

• 9:22Speaker 05

  the movement can respond to it in a way that shifts the balance of power rather than sort of succumbing to potential disarray or indiscipline.

• 9:30Scott Galloway?

  Yeah, that really struck me. Nine million people and I have yet to see any reports of any type of violence or civil disobedience. Any thoughts on one of the criteria was that the participants in the protests are from a diverse group. My understanding is these protests, No Kings, and by the way, I find them inspiring and I don't mean to, I don't mean in any way to be critical of them, but people have brought up the notion they seem to be, the participants seem to be older and whiter. Any thoughts on their ability or the importance of reaching across different demographic groups to make these more effective?

• 10:07Speaker 05

  It really depends on where it's happening, for one thing. So I think, I think that the people who have actually done surveys and done demographic counts in those surveys have noted from some of the big cities that they've seen this, kind of that demographic description that you just gave. But, you know, there were over three, probably over 3,000 events that happened on Saturday, many of them in places that have never seen a protest in the last generation, many of them.

• 10:39Scott Galloway?

  A lot of rural towns, right, that are mostly Republican, yeah.

• 10:42Speaker 05

  Exactly. And, and I think really there's also kind of a convergence, I would say, in some places where, where ICE operations have been very intense, that has drawn in a lot of younger people and people from different walks of life into the movement. And so I actually think this last No Kings saw the convergence of You know, it was probably more demographically diverse than the prior, in part because of how many streams of opposition and resistance are kind of merging in those big days of action. Clearly, like, the more people from the more walks of life who take part, the more powerful the movement will be.

• 11:24Speaker 05

  And it's often the case that movements, you know, different formations appeal to different demographics. And the more those formations come together, the more powerful they will be in shoring up the capacities of those different segments of society.

• 11:42Scott Galloway?

  I wonder, I'll just put forward a thesis, and I'm literally flying on instruments here, but I wonder if some of it is that younger Americans, the most recent protests, Black Lives Matter and the women's marches, which were inspiring, but I'm not sure those groups felt like they registered a lot of change. Whereas older Americans still remember the protests, the Vietnam protests, civil rights protests, or at least learned about them in school, which had a huge impact. I wonder if it's just one group says, this is worth my Saturday, and another group is maybe a little bit more cynical.

• 12:17Speaker 05

  You could be on to something in some cases. I would just note that there's some interesting research out there that shows that, for example, the Women's March of 2017 was the participation in women's marches, just in that single day, had a really powerful predictive effect on the diversity of candidates that ran in the midterm elections in 2018. And the blue wave that came in 2018, flipping Congress to be a Democratic Congress. They can show a strong correlation between the numbers of people who participated on that day and the outcome of that election. And the same is true for the 2020 election, actually.

• 13:00Speaker 05

  That large participation in Black Lives Matter protests in the summer of 2020 were also correlated with outcomes in the presidential election results and in shifts in public opinion and in changes that were substantive around, for example, progressive attorneys general or DA's being, you know, elevated in local and state elections. So, you know, I think that there are reasons to be skeptical, but also those types of stories aren't necessarily very prominent out there in the world. And I think it can be You know, really important to elevate the ways that even a single day of protest can

• 13:41Speaker 05

  have those types of electoral impacts. Same for the Tea Party. The Tea Party protests, there was a paper by economists that showed that it was powerfully correlated with the 2010 midterm election result, right? So, so people shouldn't underestimate how important it is, and they shouldn't overestimate how important it is compared to the other things that also lead mass movements to succeed.

• 14:05Scott Galloway?

  Yeah, so I want a thesis and then an observation. If the connection between inspiring candidates and people to turn out to the voting booth, and at a minimum, this creates infrastructure and makes you more invested in outcomes, right? It sounds as if, if this holds, and I don't see any reason why it wouldn't, it's going to be a very ugly November for Republicans.

• 14:26Speaker 05

  Yeah, I mean, if, if the pattern obtains in this case, then we would expect, we would expect a, a loss in the midterms. Now, I also think that none of these models have predictive power, right? So, so lots of things can be different, but, but I think the, yes, if, if, if what we saw in 2017 and 2018 tracks in this case, then, then we would expect in a normal kind of election year and under normal circumstances to see a similar outcome in, in the 2026 midterm.

