Wednesday’s Forum
Steven L. Taylor
·
Wednesday, February 5, 2025
·
78 comments
OTB relies on its readers to support it. Please consider helping by becoming a monthly contributor through Patreon or making a one-time contribution via PayPal. Thanks for your consideration.
About Steven L. Taylor
Steven L. Taylor is a Professor Emeritus of Political Science and former College of Arts and Sciences Dean. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored
A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging since 2003 (originally at the now defunct Poliblog).
Follow Steven on
Twitter and/or
BlueSky.
I posted something to Tuesday’s forum perhaps an hour ago, repeat it here:
Cheryl Rofer just posted an explainer at LGM:
https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2025/02/some-computer-explanations
snip
Noting that Wired magazine identifies one kiddie as having root level access (e.g., ultimate admin privileges):
ETA: Adding to Cheryl’s list of things that can go wrong:
The system might start doing strange things it should not do.
@charontwo: This is crazy! If any of the bad possibilities happen, it seems like grounds for suing for damages by any/all affected people against Elon and his evil minions. Maybe a class action suit.
So re the whole Gaza thing. I’m sure more info will come/leak out today, but I’m wondering a few things.
Has Trump bothered actually telling Egypt and Jordan they’re taking in about 2 million Gazans or did they find out about it the same way Americans did from the press conference?
Has Netanyahu completely lost his marbles to think this is some kind of victory for him? Personally I think if this insane policy actually comes to fruition (it won’t but it could get very messy), it’s the beginning of the end for Israel. People and other countries don’t have to be pro-Palestinian to just say, the hell with it, you’re on your own from now on.
Actually, there is one way this could benefit Israel: if the Palestinian fury is now focused entirely on America and Americans. I think Netanyahu would be conniving enough to do it but I don’t think he’s clever enough to bring it off, even with Huckabee praying beside him.
What idiot would buy or rent hotel rooms at the Trump Riviera condos/hotels knowing how close Gaza is to all the surrounding countries with sizeable Palestinian populations who will be furious with Americans for the next several decades and who know how to dig tunnels that aren’t easily discovered?
Mind-blowing. This is entering into serious Amendment-25 territory.
We often cling to our idea of what a party, a country or a person is long after they have revealed that they are no longer what they were, if the ever were. Even in 2016 people believed the Republican Party was going to hold to “norms” and stand against Trump’s violations, but it was already apparent that a) January 6th was very likely to happen and b) the Republicans would block any repercussions.
And that takes us to last night with Trump and Netanyahu stating outright that ethnic cleansing is the goal in Gaza. I contended it was obvious from the start, for a dozen different reasons. But people remember Israel as a brave young nation, resisting (very real) lethal threats from all sides. They can’t see the Israel that exists today, an apartheid state that seeks the utter destruction of 3 million people, or losing that, their virtual enslavement.
@MWLib: I am not a lawyer, but I would think that sovereign immunity would get trotted out.
I just can’t believe this has happened. How long before a bad actor launches a successful ransomware attack?
Re; border security.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFn0rc8ykRW/?igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==
@Daryl:
Glorious.
https://www.notus.org/congress/trump-musk-treasury-spending
Some of the above comments might play really well in campaign advertisements.
Why is there not a follow up question: If you’re not doing your job, why don’t you resign?
@Scott:
I’m glad I wasn’t the only one incensed to read that.
@charontwo: In the normal Constitutional order, Republicans in Congress have been required to compromise with Democrats in order to reach agreement on national priorities. That is what Article I requires and it is the soul of representative democracy.
So now you have a Republican president who is willing to disregard all of the constitutionally required compromise and run government entirely the way Republicans have been saying they want it run for decades. It is no surprise that Republican members of Congress are entirely willing to turn a blind eye and so put their party priorities above any Constitutional order. This, not Constitutional democracy, is what they have always wanted.
Harry Stewart Jr., 100, one of the last surviving Tuskegee Airmen and a Distinguished Flying Cross recipient, has died. RIP.
For people who are opposed to the current administration and their efforts, a critical question is how best to mobilize and fight. If I may be so bold, this is the only question that truly matters.*
If you accept that thesis, it is essential to identify the strategies that are most effective in mobilizing and fighting. Those that are least effective. And those that are counterproductive.
