My experiment to eschew social media is going pretty well so far. I haven't logged in to Facebook or Twitter for about three weeks now, and I don't really miss it. I still fiddle with my way phone too much -- Sporcle, Words With Friends, MLB Gamecast, etc. -- but I think that my anxiety levels are down overall. I'm not constantly wondering what's going on out there, because out there effectively doesn't exist to me anymore. My outrage levels are much lower than before too. I still know what's going on -- I still consume a lot of news -- but there is a lot less of the blood-boiling, click-bait-y "Stupid Liberal/Conservative Does Infuriatingly Stupid Liberal/Conservative Thing" type of story in my life now. Honestly, however, I'm not sure if being less angry is a net positive or a net negative. It's definitely good for my health, but outrage is a good motivating factor. If anti-Trumpists are going to strike back in a major way this fall, we need some level of outrage. We need to be pissed off. You don't get millions of people turning out to the polls without a large dose of dander and discomfort. So, I don't know -- I don't know what the right mix is between staying sane and fighting back like a cornered rabid animal.
Speaking of animals, Trump used the term this week to describe members of MS-13, the criminal gang of mostly Latino immigrants that nobody had really heard of until a few months ago when Republicans realized they needed something other than their record to run on this year. I think this presents a good opportunity for Democrats. They should position themselves diametrically opposed to Trump on crime. They should adopt the phrase "stupid on crime" to counter his "tough on crime" rhetoric. Make the two become synonymous. Hammer home how bad ostensibly harsh measures are. I think there is a large segment of the population open to this message. People have seen and are continuing to see the futility of measures like the War on Drugs. Here's what I would say if I was a congressperson in response to Trump's comments:
Members of MS-13 are not "animals." They are people. Not only is it immoral to treat people -- even people who do terrible things -- as animals, it's stupid. The only way to eradicate gang violence is to call it out for what it is -- crimes by people against people. It is a human problem. To pretend it's something other than this, is to go down a path of continued failure.
"People are people" is another angle I would hit hard if I was a Democratic politician. Every comment I said about immigration would start with the disclaim, "Look, they are people in a desperate situation trying to do what's best for themselves or their family just like you or I would do..." I think there is a desire for that right not in contrast to Trump's ugliness. I suspect even most people who favor stricter immigration enforcement can empathize with immigrants on a human level. They don't want to see people ripped apart from their families or held indefinitely in detention centers. Such a message will utterly fail with hardcore Trumpists, of course, but any message delivered by a Democrat will utterly fail with hardcore Trumpists. The worst thing Democrats can do, in my opinion, is bend over backward to try to placate "real Americans." At best, it will come off as insincere and be ineffective (Fox News and Republican politicians will cast Dems as disrespectful elitists no matter what they do); at worst, it will repel voters on the other side of the coin and erode the Democrats base. I think this article gets it right -- the best thing Dems can do when dealing with Trump Country is to not make apologies for being "elitists," but instead to change the subject and continually hammer the GOP on economic issues. The goal is just to pick off a small fraction of a small fraction of disenchanted Trump voters -- a possible margin of victory in a close election -- not change hearts and minds en masse, because that ain't happening any time soon.
The other thing about the "people are people" message is that it could, somewhat ironically, actually help with the "your don't understand real Americans" messaging problem, because Trump voters are people too -- even those who harbor hateful and prejudice feelings. "Racists are people" is a corollary of "people are people," and I think liberals would be well-served to remind themselves of this sometimes. The thing is, a lot of people in this country come directly from a lineage of white supremacy. White supremacy was a legally codified, defining characteristic of our country for almost a century, and you can argue it is still a de facto one in many areas today, especially in much of the South. (Based on the data I've seen, I believe a desire to hang onto the vestiges of white supremacy is the primary reason Trump was elected.) So, if somebody grows up in an area with deep racist roots and everybody around them -- everybody they love and admire -- is racist, it is overwhelmingly likely they are going to be racist too. What do we do with such people, tell them all to fuck off die? That's not practical, even if it's what we want to do. And it shouldn't be what we want. We don't have to be tolerant of racism, but we can (and should) be empathetic towards racists, in the same way we don't have to be tolerant of violence and criminality, but we can be empathetic towards people who grow up in circumstances in which that's all they know. People are people.
