According to Jane Fonda, authoritarian leaders thrive on an image of being impermeable and inevitable. Humor and ridicule are powerful weapons against this because they expose weakness and humanity, which authoritarians cannot tolerate. A comic making fun of a dictator shatters the carefully constructed facade of invincibility.
Jane Fonda argues that defeating an authoritarian regime requires weakening its "pillars of support" like finance, military, and art. This is achieved through strategic noncompliance—strikes, boycotts, and mass actions that hit the economy—rather than traditional protests, which are less effective against entrenched power.
Jane Fonda points out that historically, authoritarian regimes always attack artists and educators first. These groups are the "storytellers" who control the cultural narrative and shape how people think and feel. By silencing them, a regime can more easily impose its own version of reality.
Jane Fonda distinguishes the strategic value of protests. While vital for pressuring receptive governments, under an unreceptive or authoritarian regime, their primary function shifts. Protests then serve to build solidarity and morale ("flossing the movement") rather than directly influencing policy.
Countering the idea that one must feel hopeful to act, Jane Fonda asserts that the reverse is true. When feeling depressed or despairing, the most effective antidote is to take action. Action itself generates hope, which she describes as a "muscle" that grows with use, not a passive state of optimism.
Jane Fonda argues that mortality gives life its meaning and creative spark. At age 60, she consciously began to live in a way that would minimize future regrets. This focus on the end-of-life experience, rather than fearing it, informs present-day actions and creates a more purposeful existence.
Jane Fonda attributes the Democratic Party's struggles in the middle of the country to a fundamental shift in strategy. She claims the party "got in bed with its donors" and abandoned its practice of funding local, on-the-ground community organizing, thereby losing touch with the very people it needed to represent.
Instead of focusing only on federal elections, Fonda's climate PAC targets local races like city councils and school boards. This builds a "firewall" against opposition and creates a pipeline of experienced, climate-focused candidates for higher office, mirroring the Tea Party's successful grassroots approach.