I’ve been noodling that last category. What strategies (and/or approaches, reactions, etc) are counterproductive in this effort?
One thing that I’ve observed a lot over the past week (not specific to OTB) is the rubbing of faces:
-“You happy now, dumbass!?”
-“What the fuck did you think would happen?!”
-“How’s it feel to have leopards eating your face?!”
These are understandable reactions – hell, I have similar thoughts and worse.
And if the goal is to mobilize and fight… if the goal is to stop the destruction… if the situation is life/death serious…
Then the rubbing of faces is among the most counterproductive things one can do. It’s an anti-mobilizing strategy. It pushes people away.
One might respond: “But the (regretful) Trump voters aren’t going to mobilize under any circumstances.” That may be true (though I don’t think it’s a given).
And that still leaves a sizeable number of people who sat out this last election because… Gaza, eggs, bothsides, etc. Many of these folks have previously voted D. They can be mobilized. Hell, a lot of them mobilized against Biden (Harris) last time around.
If you can’t stomach inviting them in, then at the very least don’t dis-invite them, repel them, etc.
This only holds IF the primary goal is to mobilize and fight.
*Depending on one’s circumstances, a more critical question is how to protect oneself and loved ones.
@charontwo:
Heather Cox Richardson points out with a trifecta the GQP could enact whatever cuts they wanted. But putting up bills and debating them would prove such things too unpopular to pass. therefore they’ll let the nazi in chief make the cuts for them.
They will still be unpopular. So the question is not how they’ll blame it all on transwomen, immigrants, DEI, and democrats, but what mental contortions republican voters will need to make to swallow that steaming pile of trumpshit.
Waiting for our daily email invoking FOMO from Musk’s little minions.
@Mimai: A more pertinent question is what to mobilize and fight against.
@Kathy:
Just taking a meat axe to NOAA funding as one example because it notices that weather can be affected by climate.
But irresponsible cutting is only one problem.
You have, for example, a lot of classified activity by DOD, CIA etc. that gets funded out of the treasury. Now these payments are potentially exposed to foreign actors accessing the computers.
@Fortune:
I’d like to invite you to say more about that.
Trump is the WW3 president. Gaza invasions won’t lower rising egg, coffee, and gas prices. The reckless rapist promised to fix everything on day one. Instead, his incompetent Project 2025 chaos is making everything worse.
Trump claimed crime was up then released 1,500+ thugs, who are getting arrested again. Housing and healthcare are unaffordable, but Republicans are instead focused on strengthening China and Russia by gutting USAID.
And Trump is focused on starting ground wars and trade wars, fighting our neighbors, letting Musk’s incels steal our bank data and SSNs, and replacing experienced civil servants with unqualified DUI hire MAGA sheep.
Anyone feel safer flying under Musk-Trump than under Biden-Harris?
Everybody who thinks there will be zero blowback, please raise your hands.
@Mimai:
Democrats are a long, long way from thinking sensibly about winning. Democrats want to be right, they aren’t about winning. They’d rather be right and impotent than compromise and do real good for people. Lawyers, teachers, college kids, and much more realistic but generally ignored Black voters – a party of Tom Hagens, not wartime consiglieri.
@Michael Reynolds: I always equated Chuck Schumer with Tom Hagens. The Senate needs another Harry Reid.
@Mimai: Trump’s 2024 victory negates the idea this sort of thing has any appreciable effect on voter behavior.
It’s a comfortable Bible story though, for those who still insist voters only act based on what Democrats say and don’t say (because neither Republicans nor the voters themselves have agency or priorities independent of Democratic “messaging”) and who can’t bring themselves to accept the uncomfortable reality that our 2024 results were another unfortunate data point in a global post-COVID anti-incumbent wave.
Because of their ability to bend their own lives to their will, smart liberals are fond of believing the wider world also turns on their acute deeds. This sort of egocentrism is sometimes necessary to be a success in life. But sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and has very little to do with you.
The 2026 results will be defined mostly by how the general zeitgeist judges Republican governance and perceives the Trump economy and public order, and whether those vibes are positive enough to alter Americans’ tendency to get restless and swing towards the opposition every 2-4 years. Disappointingly for the keyboard consultant class, it will have little to do with Democrats themselves, let alone online comments sections. There’s no mass of voters in 2026 or 2028 who will be moved because some liberal online somewhere in 2025 said “I told you so.”
