¿Tienes algo por decirnos? Escríbenos a info@inspiratorio.org.
By: Mónica Roa López
Executive Director of Puentes, Inspiratorio's home.
Although the mission of Puentes is to strengthen the narrative power of social movements in Latin America, the U.S. presidential campaign has become an interesting showcase that allows us to observe in real time how narrative work is applied to a concrete and challenging scenario, revealing the potential of our three strategic pillars: inspiring hope, generating connection, and fostering creativity. This process not only provides us with valuable lessons but also underscores the importance of maintaining a global narrative infrastructure capable of engaging across borders and leveraging the experiences of others to adapt what resonates in our local contexts. Without pretending to be an expert in U.S. politics and acknowledging my limitations as an external observer interested in narrative practice, I am eager to engage in a constructive dialogue and stimulate innovation based on these reflections that I share with you below:
Inspiring hope is our number one strategy. Hope constantly reminds us and our communities that social change is possible if we work to achieve it. This means keeping in mind that the future is not yet written, that we are not doomed, that we have agency, and that despite facing serious democratic, climatic, social, and humanitarian crises, we have the capacity to avoid being paralyzed by fear and cynicism, reconnect with our purpose, and mobilize to build other possible futures.
A couple of weeks ago, it seemed that a second Trump term was inevitable. However, the inclusion of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz in the campaign brought a shift in strategy that activated hope, expanding the imagination of U.S. citizens to conceive a different future and not give up prematurely.
This is precisely the goal that Harris and Walz aimed to achieve by introducing, with their arrival, two ideas that their supporters now enthusiastically shout: "When we fight, we win" and "We are not going back”. These slogans not only reflect a shift in the campaign's narrative but also invite action and mobilization, reminding voters that they are the heroes and heroines of this story and that their participation is crucial in building the future they desire.
In times of uncertainty and challenges, hope becomes a powerful driver of change. By inspiring people to believe in their own capacity to make a difference and providing them with a sense of shared purpose, hope can transform apathy into action and fear into determination.
The narrative of hope is activated by telling multiple stories through different voices and formats that connect with the values of the people we seek to engage and illustrate that possible future we want them to help us build. Additionally, in most cases, there are elements of that future that are already visible, allowing us to believe that they are indeed viable. In other words, it’s about getting people to imagine what the world would be like if all our causes won and to channel their energy toward that path to make it a reality step by step. And by this, I don't just mean legal and political victories but also how we would like to inhabit the world and what kinds of relationships we would like to have.
For example, I believe that the narrative of this election is not just about conceiving the possibility—now perceived as so real!—of a Black woman becoming President of the United States, but also about a radical narrative shift that, while closely linked, was more unexpected: the place of white men and the way masculinity is understood in contemporary societies.
During the Zoom call "White Dudes for Harris", stories were told about white men who recognize the leadership of Black women, who sensitively defend reproductive rights, who publicly admit that they cried for their children when Trump was elected the first time, who know that historically, gatherings of white men were associated with iconic pointed hoods, and who understand the urgency of reclaiming the narrative about their identity to change the stories that are told about them. These stories are joined by those of Tim Walz—the vice-presidential candidate who is a man comfortable being under the orders of a powerful woman, using his voice and power to defend reproductive rights and support the LGBT community, while talking about his military past and engaging in hunting, fishing, and auto mechanics—and Douglas Emhoff—Kamala’s husband who had no problem leaving his professional career to take on the ceremonial, social, and sometimes trivial role historically designated to the spouses of elected leaders.
By successfully inspiring their base with these doses of hope, the Democrats have activated their supporters. Those same people who were on the verge of throwing in the towel weeks ago suddenly took ownership of the narrative and set about finding their own way to actively contribute to the campaign. Paraphrasing strategist Anat Shenker-Osorio, they went from feeling like extras in *Les Misérables* to knowing they were the protagonists of *Mamma Mia!* In this way, Democratic Party supporters rediscovered and fully embraced the joy of political participation. The Democratic convention was a true feast of joy and hope, with constant references to "joy" becoming the thread that tied together every speech, performance, and memorable moment. Bill Clinton called Kamala Harris the "president of joy," Oprah Winfrey invited people to choose truth, honor, and joy, and Michelle Obama declared that hope was making a comeback.
