Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I'm wrong all the time.



Look, you did not "explain" anything. You're under no obligation to respond to his article at all. You have every right to say you disagree. You certainly may be right. But if you mischaracterize what he says ("technique") and assert in a few sentences that what he says in several paragraphs is not right, don't pretend that you have "explained" why you think he's way off. There are obvious answers to what you've said in what he says, which shows you are not engaging with him. Again: maybe you're right and he's wrong. But you haven't bothered to explain it.



Well, he doesn't say that "we're going to see mass protests" and he doesn't say that "they're going to succeed in removing Trump."

Here's the paragraph that (I think) captures his thesis:



Here is some of his explanation of why he thinks mass protests can work:



Does he say that "we're going to see mass protests"? No, and he points out that institutional Democrats are uncomfortable with them. Does he say that "they're going to succeed in removing Trump"? No, but he offers reasons to think that they have promise.



I think the problems with Trump go far, far beyond "a novice fucking up." Among other things, he rejects any oversight or obligation to be bound by the law. (He literally just argued to a federal court that he could shoot someone and be immune to prosecution or investigation while he is President.) If there are mass protests, they won't be protesting the hold-up in military aid to the Ukraine. Try asking yourself, what will they be protesting? How is it different from Iran-Contra?

1. It is a technique. The whole point of the piece is protests are a neglected technique that ought to be used.

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.

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.)

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. That is not even close to likely unless Trump does something truly extreme or we have a significant recession.

5. On the last point, one man’s lawlessness is another man’s battle against the establishment. 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.