Besides what other people already answered here: Solidarity will also go a long way. Workers in the old days faced the same dilemma: When they go on strike, will they lose their job? A lot of them did. Solidarity saved them and made the movement work.

In the context of housing, solidarity can take the form of organized people in a town agreeing upfront: “If folks from one house get evicted, they can move in with us.” Of course this requires a lot of trust—just like the person in the article says. And whenever it should come to this, it will be costly and inconvenient, even burdensome, for everyone involved. Just like filling a strike fund from already low wages was. In the end it worked.

Without solidarity, we are defenseless.

I can fully understand the sentiment behind “told you so” and calling out Trump/Republican voters for wanting to throw others under the bus. Still, you’re going to have to build as powerful a coalition against the Republican administration as you can, and for many districts this will eventually require a good number of former MAGA people. It may feel shitty, but the most strategic thing (including for the purpose of helping the most oppressed) is to find a way so that potential supporters who voted red in 2024 won’t be quiet 2026 and 2028 because of shame.

If you don’t come around to this, two years down the road I would have grounds for saying “told you so” to you – and I’d hate me for it, because it would mean that I haven’t communicated this crucial point effectively enough. Much love from Germany.

One can of course always argue over what percentile makes you which class (and to to what degree percentiles are useful for this question in the first place).

As for the question of influence, Piketty for example, while calling the top 10% the “upper class”, calls the top 1% the “ruling class”, which seems like a decent way to undercore this point.

Thank you, that’s very insightful and useful.