With this change in perspective, the Democrats managed to get their choir singing, a choir that is increasingly large and with a contagious energy that has set society dancing to their rhythm. These renewed cravings for hope have given rise to a new phenomenon: hopescrolling—the compulsive, addictive, and tireless consumption of hopeful digital content. Democratic campaign supporters have become avid seekers of hopeful stories that nourish their spirit and can be shared with their own networks. This behavior has a significant impact on civic mobilization. In this sense, hope not only serves as a catalyst for individual action but also has the power to create a domino effect of participation and mobilization. When people see others around them engaged and excited about a cause, they are more likely to feel motivated to join in and become part of it.
It’s essential to clarify that this is critical hope, not naive or complacent. Critical hope does not ignore difficulties; it is not based on blind faith in a utopian future. On the contrary, it begins with the recognition of the serious challenges and deep injustices we face, but it does so by focusing on the possibilities, assuming a sustained commitment to the future, taking progressive action to bring us closer to that desired world, even in the darkest moments. In the context we are analyzing, we are aware of the significant shortcomings of the Harris/Walz campaign, such as its unsatisfactory response to the genocide in Palestine and the lack of a humane policy at the southern border, among many others. However, those who embrace critical hope understand that by voting democrat, they are electing people they can challenge and demand they change their policies within a democratic framework, not as unconditional friends to whom they give a blank check.
Inspiring hope among your own is not enough; it’s also key to generate connection beyond our bubbles, attracting flexible-minded audiences and neutralizing the impact of antagonistic narratives. To achieve this, even if we share the final goal, we must divide roles and diversify tactics.
The strategy for attracting flexible audiences has relied on a hopeful narrative and inclusive approaches—though still imperfect and marked by contradictions, as humorously highlighted byThe Daily Show. Tim Walz uses his experience growing up in a rural environment to emphasize the importance of caring for neighbors, even if they don't share our beliefs or values. Oprah Winfrey reinforces this message, highlighting that in times of crisis, we don't ask about the race, religion, or political affiliation of those who need help; we act to save them. Meanwhile, Michelle Obama calls for defending decency and basic respect, regardless of whether people identify as Democrat, Republican, Independent, or none of the above.
Barack Obama engages in two complex exercises in his speech, aimed at building bridges with more flexible audiences.
On the one hand, he seeks to harmonize seemingly opposing concerns to win over flexible audiences without losing sympathizers. For example, he emphasizes education as a fundamental pillar to strengthen the economy, advocates for equal pay between women and men as a benefit to all families, acknowledges the need to secure borders but rejects separating children from their parents, and argues that it’s possible to keep streets safe while building trust between police and citizens.
On the other hand, he invites more progressive supporters to reflect on the importance of not destroying the bridges being built with those who hold more flexible views. Rather than closing off in dogma, he urges them to keep lines of dialogue open, recognizing that true transformation requires patience and the ability to include others in the conversation, even when they don't fully agree with us. Even though he validates the frustrations of his progressive base, he advocates for a more conciliatory approach, capable of attracting "ordinary people" without resorting to scolding or shaming tactics, which are ineffective and only fuel the division that benefits authoritarians.
Finally, Kamala Harris seeks to create empathy with the working class by sharing her personal story as the daughter of immigrants, raised in a working-class neighborhood of construction workers, firefighters, and nurses, who worked at a McDonald's in her youth. She emphasizes that as a lawyer, her only client has always been the people, highlighting her commitment to those who form the backbone of the country. Harris presents herself not only as a leader but as someone who has lived and deeply understands the struggles and aspirations of the people.
Narrative practice tells us that the best way to connect with new audiences is through their values. This explains why one of the main narrative strategies involves contesting the meaning of the most important value for American society: freedom; traditionally a rhetorical stronghold of Republicans. Multiple stories and strong statements from leaders like Tim Walz, Barack Obama, and Kamala Harris are presenting a broader and more progressive vision of what true freedom means in today’s American society.
Firstly, they challenge the Republican narrative that freedom is reduced to limiting government intervention and giving free rein to corporations. Instead, they argue that true freedom must include the ability to make fundamental decisions about one’s own life without undue interference, whether in matters of health, family, sexual orientation, gender identity, or religious beliefs. From the Democratic perspective, freedom is not simply the absence of restrictions but the active empowerment of individuals to shape their own destiny.
Secondly, Democrats are expanding the concept of freedom to encompass aspects such as public safety, environmental protection, and the right to vote. They present freedom not only as a matter of individual rights but also as a collective condition that requires certain social guarantees. The "freedom to live without fear of gun violence," the "freedom to breathe clean air," or the "freedom to vote" are presented as fundamental requirements for the full exercise of individual freedoms.
