Strategy for the Present Conjuncture in North Carolina
In their most recent book, What It Takes to Heal, Prentis Hemphill writes: “Our ability to dream of something different, to name longing, to articulate a vision and commit to it, directly correlates to the likelihood that we will experience it, that it will be realized. It’s the way we bring about change for ourselves, and for the world.” This framing feels especially resonant for movement leaders in the South, where it often feels like we are organizing within a constant state of chaos—political, emotional, and material. Many of us are navigating overlapping crises at once: authoritarian backlash, resource scarcity, burnout, interpersonal conflict, and the pressure to respond quickly and be productive. In this environment, dreaming of something different can feel naïve, indulgent, or even dangerous.
Yet the inability to dream, to pause long enough to articulate what we are actually fighting for, is key. When we are trapped in reaction and urgency, we confuse motion with progress and productivity with power.. My assessment is that in order to win, we must be bold in our devotion to shifting how we understand success and failure, and equally committed to developing a grounded analysis of where we are and how we arrived here. This is not a call for optimism detached from reality, but for clarity grounded in it.
A common challenge organizers face is how to move from inaction—especially the kind that grows out of hopelessness, fear, or exhaustion—into not just action, but strategic, meaningful action. Too often, we are stuck between paralysis and overextension. Without a shared analysis, our work becomes fragmented and reactive. We need a framework that allows us to understand our struggles within a larger political moment, identify cracks we can capitalize on, and act collectively with intention. This is where conjunctural analysis comes in.
Conjunctural analysis is a method for understanding the balance of power between social forces within a specific context—local, regional, national, or global—at a particular moment in history. Rather than treating politics as fixed, this approach shows us that power is dynamic. It asks us to examine how different forces interact, where legitimacy is eroding, and where contradictions within the system create openings for change. Importantly, conjunctural analysis requires us to look not only at what is happening, but why it is happening right now.
The concept is most commonly associated with Italian Marxist theorist Antonio Gramsci, and later expanded by thinkers such as Louis Althusser, Stuart Hall, and others. Conjunctural analysis sounds fancy, but it’s a basic, practical tool organizers must be using. It helps us move beyond surface-level explanations and toward a deeper understanding of how political, economic, cultural, and ideological forces shape our world in a given moment. By identifying contradictions within the system, we can better determine where intervention is possible and where our efforts are most likely to have impact.
When organizers do not engage in conjunctural analysis, our strategies tend to default to what feels immediately necessary or emotionally urgent. This can lead to an overreliance on a single strategy—like electoral work, direct action, or narrative campaigns—at the expense of a more holistic approach. The result is a cycle of intense mobilization followed by deflation, as wins feel fleeting and losses make us jaded.
The ruling powers, whether we name it explicitly or not, practice conjunctural analysis constantly. Imperial forces are always tracking shifts in public opinion, economic conditions, and social movements so they can adapt their strategies to maintain legitimacy and control, even as the systems they rely on generate collective harm. The difference is not one of capacity, but of purpose. Their analysis is oriented toward preserving structures of exploitation and domination. Ours must be oriented toward dismantling those structures and building something new.
We are currently living in an interregnum—a period in which the old order is breaking down, but a new one has not yet taken shape. The neoliberal framework that structured political and economic life for decades has lost credibility among the majority. Empty promises of freedom, stability, and democratic accountability have been repeatedly broken. At the same time, the institutions built under that framework remain largely intact, continuing to govern despite declining legitimacy. The United States remains a settler-colonial empire rooted in racial capitalism, however, its global dominance is being increasingly contested. The rise of China as a geopolitical and economic rival, along with broader shifts in global power, has contributed to instability both internationally and domestically. Within the U.S., this instability has manifested in economic limitations, political polarization, and a growing authoritarian backlash.
Despite these obvious contradictions, we haven’t seen the emergence of a new hegemonic “common sense” that can guide us toward collective liberation. The uncertainty we’re all feeling can be paralyzing, but it’s actually full of possibility. What comes out of this moment is still being determined, and will be shaped by the strategies we use today.
In our analysis of the current national conjuncture, two dominant forces stand out: the authoritarian Right and a broad pro-democracy front. Each of these forces have significant contradictions to navigate. The pro-democracy front is dominated by the liberal center, particularly within the Democratic Party. While they act like they’re not aligned with authoritarianism, they have consistently demonstrated an inability—or unwillingness—to govern in ways that materially improve the lives of their base. Housing insecurity, the absence of livable wages, rising healthcare costs, and declining public/social services go unaddressed, even as these issues deepen public frustration. The liberal center’s failure to deliver has eroded its credibility and created widespread disillusionment. This legitimacy crisis represents a significant crack in the existing order. It also presents a critical opportunity for the Left to contest for leadership within the broader pro-democracy front by offering a vision rooted in material solidarity and collective care.
The Left has obvious weaknesses, too. Fragmentation, strategic disagreement, and limited infrastructure have limited its ability to fully seize these moments. Yet recent mass mobilizations and the ongoing resurgence of labor organizing suggest the potential for renewal. These developments point to the possibility of a Left that is better positioned to meet the demands of this interregnum, provided it can learn from past limitations and commit to a more expansive understanding of power.