In all this madness, we got a kitten. We have lots of cats up here, but few kittens. The many hawks keep the feral cat population down. This one, Quinzy, survived. She is tiny, 1.9 lbs. Healthy other than a minor infection from living rough with other cats. She’ll be spayed and vaxxed and get lots of love. The grand girls are over the moon. Sadie is undecided.
Anyway, something sweet and innocent to help take our minds off the fact that the Musk controlled GOP castrated themselves and then lay prostrate on the muddy ground to create a human rug for their billionaire keepers to walk on as they carried out their evil and sellout America to the highest bidder.
@becca:
I’m sure Ms. Sadie will come around.
A Black man has to be twice as good to succeed, and Jamelle Bouie is. He has a must read column in NYT today, There Is No Going Back (gift link).
@Mimai:
BTW, if you have any doubts about my diagnosis of Democrats’ limp, passive, helplessness see @DK: .
Trump’s statement on Gaza contained two ideas.
#1. Exile the current inhabitants
#2. Build a great community in Gaza with lots of good jobs for everybody
I didn’t hear any specific plans for accomplishing these goals. My guess is that the expulsions will have priority over reconstruction. These actions amount to an open invitation for China to make themselves the international good guys with anyone who finds this plan distasteful. A few low risk actions by the Chinese will make this happen.
Oh well, the US still leads the world in technology like AI and electric cars.
Not that it’s possible, but if I could make a bet, I’d put a substantial amount on either a coup, a civil war, or a revolution taking place in the US before 2028.
Things might hold for a couple of years, especially if the nazi in chief and the tinpot tyrant walk back some of their most egregious moves. But then if there are no midterm elections in 2026, or these are not held in a free and fair manner, something really dreadful will happen.
All the lawsuits pending will be appealed to the Crow and Leo court eventually. I can see two ways in which they undo birthright citizenship, if so ordered (I won’t say how in order not to give them any ideas). And the same goes for most if not all other questions.
But even if the court by some miracle acts as it should, odds are the current wrecking crew would go on doing what they want, and mock the court by daring it to enforce its rulings.
@DK:
We seem to be talking about separate (and related) things.
I am talking about mobilizing and fighting. Now. And the most, least, and counterproductive ways to facilitate this.
You are talking about voting. And other stuff.
I don’t have a problem with us talking about different things. I just wanted to note it.
@Michael Reynolds:
Having observed a few past interactions between you and DK, I’ve got negative interest in getting in the middle of you two 😉
Don’t let that stop you two though. As if it could.
@becca:
We had a dog and a cat at the same time once. the cat was there fist, and I think she resented the dog. For her part, the dog would try to play with the cat, and sometimes the cat went along. It helped they were of about the same size.
Before the dog came, the cat would come down to my room when I got home. Afterwards, she did only if the dog wasn’t with me.
On a bright note, my petition for a legal name change was granted today
@Stormy Dragon:
Congrats! May all continue to go well for you.
@Slugger:
T. S. Eliot, in the aptly named, The Hollow Men.
Ooh-wee, Trump rides so high but his plan ain’t going nowhere.
It ain’t gonna fly.
@Rob1: I wish I could give you an extra thumb for the “You Ain’t Goin’ Nowhere” reference.
@Slugger: I assume that there was a missing /s at the end of your last sentence.
@Kathy:
Don’t worry about it. The Federalist justices were chosen for their outstanding ability to come up with bullshit legal rationalizations on their own.
@Kathy:
At one point we had four cats. They all studiously avoided us. Always in the same room as us.
I may be overthinking Trump’s statements; I might actually be spending more time on them than he did. When he said “we will own it” referring to Gaza, what does that mean? Will Gaza have territorial status like Guam? Or was that statement not intended to be taken seriously?
@gVOR10:
Ramona would meet me at the door to my room, and I’d let her in. She’d play or take petting for a bit, but then she went on to undertake her continuing exploration of the bookcase. She liked to jump onto the higher shelves, where she could walk on top of my books.
Sometimes she would explore behind the TV, and once or twice she tried to probe the mysteries of the bathroom. Eventually she’d go to attend to other business.