In a deeply polarized electoral context, efforts to build a "larger us" by engaging flexible audiences must contend with the narratives of fear and division employed by Republicans in the United States and authoritarians worldwide. As a result, the narrative strategy must also aim to neutralize antagonists.
Ideally, we should critically address problems while extending grace to people, acknowledging that human societies must learn to coexist with difference and disagreement.. However, in electoral times, the confrontation of us versus them seems inevitable, which carries the risk of leading to the dehumanization of the other side, seeing them more as enemies to be defeated than as fellow citizens with different perspectives. To navigate this polarity, it is helpful to remember the metaphor of the jazz band:
Working as a jazz band requires activists to master the art of riffing off each other, understanding strengths, weaknesses, and coordinating seamlessly. Recognizing when to step forward or support others is vital for creating a harmonious impact, tailored to the demands of each circumstance.
In this sense, to prevent polarization from dangerously calcifying, it is essential that those who denounce the risks of authoritarians in the electoral context know when to step back and cede leadership to those working to expand the larger us and promote mutual understanding between opposing sectors of society. These latter must take on a leading role to calm the waters, humanize the other and remind us of the shared values and identities that unite us beyond our political differences. Only through this dynamic management of roles and timing, with some voices denouncing and others reconciling, will we be able to break the vicious cycles of polarization and open paths towards empathy, dignity, and peaceful coexistence amidst diversity. It is a delicate balance that, like in a jazz band, can only be mastered with practice and sensitivity.
From the very start, the campaign of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz has achieved a transformative impact by highlighting cultural content such as coconut and palm tree emojis, “brat” green backgrounds, Swiftie cat-lady stickers, videos of Kamala laughing, and Beyoncé's song "Freedom," among many others. These elements have brought a refreshing vibe to the electoral environment. Understanding that "some people engage with politics some of the time, but everyone lives in culture all the time," the narrative strategy has focused on encouraging supporters to flood the digital ecosystem with cultural pieces that go beyond conventional political discourse.
The creation of these contents, which are easy to produce, share, and make viral on social media, has served a dual purpose. On one hand, it has provided excited and committed followers with a useful way to contribute to the campaign, channeling their enthusiasm into the generation and dissemination of these materials. On the other hand, it has met the growing demand for "hopescrolling" content; the compulsive consumption of posts that offer hope and lightness amidst political exhaustion.
This strategy wouldn’t be possible without a team that grasps the fast-paced nature of our world and embraces constant experimentation. They understand that failures are part of the learning process, yet they persistently seek to communicate complex ideas in simple, innovative, and effective ways that resonate with audiences. I recommend the newsletter La Lupa Digital, where Cristina Vélez provides an excellent analysis of memes and the impact of Kamala Harris.
The strategy doesn't rely on searching the vast ocean of digital entertainment for "the perfect content" to go viral in isolation. Instead, it aims to establish a coherent narrative through a multiplicity of stories, formats, and messengers that share and project the same worldview. It's not about creating a single cultural hit but about flooding the ecosystem with a diversity of content that, together, encapsulate and spread a consistent message. Each cultural piece represents an opportunity to embody values and ideas from a different angle, with the potential to connect with specific segments of the population, but always staying true to the central narrative.
Ultimately, it's a bold attempt to influence the cultural sphere, recognizing that politics alone is insufficient to shape the narratives that determine society's beliefs and emotions. By delivering memes, videos, music, and other cultural products packed with their messages, they aim to permeate everyday conversations and embed themselves in the collective imagination in a more organic and enduring way than traditional political communication.
Many of the concepts analyzed here are integral to Puentes' daily work. Observing their application in Kamala Harris's campaign reaffirms that narrative power is a crucial tool for social change, one that we must continue to explore and master. By inspiring hope, fostering connections, and encouraging creativity, a narrative can mobilize supporters and attract new audiences through inclusivity and emotional resonance. Although the election results are still uncertain, this approach has not only revitalized political engagement but also enriched the cultural landscape with content that reinforces a vision of the future. It illustrates that in a world where politics and culture are deeply intertwined, addressing both is essential to achieving our goals. These sometimes counterintuitive ideas hold potential for renewing efforts to challenge authoritarianism globally, highlighting the significance of a narrative strategy that not only confronts but also unites and inspires a broader, more hopeful "us."