Another thing concerning racism we do that I don't like is we treat it as a binary -- you are either racist (bad) or not racist (good). When in actuality racism encompasses a huge range. There is everything from Dylan Roof down to your friend's dad who secretly hates the fact his daughter is dating a black guy and feels guilty about it. Racism is not an zero-one variable, but that's how we treat it, and this makes it hard to talk about (and thus make any progress on) racism, because pointing out somebody harbors racist views is treated as akin to calling them a KKK Grand Wizard.
Anyway, I don't really have a good solution to any of this, other than to say we all should be more empathetic toward everybody. Kumbaya, motherfuckers.
Until next time...
Speaking of animals, Trump used the term this week to describe members of MS-13, the criminal gang of mostly Latino immigrants that nobody had really heard of until a few months ago when Republicans realized they needed something other than their record to run on this year. I think this presents a good opportunity for Democrats. They should position themselves diametrically opposed to Trump on crime. They should adopt the phrase "stupid on crime" to counter his "tough on crime" rhetoric. Make the two become synonymous. Hammer home how bad ostensibly harsh measures are. I think there is a large segment of the population open to this message. People have seen and are continuing to see the futility of measures like the War on Drugs. Here's what I would say if I was a congressperson in response to Trump's comments:
Members of MS-13 are not "animals." They are people. Not only is it immoral to treat people -- even people who do terrible things -- as animals, it's stupid. The only way to eradicate gang violence is to call it out for what it is -- crimes by people against people. It is a human problem. To pretend it's something other than this, is to go down a path of continued failure.
"People are people" is another angle I would hit hard if I was a Democratic politician. Every comment I said about immigration would start with the disclaim, "Look, they are people in a desperate situation trying to do what's best for themselves or their family just like you or I would do..." I think there is a desire for that right not in contrast to Trump's ugliness. I suspect even most people who favor stricter immigration enforcement can empathize with immigrants on a human level. They don't want to see people ripped apart from their families or held indefinitely in detention centers. Such a message will utterly fail with hardcore Trumpists, of course, but any message delivered by a Democrat will utterly fail with hardcore Trumpists. The worst thing Democrats can do, in my opinion, is bend over backward to try to placate "real Americans." At best, it will come off as insincere and be ineffective (Fox News and Republican politicians will cast Dems as disrespectful elitists no matter what they do); at worst, it will repel voters on the other side of the coin and erode the Democrats base. I think this article gets it right -- the best thing Dems can do when dealing with Trump Country is to not make apologies for being "elitists," but instead to change the subject and continually hammer the GOP on economic issues. The goal is just to pick off a small fraction of a small fraction of disenchanted Trump voters -- a possible margin of victory in a close election -- not change hearts and minds en masse, because that ain't happening any time soon.
The other thing about the "people are people" message is that it could, somewhat ironically, actually help with the "your don't understand real Americans" messaging problem, because Trump voters are people too -- even those who harbor hateful and prejudice feelings. "Racists are people" is a corollary of "people are people," and I think liberals would be well-served to remind themselves of this sometimes. The thing is, a lot of people in this country come directly from a lineage of white supremacy. White supremacy was a legally codified, defining characteristic of our country for almost a century, and you can argue it is still a de facto one in many areas today, especially in much of the South. (Based on the data I've seen, I believe a desire to hang onto the vestiges of white supremacy is the primary reason Trump was elected.) So, if somebody grows up in an area with deep racist roots and everybody around them -- everybody they love and admire -- is racist, it is overwhelmingly likely they are going to be racist too. What do we do with such people, tell them all to fuck off die? That's not practical, even if it's what we want to do. And it shouldn't be what we want. We don't have to be tolerant of racism, but we can (and should) be empathetic towards racists, in the same way we don't have to be tolerant of violence and criminality, but we can be empathetic towards people who grow up in circumstances in which that's all they know. People are people.
Another thing concerning racism we do that I don't like is we treat it as a binary -- you are either racist (bad) or not racist (good). When in actuality racism encompasses a huge range. There is everything from Dylan Roof down to your friend's dad who secretly hates the fact his daughter is dating a black guy and feels guilty about it. Racism is not an zero-one variable, but that's how we treat it, and this makes it hard to talk about (and thus make any progress on) racism, because pointing out somebody harbors racist views is treated as akin to calling them a KKK Grand Wizard.
Anyway, I don't really have a good solution to any of this, other than to say we all should be more empathetic toward everybody. Kumbaya, motherfuckers.
Until next time...
No comments:
Post a Comment