Trump’s daughter-in-law will host her own show on Fox come Feb. 22. “My View with Lara Trump” will air on Saturdays at 9 p.m.
The show will focus on “the return of common sense to all corners of American life.”
Gee, I can hardly wait.
Take a pause from all the bad news, and enjoy 2:20 of delight.
@Kurtz: lovely. Now I’ll have to go look up all those tongue-twisters!
@Kathy: I think Sadie is confused by the kitten. We had a beautiful Siamese cat, Bebe, up until two weeks ago. She came with the house. Local lore held she showed up around the lake years ago. She would pick a place and live with someone for a bit, then take off. She came to us and stayed 5 years. The vet said she was at least 10 and probably a lot older. We buried her under a stand of pines. What a great cat. She ruled Sadie.
To Sadie, the kitten isn’t much different than a squirrel, which is for chasing up trees and scaring half to death. Just to be on the safe side, we re-upped the trazodone prescription to give Sadie during the transition period.
I could use some trazodone myself these days.
@Michael Reynolds: Yes, because who wouldn’t doubt diagnoses from a self-credentialed election doctor who hasn’t run for or managed, and then won jack squat electorally. How could we not all bow before the genius of the owner of an imaginary political consulting firm to which imaginary Dem candidates are clamoring for advice?
So many comments section heroes in possession of the perfect potion, and yet somehow they’ve never managed to sell their magic proprietary formula to a single real world buyer. Fancy that.
@CSK: What’s really fun about this (in a not-fun-at-all sort of way) is that the “common sense” being applied is, in fact, the opposite of common sense. Which we could expect from these people.
For instance, let’s take trans people. They are privileging the religious reaction of a few people that have had zero contact with everyday trans people over the everyday experience of trans people, and people who know them. People who have the everyday experience on many topics are shouted down and ignored (interestingly enough, this has happened to Mike Johnson as regards his adopted black son and his everyday observations of unequal treatment) in favor of ideology that doesn’t challenge them emotionally.
This is not common sense. Not in the least. It is ideology trumping common sense. We need to undermine the “common sense” garbage, and refine this argument.
@Jay L Gischer: Did we ever find out whether the Johnsons actually adopted that kid or not, and how long he was in their care? That story was so odd.
@DK: Well, I think I can respect it being called “odd”. As best I can tell it’s true, and they raised the boy to adulthood. I’m not sure whether it was foster parenting or adoption.
I would think, though, that you would be able to understand how layered and complex and yeah, odd, humans can be, though. Maybe that’s “work” to you and you don’t feel like working here?
All the same, I think @becca nailed it when she described him as a “professional christian”. He decided that his political ambition was more important than standing up for his son with other Republicans (which it appears that such standing up had little value).
Nevertheless, there are a few – not many, but a few – policy priorities that I think I have in common with him. Ukraine aid, for instance. Unlike Mitch McConnell, Johnson does not want his differences with Trump to become public, though.
And of course, we have lots of very significant differences.
Maybe Kelce is planning to break up with his girlfriend.
@Kathy:
Kelce doesn’t sound like the brightest bulb in the chandelier.
@CSK:
Now I really want the Eagles to win.
@Kathy:
So Trump can invite them to the WH yet again, and most of them refuse the invite, yet again?
My over/under on Trump endorsing ethnic cleansing was two months. He performed bigly, covering the under in less than three weeks.
@Jay L Gischer: It wouldn’t be “work” to recognize the simple and non-controversial reality that human beings are complex. But I don’t know what that means in regard to the apparent facts of Johnson’s non-adopted adopted kid, and how his existence was revealed to the public, per Business Insider:
To me this is curious. My adopted brother would never be excluded from, or exclude himself from, our family presentation. We don’t even think of him as adopted. But we’re also not (national) public figures. The Johnsons’ situation is different.
They took in teenager, raising him from there. After Johnson became a public figure, this family member was unknown to most til 2020, when Johnson told an interviewer of his black “adopted” son during L’affaire du George Floyd.
That sent reporters digging, as this son had theretofore been unseen and unmentioned in Johnson’s biographical material. Johnson’s camp then clarified, comparing the situation to The Blind Side as opposed to a formal, legal adoption. It had been kept low key due to the now-adult son’s desire for privacy, which makes sense.