Then we have the authoritarian Right, which we recognize and name as the “new confederacy.” This group seeks to cement Christian hegemony, patriarchy, and white supremacy through policy, the courts, media, surveillance, and cultural institutions. While pushing these agenda’s, they’ve marginalized, and sometimes removed, more centrist actors within the Republican Party. While their strategy relies heavily on division, those internal shifts also generate contradictions that can be exploited.
Recent electoral and organizing efforts demonstrate that it is possible to weaken authoritarian forces by building broad coalitions, even when those coalitions include people with whom we do not fully align. Campaigns such as Zohran Mamdani’s illustrate how principled, working-class-centered politics can resonate across traditional divides. These approaches offer valuable lessons for contesting authoritarian power while simultaneously challenging the limitations of liberal leadership within the pro-democracy front.
North Carolina occupies a unique position within this broader conjuncture. As a Southern state with a deep history of resistance and people-powered movements, it has long served as an early testing ground for authoritarian strategies. Gerrymandering, judicial capture, the weakening of executive authority, and coordinated attacks on trans communities have all been implemented here before being replicated elsewhere. In this sense, North Carolina offers a preview of national trends, as well as a place for ongoing experimentation.
The current conjuncture in North Carolina mirrors national and global dynamics in important ways. We see sustained attacks on public education, increasingly partisan courts dominated by Republicans, and the widespread circulation of disinformation in judicial and statewide races. Authoritarian forces wield significant control over policies that directly impact working-class communities, while also shaping public perception through media dominance. This combination reinforces a “common sense” that normalizes inequality and suppresses dissent. At the same time, North Carolina’s political landscape contains significant openings. The state remains deeply purple, characterized by split-ticket voting and an increase in unaffiliated voters. Latine political participation is growing, labor organizing is on the rise, and recent local resistance—such as the response to ICE and CBP raids in late 2025—demonstrates a willingness to mobilize in defense of community members. These conditions create real opportunities for counter-hegemonic organizing.
Electorally, North Carolina’s unaffiliated voters present another strategic opening. Rather than remaining trapped within a two-party system, organizers can focus on local and county-level wins, support independent and working-class candidates, and treat elections as one organizing tool among many. Electoral work should operate alongside base building, disruptive movements, narrative campaigns, inside-outside strategies, momentum building, and collective care—not above them. To seize these openings, organizers must actively shape a new common sense. This means centering working-class solidarity over party loyalty, framing public goods such as food, housing, and healthcare as collective obligations rather than charity, and asserting that North Carolina’s economy is built on workers—not CEOs. These narrative shifts are foundational to building durable power.
Economically, there’s a significant opportunity being uplifted for mass labor action. The call for a May Day 2028 mass strike, called for by United Auto Workers President Shawn Fain, represents a historic possibility. By aligning contract expirations and organizing cross-sectorally—healthcare, education, sanitation, utilities, hospitality, etc—workers could exert power we haven’t seen in decades. This action builds on the success of the 2023 UAW strike and shows us that there’s a growing willingness to challenge the billionaire class directly over wages, healthcare, and pensions.
One of the most persistent cracks within the Left is a tendency to privilege certain forms of power while dismissing others. This imbalance often stems from a lack of shared understanding, leading to rigid strategies and internal hierarchy. By replicating the very structures we seek to dismantle, we undermine our own efforts. A conjunctural approach demands that we commit to the full range of power we hold, recognizing that different strategies empower one another.
North Carolina’s role in this interregnum positions it as a potential bridge between local struggles and national transformation. However, realizing this potential requires confronting the challenges posed by physical separation, regional differences, and internal identity conflicts. These divisions distract us from developing a cohesive, long-term vision. While the system is designed to keep us fragmented, acknowledging these realities allows us to work through them with intention and care. We must also be willing to pursue incremental wins—stepping-stone reforms and milestone reforms—without losing sight of the larger goal: structural transformation. The fruits of our labor may not be realized within our own lifetimes, but conjunctural analysis reminds us that without working-class solidarity, meaningful change is not possible.
The beauty of this moment lies in the opportunity it presents. By mobilizing our people, while acknowledging the variety of power-building strategies we must use, we can provide material change and tend to the wounds that the current ideological crisis has left behind. Building strong working-class institutions and electing working-class leaders at the local and state level can reshape what feels possible. Through sustained, care-centered organizing—especially in rural communities and among those abandoned by the two-party system—we can offer more than we thought was possible. The current interregnum holds both real danger and real possibility. While authoritarian power remains loud and powerful, its legitimacy is eroding. The future isn’t fixed, but it will be shaped by our devotion to ourselves and one another, our commitment to cohesion, and what we choose to build together in this moment.
References
Hemphill, Prentis. What It Takes to Heal. Random House, 4 June 2024.
Bhargava, Deepak, and Stephanie Luce. Practical Radicals. The New Press, 7 Nov. 2023. “Conjunctural Analysis 2025: Crises and Collective Action.” Black Rose/Rosa Negra Anarchist Federation, 16 Jan. 2025,
www.blackrosefed.org/conjunctural-analysis-2025-crises-and-collective-action/. “Critical Analysis for Movement Building: Antonio Gramsci and Conjunctural Analysis.” The People’s Forum, 23 May 2019,
peoplesforum.org/events/critical-analysis-for-movement-building-antonio-gramsci-and-c onjunctural-analysis/2019-05-22/.
“Shawn Fain: May Day 2028 Could Transform the Labor Movement—and the World.” In These Times, 30 Apr. 2024,
inthesetimes.com/article/may-day-2028-general-strike-working-class.