Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
1. It is a technique. The whole point of the piece is protests are a neglected technique that ought to be used.
|
Only if you use the word "technique" in a strange way. Google suggests to me that the word means, "a way of carrying out a particular task, especially the execution or performance of an artistic work or a scientific procedure." Calling mass protests a "technique" seems to me to miss or obfuscate the point, since the term has connotations that are antithetical to the idea behind mass protests, but knock yourself out.
Quote:
|
2. I explained why it’s not neglected but actually rejected. If people were going to use it, to effectively (emphasis there) protest any policy of Trump, we’d have seen tons of it. Outside the govt employees defying Trump, we’re not seeing much in the way of protests. As you and I note, people don’t know, care, and are too busy.
|
And Yglesias points to 2017. Maybe you were asleep that year and then skipped over that part of his piece?
Quote:
|
3. If not mass, what sort of effective protests would work? A small protest is nearly an oxymoron. (You even admit Yglesias is suggesting that “mass” protests can work, btw.)
|
Not only do I admit it, his actual point is that they can work. He doesn't just suggest it -- he says it pretty explicitly. (Does he say that "they're going to succeed in removing Trump"? Again, no.)
Quote:
|
4. The distinction between saying mass protests can work vs. will work is a frivolous one to raise. Clearly, Yglesias desires them to work and thinks they can.
|
Yes.
Quote:
|
That is not even close to likely unless Trump does something truly extreme or we have a significant recession.
|
I understand that you think this, because you said it before. Thank you for repeating yourself to avoid confusion. If at some point you would like to explain why you think that, that would be swell. If you don't want to bother, that's fine too.
Quote:
|
5. On the last point, one man’s lawlessness is another man’s battle against the establishment.
|
Do you really believe that both are equally true here? Of course not.
Quote:
|
The victimized savior narrative is worn by few more effectively than Trump. This impeachment helps him more than it hurts. Nancy knew this, and among all the Ds who find ways to lose, she’s an annual 20 game winner.
|
In what way does he "wear" that "narrative" effectively? In what way does impeachment help him? Since Nancy's smart, what can we learn from her decision to move on impeachment?