To me this is trivia. Unimportant, but all rather convoluted and thus odd, independent of any specific human traits. Not unlike Matt Gaetz’s announcement of his “adopted” non-adopted cubano son Nestor — also revealed during the infamous Summer of
692020, and for similar reasons — who’d apparently lived with Gaetz for six years pre-disclosure.@Jay L Gischer:
I fear it’s not even ideology. For the voters it’s fear, fear of the unknown, fear of others, fear of the future, fear of whatever you got. For the pros, it’s the need for an enemy. Trump can be confident Canada and Mexico will remain allies, and they certainly won’t shoot at us. GOPs have had to lighten up on gays a bit. About 5% of Americans identify as gay or lesbian, but the real number is maybe 20%. Less than 1% identify as trans. For reference, Jews were less than 1% of the German population in the 30s. They need an enemy, they need an enemy that can’t fight back effectively, and they don’t care who they hurt. In fact it makes them feel strong.
@CSK:
Yes. But have you seen the losing team in just about every Super Bowl? Most players look like they’re grieving. So I would like to imagine Travis seeking solace from Swift, only to hear how he should go seek consolation from the rapist who proclaimed to hate Taylor Swift whom Travis said it was an honor to play in front of.
@DK: I’m just wondering how many other elected Republicans have secret not-legally-adopted sons of other races. And whether they have been sexually abused.
@Kathy:
I spend very little time pondering the affair of Swft-Kelce, but it does occur to me that this might create a rupture between them.
@Jay L Gischer:
The Trumps don’t speak common sense. They say whatever it is their fans want to hear, and then the MAGAs laud this as “common sense.”
If Trump himself had common sense, he would have averted multiple bankruptcies.
@CSK: He shouldn’t have played so many games without his helmet.
@Michael Reynolds:
This is where the Labour Party has the edge over the Democrats.
We have a solid core of bloody-minded, fight-dirty, utter bastards. 😉
(Say hello to Morgan_McSweeney “Todd” and Pat McFadden)
See Starmer’s evisceration of the Corbynites, and the Tories.
Of course, that entailed hostages to fortune re. tax and EU policy, etc.
But sufficient unto the day are the burning bridges thereof.
First: WIN!
@JohnSF:
And Starmer has the distinction of being absolutely GOP when it comes to screwing over trans people. One of the few delights of me getting UK citizenship will be telling Labour to gargle my balls.
In other news, thanks to the GOP bastards and Musk, a deal that I had worked out that was going to bring repairs to the home over an elderly couple has been nuked. The charity that was supposed to do the work and has been appointed as receiver has had to pull out because they have LOST FUNDING TO DO ANY MORE WORK. Even on matters that have been previously ordered and approved. This is going to nuke the economy. Not right away, slowly, then all at once.
That’s one little bright spot for me. These Wall St. idiots are as high on Trumps farts as the GOP. These idiots thought the economy was bad last year, lol. Just wait. The day that blows up is going to be the day Trump strokes out.
@Mimai:
The problem is that takes us to a place that is uncomfortable from an ethical perspective, and a democratic perspective.
Ethics: I recall Rust Cole’s line from True Detective, ““The world needs bad men to keep other bad men from the door”. By definition . . .
—
Democracy: the election was won according to the rules set out, and Trump won the popular vote. How bad must a Constitutional crisis be before we can justify taking action?
And that does not address other related questions:
Has the mechanics of the government outlined by the Constitution actually accomplished the goals set out in the Preamble? If the answer is no, then why mobilize for it?
If the fear is about the current administration establishing a worse social order, it raises even more questions.
I did not engage these questions in my response to @DK’s “let it burn” post in a recent thread, as I was more focused on the immediate, direct results of fiddling like Nero. I am wrestling with the implications of that approach; others have mentioned they are as well.
ETA: Nor does it address the means of mobilization.
@Fortune:
Can you be more specific?
I have ideas of what you may mean, but I would rather not be accused of making assumptions.
@Kurtz: Any idea who the cover band is? (I’m now listening to the original band. Excellent!)
@MarkedMan:
Haku. (Full stop is part of the name).
I listened to the original and liked it as well.
Here is another one of Haku.’s songs. I like this one as well. Pretty sure it’s an original composition. I’m just beginning my journey on this.