• 15:05Scott Galloway?

  We'll be right back after a quick break.

• 15:13Scott Galloway?

  Support for the show comes from Nutraful, the number one dermatologist recommended hair growth supplement brand used by over one and a half million people. With age comes knowledge, patients, and for some, hair loss. Didn't say it was all good things. And for those who want to do something about it, there's Nutraful. Nutraful has formulas built for men at different life stages. They have Nutraful Men for Guys Age 18 to 49, plus the new Nutraful Men 50 and Older. That's the first product of its kind specifically for men over 50. You can now address the key root causes of thinning wherever you are in life. Grow visibly thicker, fuller hair in just three to six months. Start Nutriful today and make the hat optional. Visit nutriful.com and enter promo code PROP G for $10 off your first month's subscription and free shipping.

• 15:58Scott Galloway?

  Find out why Nutriful is the best-selling hair growth supplement brand at nutriful.com, spelled N-U-T-R-A-F-O-L dot com, promo code PROP G. That's nutriful.com promo code PROP G.

• 16:16Scott Galloway?

  Support for the show comes from Vanta. As AI adoption grows, so does your company's security risks and requirements. New frameworks, audits, and vendors keep piling on, but your team isn't getting any bigger. Most compliance tools promise automation, but you're really stuck doing all the work by hand, chasing screenshots, validating controls, and playing catch-up when audit season comes around again. Vanta works differently. Their Agentic Trust platform is built to scale with you, not slow you down. With over 1,400 automated tests across 400-plus integrations, Vanta collects evidence and monitors your controls year-round, cutting your audit prep by 82%. Plus, you can access the Vanta agent everywhere you work, whether your team is in Vanta every day or living in tools including Claude or Cursor. Want proof?

• 17:01Scott Galloway?

  Over 16,000 fast-growing companies like Ramp, Rider, and Harvey save time and resources while scaling fast with Vanta. Learn more at vanta.com/provg and get $1,000 off. That's spelled V-A-N-T-A dot com slash PROP G for $1,000 off.

• 17:23Scott Galloway?

  Support for the show comes from Vanta. As AI adoption grows, so does your company's security risks and requirements. New frameworks, audits, and vendors keep piling on, but your team isn't getting any bigger. Most compliance tools promise automation, but you're really stuck doing all the work by hand, chasing screenshots, validating controls, and playing catch-up when audit season comes around again. Vanta works differently. The regentic trust platform is built to scale with you, not slow you down. With over 1,400 automated tests across 400-plus integrations, Vanta collects evidence and monitors your controls year-round, cutting your audit prep by 82%. Plus, you can access the Vanta agent everywhere you work, whether your team is in Vanta every day or living in tools including Claude or Cursor. Want proof?

• 18:08Scott Galloway?

  Over 16,000 fast-growing companies like Ramp, Ryder, and Harvey save time and resources while scaling fast with Vanta. Learn more at vanta.com/profg and get $1,000 off. That's spelled V-A-N-T-A dot com slash profg for $1,000 off.

• 18:33Scott Galloway?

  The other question I have for you is, I keep hearing this 3.5% number. And that is, if you get to this 3.5% hurdle, and I think with 350 million people to that, that would be 12.25 million, I think, if I'm doing my math correctly. Somewhere in there, right? 12-plus million. That's when you see real change. That's when the government can't ignore it. Where did that number come from? And it strikes me that, my understanding is the No Kings protest went from 7 million to 9 million. So it's building momentum. It's no way fizzling out. And why is it we need to get to 12.25 million? Do you buy that 3.5% number? Where did it come from?

• 19:14Speaker 05

  Yeah, so the 3.5% statistic is based on a historical observation of 323 mass movements between 1900 and 2006.

• 19:26Speaker 05

  And it came from a conversation I was having with with an activist, actually, who asked me if there was some kind of critical threshold above which no movements had failed in terms of mass participation. And so this was after a study that Maria Stefan and I did, our book had come out and I was doing some workshops and and talks about it. And so like just looked at the data and and then found that observation that among the campaigns that had had that we had documented and for for which we had kind of peak participation estimates, none of the campaigns that had moved above that three and a half percent national population threshold had failed.

• 20:08Speaker 05

  So I think that the things to know about that are, first of all, it's a historical observation, not a prediction. Second of all, as you know, historical observations are always just that, they're not also prescriptive, which is the sense that if we like try to aim for three and a half percent, knowing that that's the target, are we doing something different than what people did historically when they didn't know about that kind of a threshold and wouldn't have been trying to game it, as it were? And then the third piece is that there have been, since that period, exceptions to the rule, which is to say, like Bahrain, for example, had its own attempted Arab awakening

• 20:49Speaker 05

  in 2011 that fizzled out fully by 2014. And in that case, it looks like during their peak moment, they had about 6% of the population mobilized in their sort of central area. And that ended up failing. And one of the reasons that it was defeated is important and instructive. It was defeated because there were no defections. And there were no defections because, in that case, the monarchy decided not to send its own troops out to repress and got help from Saudi Arabia to do it. And that is a really important technique of preventing defections that that we've been seen happen elsewhere.

• 21:32Speaker 05

  And the the logic is that if there are fewer kind of social connections between the security forces and the people protesting, that there will be less hesitation and brutality toward the protesters. That's just something that has been an adaptation on the side of pretty persistent authoritarian regimes at this point. And Kind of taking the wind out of the sails of these movements, even when they get very large. And it's something that that we should know. It's just that there have been adaptations on the government's side and that movements shouldn't take for granted that if they hit a historical threshold, that the same effects will naturally obtain without other types of strategy and organization building and leadership.

• 22:18Scott Galloway?

  So granted, it's probably harder to get more granular data, but the protests in Iran, a different complexion, much, I would argue, I don't know, more complex, more severe, whatever the term is. What are your observations? What do you think the media is getting wrong about the protests to date in Iran?

• 22:37Speaker 05

  I guess I have two observations about it. I mean, first of all, the repression that took place against the civilian population there, massacres that took place are some of the worst we've seen since, for sure, the Syrian revolution in 2011 and 2012. You know, one of the things that I remember happening at that point is that after the US extracted Maduro and brought him to the United States, there was strong and powerful signaling by the United States that Iran would be next.

• 23:19Speaker 05

  And that coincided with a period of improvised protests in response to basically economic concerns, like, you know, a currency crisis and other things that people were reacting to on the ground. And then when it sounded like there was going to be some kind of external intervention, from what I understand, there was, there was a sense of now or never among many of the protesters who were aware of that. And it

• 23:50Speaker 05

  Allowed for or even enabled more risky action than they otherwise would have taken. And then the fact that the US didn't actually intervene at that time or do a similar operation, as it were, you know, just kind of speaks to the very tricky global dynamics of these things and the, as they say, moral hazard problem of signaling different types of international support when none is necessarily forthcoming and that the people on the ground pay the price, I think. And there are some similar dynamics with that and the Syrian revolution. In fact, I remember in those days, there were people who were exiles from Syria

• 24:32Speaker 05

  or, you know, had recently departed from there, trying to lobby, you know, foreign governments to intervene the way that they had intervened in Libya. And there was a sense that was almost inevitable that it was going to happen in Syria. And more risky action was taken as a result of that in a way. So I think that's really very tricky. The second observation I would have is that what happens on the ground in Iran is so hard because there is not really a formal opposition or opposition groups that have the capacity to even connect with one another, much less organize a strategic mass movement.

• 25:14Scott Galloway?

  Or spokespeople. Isn't that key to our resistance, that you have spokespeople that people can rally around?

• 25:19Speaker 05

  Spokespeople for sure, but also just strategy, right? Like thinking about beyond the just going to the streets and trying to amass large shows of force, but also like how to tap into the different sources of weakness in the government and begin to, you know, chip away at loyalties. Like those types of things are really important and necessary, particularly against an authoritarian regime as durable and as formidable as the Iranian regime. And so What organizational capacity does exist is outside the country, right? So you have people who are sort of more recent departures from Iran, from say the reform era, who have more ties to people on the ground,

• 26:03Speaker 05

  but fewer kind of resources to help mobilize. And then you have people from the previous era, like the previous Iranian revolution, many of whom are kind of organizing around the Crown Prince and the like. And so even the external opposition is quite divided. And those who are rallying around Reza Pahlavi like don't have nearly as much legitimacy on the ground as the more recent departures, but they don't have the capacity that he has and the resources. So it's just a very, very tricky situation that I think helps to illuminate a lot of the the fact that when people rise up anymore, it's not just against their own government. Like they're in this sort of global environment

• 26:46Speaker 05

  that's changing very quickly and it's creating very challenging terrain.

• 26:51Scott Galloway?

  Admiral James Stavridis on, who was the NATO Supreme Allied Commander, and he said something obvious but insightful, and that is the shock troops, kind of the Marines of the protests, the ones who are most aggressive and quite frankly, willing to give up their lives, and they did. There was 30,000 of them and they're dead now. And that they kind of, our timing was just wrong, right? That you wanted, you wanted support from America or perhaps military action before those 30,000 people took to the streets. And, and there's going to be a limited supply of people who are willing to give their lives for a movement like this.

• 27:34Scott Galloway?

  I have been shocked at the lack of resistance and the lack of protest.

• 27:40Scott Galloway?

  Amongst corporate leaders, I'm convinced that of the 500 Fortune 500 leaders, 490 of them wake up in the morning, look in the mirror and say hello madam or Mr. President. I think they're all waiting to be drafted to run for president. And I have been, the silence is deafening. And whatever your politics are, I think there's a very solid argument that what is going on right now is not good for business at a very capitalist level. And there has been crickets. Have you done any research on the importance of, I go back to Weimar Germany, when a lot of the industrial captains of industry in Germany stayed quiet or kind of did a deal with Hitler, if you will.

• 28:21Scott Galloway?

  But any parallels or any historical references around the lack of protests or resistance from the corporate world in your studies?

• 28:32Speaker 05

  So, this is a really important issue. It's not my primary area, but what I'll say is, if you think about cases like South Africa, for example, this is a case where clearly the linchpin in the sustainability of apartheid ended up being the corporate and business elite. And that was a case where the security forces were never going to defect to, you know, the sort of united democratic front and the black opposition. But the sort of implication of that was that if the security force pillar is not available, then what about the business and economic elites that are upholding, you know, the apartheid state?

• 29:17Speaker 05

  And so, that is the way that apartheid ultimately fell, was by a variety of economic actions, whether those were boycotts of white owned businesses, whether they were ultimately multinational corporations pulling out of the country, whether it was strikes and work stoppages combined with massive protests and marches. Like that, that is ultimately what pressured the business class to pressure the national party, which was the pro apartheid party, to elect a reformer and de-clerk when they had the opportunity to do so. And when he came to power in the national party,

• 29:58Speaker 05

  he immediately like pushed through legislation to unban the ANC and start negotiations. And they found a path to a democratic transition without a civil war in a country that looked like it was on the path to either, you know, continued, you know, military garrison state with a white supremacist government, or it was on the path to civil war. And so they they found that that way, and it was because of the pressure put on the business community to change what they viewed as their own interests and in the stakes. And so like, I think they are that the business and economic community is so important.

• 30:39Speaker 05

  And as you mentioned, there are other cases of, you know, autocratic breakthrough moments where, you know, if big business has had acted a different way, it probably would have created huge amounts of friction. And instead, they didn't. And so it didn't.

• 30:56Scott Galloway?

  We'll be right back.

• 31:04Speaker 00

  Flowing ad budget on metrics that look great till the CFO sees them? That's bullspend, and marketers are calling it out in Dashboard Confessions.

• 31:14Speaker 01

  I remember telling my boss, it'll be good for the brand when leads were slow. Yeah, it it wasn't.

• 31:21Speaker 00

  Cut the bullspend. LinkedIn lets you target by company, job title, and more. Advertise on LinkedIn. Spend $250 on your first campaign and get a $250 credit. Go to LinkedIn.com/campaign. Terms and conditions apply.

• 31:36Speaker 02

  This episode is brought to you by Michelob Ultra. Good times mean competitions between you and your friends, like seeing who can throw some pigskin the farthest or rush the field the fastest. Winner gets an Ultra. Because it's not just a superior-like beer, it's also giving fans superior access to their favorite sporting events. Superior is worth playing for. Visit MichelobUltra.com/SuperiorAccess to enter. Enjoy responsibly. Copyright 2026 Anheuser-Busch InBev Michelob Ultra Beer, St. Louis, Missouri.

• 32:05Scott Galloway?

  Support for the show comes from Nutraful, the number one dermatologist recommended hair growth supplement brand used by over one and a half million people. When you get to the stage of life where you start to notice hair loss, you have a few options. You can shave it all off and enjoy your new look, or you can commit to a new team whose logo you wouldn't mind constantly spotting on a hat, or you can actually restore some of your hair's former glory with Nutraful. Nutraful has formulas built for men at different life stages, such as Nutraful Men for guys aged 18 to 49, or the new Nutraful Men 50 and older. It's the first product of its kind specifically made for men over 50. You can address the key root causes of thinning wherever you are in life. Grow visibly thicker, fuller hair in three to six months. Start Nutraful today and make the hat optional.

• 32:50Scott Galloway?

  Visit nutraful.com and enter promo code PROVGE for $10 off your first month subscription and free shipping. Find out why Nutraful is the best-selling hair growth supplement brand at nutraful.com, spelled N-U-T-R-A-F-O-L dot com, promo code PROVGE. That's nutraful.com promo code PROVGE.

• 33:16Scott Galloway?

  We're back with more from Professor Erica Chenoweth. So do you think, we constantly use the term, there's a difference between being right and being effective. And the note King's protests are both. But I'll put forward a thesis, or a question, and obviously it's a loaded question because I have a bias here. What would be more effective? The protests of nine million people, or potentially nine million people stopping all spending and not going into work for a week?

• 33:46Speaker 05

  I'm going to give a totally unsatisfying response, because it depends on the context, which is to say-

• 33:50Scott Galloway?

  You mean nuanced?

• 33:51Speaker 05

  Yeah.

• 33:52Scott Galloway?

  There's some nuance here?

• 33:54Speaker 05

  I think it depends on the durability of it, right? And actually, how much cost is imposed.

• 34:02Speaker 05

  I also think that imposing costs is not the only way to to change behavior. Right. So there are there are other ways to change behavior, negotiating inducements, trying to get, you know, there that sometimes an oppositional approach or an adversarial approach like that is necessary to demonstrate what can happen or what the consequences are of inaction or complicity. And sometimes there's low hanging fruit and and just finding a way to identify shared interests and then go with that is is another way. There's a study out by one of my colleagues, Jonathan Pinkney, who, together, I think, with another

• 34:44Speaker 05

  author or two, was talking about methods of inducing defections. And particularly, I think, for the business community, they were saying that sometimes more private, behind the scenes, quiet organizing and persuasion work is going to go a longer way than kind of public adversarial approaches. Now, there's always going to be a range, right, of of interests and where different businesses and corporations place themselves on that spectrum. And the ones that are the most tightly aligned with the with an authoritarian or aspiring authoritarian regime are going to be the hardest to to to get at. But others who are a little bit further or just trying to stay out of the fray or whatever, those

• 35:28Speaker 05

  are the ones to sort of think about focusing on first. And then, you know, the more adversarial approaches then can be applied to those who are kind of further along in the sort of authoritarian direction. So I think that's an intriguing proposition. And it hasn't been fully, you know, tested in the US case, I think, but is an interesting way to think about it.

• 35:51Scott Galloway?

  It's an interesting insight. And again, it's kind of hiding in plain sight. But the thing about the No Kings protest is they are very positive. They have a really nice feel to them. You know, you bring your kids, you the signs are funny, you feel a sense of citizenship, camaraderie. They are very, very positive. And I think it's I think it's hard to be critical of them. They they just look like good people doing good things. Imagine there's a large swath of the population that is really upset by the administration's activities. And they believe that action absorbs anxiety and they want to do something. And they all got together and elected a board of directors and said, all right, who do we reach out to to organize the next big

• 36:36Scott Galloway?

  form of resistance or protest? And I said, okay, we're going to reach out to Professor Chenoweth. And you are given the ability to organize a protest or a form of resistance, to shape it and say, this is, this is, I want to be focused on effectiveness, whether it's getting a mass secret police out of cities or changing our policies on immigrants, whatever it might be. But if you were given, if you were, if you will, the CEO of this thing, and you got to shape it, what elements would would be incorporated? What would it look like?

• 37:12Speaker 05

  Do you mean on the infrastructure side or on the like tactical and strategic side?

• 37:17Scott Galloway?

  Yes.

• 37:19Speaker 05

  Okay. If it's on the infrastructure side, like it's an interesting question about like what capacities are needed right now and at what scale? And I think that, you know, my argument would be that in in other cases where we've seen successful kind of democratic U turns take place, usually there's been some kind of umbrella formation like the United Democratic Front in South Africa, or like its comparison in Chile under Pinochet. Or more recently in South Korea, there was sort of a united alliance. And I would argue that we need some kind of kind of umbrella formation that's giving shape to what already exists in the US,

• 38:01Speaker 05

  which is a huge number of ingredients for what makes for a successful democracy movement. And I think that in terms of the capacities needed, you know, there's clearly the sort of mobilization capacity that that that exists already. But then also, kind of An ability to communicate broadly about what's happening in a way that that brings common knowledge to the population at large about, you know, what what's going on and what they should know about it and what they might do about it. Like I said earlier, I think like what what we're seeing right now in the US is is consistent

• 38:43Speaker 05

  with what we've seen in a lot of different successful democracy movements, in part because there has been such robust training infrastructure set up for things like, you know, observing ICE operations. And because of that, the killings of Renee Good and Alex Preddy backfired. It's only because cameras were rolling and people were there observing because they knew how to do that and they knew how to get the information out that those stories ended up being the sort of official narrative about those stories ended up being contested in the first place. Right. And then there's training and nonviolent discipline, there's training and noncooperation. Like, all of those things are happening.

• 39:25Speaker 05

  There's so many people around the country in organizations trying to support that work. And I think that's, you know, part of why we've seen it play out the way it has. So I think in terms of, it's hard to to to focus on more than the the sort of four things that I mentioned that successful movements do. Right. And and so and I and I think those things are happening. So I I guess this is all to say, I wouldn't really suggest that that much is different in the country, except except what I mentioned about a sort of broader umbrella formation helping to make it more than the sum of its parts.

• 40:05Scott Galloway?

  You brought up something that I hadn't thought of before that I think is an outstanding example that we don't talk enough about. Can you talk about what what what went down in South Korea?

• 40:14Speaker 05

  So the really abbreviated version of this is that last December, there was an attempted coup by the incumbent president.

• 40:24Speaker 05

  And while it was underway, meaning after he declared martial law and was enacting the coup, there was a huge umbrella formation, largely represented by trade federation and unions, that came out and said, by declaring martial law, you've declared the end of your presidency, and we're going to bring the country to an orderly standstill tomorrow morning if this thing goes down. And they were able to bring thousands of people to, within minutes of the declaration of martial law also, to a nonviolent protest outside

• 41:02Speaker 05

  of the, like, main government building. And by the morning, had made such a credible commitment to being able to shut down the country, that the people who were doing the coup blinked, basically, like, the senior military kind of hesitated and said they didn't think they would go along with it. And the president had to basically cancel the martial law order and effectively try to cancel the coup. And then, you know, by the next day, the trade unions and the sort of pro-democracy movement had come out and said, we're really glad the coup has ended, but that's not enough. Like, you tried to

• 41:42Speaker 05

  have a coup, and so you're going to be impeached. And they launched impeachment proceedings after one failed attempt because the ruling party tried to get around a quorum rule so that they didn't have to show up and actually participate in the impeachment proceedings. The movement basically demanded that they show up and vote, and they did, and the president was impeached. And then he tried to appeal it, he lost the appeal in the Supreme Court, like, he's out and going to be held accountable for it. So that's the way, that's the way both a successful movement works and how to stop a coup and prevent it from happening again. I think the, one of the things that's so powerful about the example...

• 42:28Speaker 05

  Is that they could credibly commit that they could bring the country to an orderly standstill. And that's why it worked. And so I think the deterrent impact that they were able to have was profound. And it's just a lesson to learn, I think.

• 42:45Scott Galloway?

  This is such fascinating material. How did, just for, there are a lot of young people listening to the podcast, how did you stumble on, or was this more deliberate? How did you stumble upon this domain?

• 42:57Speaker 05

  It was actually when I was finishing my PhD in political science that I was invited to apply to go to a workshop on how to teach about nonviolent resistance. And this was a topic I had never learned about, had not encountered in my research. I studied terrorism and political violence exclusively at that time. And so I wanted to go to the workshop to put it on my CV and, you know, draw on my network and get free books and learn how to teach this topic. And I just thought that the material was very interesting, but I noticed that there hadn't really been like a quantitative treatment of the question

• 43:37Speaker 05

  about whether nonviolent resistance was actually a realistic alternative to violence in different difficult settings, you know, like in settings where we would typically expect people to use armed conflict to promote their agenda. And so my colleague Maria Stefan and I, whom I met there, decided to team up and do such a study. And so that's what led to our 2011 book on, which is called Why Civil Resistance Works. And in that book, we, you know, start with the descriptive observation that two, you know, the nonviolent mass campaigns that we studied from 1900 to 2006 had a higher success rate than the violent campaigns that we studied. And we set about trying to understand why that was the case. And so

• 44:22Speaker 05

  the book sort of has two parts. The front is trying to understand the strategic advantages of nonviolent resistance. And the second half of the book is trying to explain why some movements succeed while others fail. And there's been then a very large literature that's emerged on this topic, which is, you know, Both been critical and reinforcing of the findings, depending on what they are. And, and as I mentioned, I think there's this sort of consensus now 16 or so years later about the things that make movements more likely to succeed. And, and so that's the four things I mentioned.

• 44:59Scott Galloway?

  Erica Chenoweth is a political scientist and professor at Harvard Kennedy School, whose research focuses on political violence, civil resistance and social movements. Professor Chenoweth joins us from Cambridge. Professor, I just, such a nice moment for you, unfortunately under not great circumstances, but it's just, it's rewarding to see people who have devoted their life or their professional life to becoming an expert in something that feels fairly germane at the time, and then all of a sudden becomes incredibly important and relevant. So congratulations on your good work and what is well-earned prestige and attention and relevance right now. So it's weird to say a nice moment for you, but an important moment for you. And thanks for all your good work.

• 45:43Speaker 05

  Thanks to you. And thanks for the opportunity to share with your listeners as well.

• 45:51Scott Galloway?

  This episode was produced by Jennifer Sanchez and Laura Janer. Kami Reek is our social producer. Bianca Rosario Ramirez is our video editor. And Drew Burrows is our technical director. Thank you for listening to the Prop G Pod from Prop G Media.

• 46:12Speaker 06

  Now at Kroger, your points add up to more ways to save every trip. Use them your way to take dollars off groceries at checkout or save at the pump. You can even save up to $35 on your next fill-up. Same points, more choices. And with low prices on fresh, quality food, plus digital and personalized offers tailored to how you shop, your dollar goes further. Redeem your points online or in the app. Kroger, fresh for everyone. Restrictions apply. See site or store for details.

• 46:55Speaker 07

  To a stay.

• 46:58Speaker 07

  Surrounded by nature.

• 47:02Speaker 07

  That's nice. Go on, book it. It's easy. Booking.com. Booking dot yeah.

• 47:12Speaker 08

  Close your eyes, exhale, feel your body relax, and let go of whatever you're carrying today.

• 47:20Speaker 09

  Well, I'm letting go of the worry that I wouldn't get my new contacts in time for this class. I got them delivered free from 1-800-CONTACTS. Oh my gosh, they're so fast.

• 47:28Speaker 08

  And breathe.

• 47:29Speaker 09

  Oh, sorry. I almost couldn't breathe when I saw the discount they gave me on my first order. Oh, sorry. Namaste.

• 47:37Speaker 08

  Visit 1-800-CONTACTS.com today to save on your first order.