I just heard about them from a friend who was basically the last person I would expect to have expanded his horizons to Japanese rock bands.
I’ve seen other videos using the same set as the cover song, I think they were produced for a TV show.
@Beth:
And Starmer benefitted from being Leader of the Opposition during an election held in 2024, in the midst of a global anti-incumbent wave. As did nearly every opposition leader everywhere.
Wrt to Kelce, a couple points are in order.
He is pro-vaccination. That may not seem like much, but in today’s environment, especially considering Rodgers and the Bosas, it is something.
Some people view religion and politics as things not to discuss publicly. The former, that would be great. The latter? Eh, not in a democracy. But it is woven into some parts of American culture.
Would I prefer that Kelce be more like JJ Watt? Of course. But not everyone is inclined or built to be political in a public manner. And if they do not have enough interest in the issues, is it not better that they not say anything?
—
The assertion of “not that bright” grinds my gears a bit. Most, though not all, of today’s NFL players need some level of baseline intelligence to be successful.
Physical skill and mental consistency rarely gets one far without cognitive ability as well. The systems installed at the professional level are highly complex, and require far more than just quick reflexes and run fast, hit hard. There are positions that are less intensive mentally–running back, some defensive line techniques, and pure man cornerbacks come to mind.
Take running back as an example. Outside of unicorns like Adrian Peterson, who are such physical monsters that a team can build an offense around them. the ones who cannot keep up with cognitive aspects of the game are either limited to specific roles or wash out of the league quickly. Just ask Peyton Manning what it’s like to have a running back who does not have the cognitive ability to understand protection schemes.*
Kelce plays a very difficult position. There is a reason that it takes a long time for TEs to develop–it is not just the better competition. He is closer to a receiver than old school TEs were, but he does have blocking responsibilities.
Moreover, in the modern NFL, being a quality receiver requires far more than physical prowess. If you know what you are looking for, you can see it. When a QB throws a pick and you have no idea who he was throwing it to, a good portion of the time, the receiver ran the wrong route (again, knowing your assignment requires an enormous amount of data and recalling it in a split-second, under immense pressure), or they misread the defense. Being fast and quick will not get you much more than reps on designed touches like screens and gadget plays.
QBs, Safeties, and MLBs are not the only positions that require intelligence.
*Watching Manning try to run makes me laugh. His nephew appears to have added quickness and speed to the Manning talent tree. That is scary.
@Kurtz: Has the
nationleft become so polarized now that we have to GAFF about some boilerplate nonsense that an NFL player says about POTUS attending the Superbowl? Don’t you guys have lives?@Kurtz:
@just nutha:
The thing is Taylor Swift has rather strong political opinions, and the tinpot tyrant Xitted in his data mining app that he hates her. Next her boyfriend says it’s an honor to play with him in attendance.
I know how I would feel and what I’d tell him about it.
If he wanted to be apolitical, Travis could have said his head will be in the game, not on who’s watching it.
@Kurtz:
I’m fairly confident I understand what you’re getting at here.
I do want to clarify that by “mobilize and fight,” I meant “get people together to protest and march and coordinate etc… in the relatively typical ways.”
I did not mean “get people together to topple the administration etc… by whatever means is necessary.”
To be sure, I have pondered the latter. On many occasions. “What would it take for me to do and advocate for [redacted]?”
I’ve floated some version of this question around here in the past, and it hasn’t really inspired much fruitful engagement. This is entirely my fault — I own it.
Thus, in my comment today, I was sticking to the more banal topic, with a particular focus on what I see to be a counterproductive (and understandable) reaction.
That didn’t seem to work much better. Again, entirely my fault — I own it. (insert Raylan Givens quote about assholes)
“If YoU dId NoThInG WrOnG yOu HaVe NoThIng To WoRrY aBoUt” – FEDs since 9/11 (until now)
@Kathy:
He also may see it as showing respect for the office, rather than the person.
I see his comment as anodyne.
No matter what he says, he is going to get criticized by somebody.
Also, guessing about the status of celebrity relationships holds zero interest to me.
@just nutha:
I mean, I didn’t even know about the statement until it was flagged here.
I actually agree with you more than you seem to think. As far as I can tell, of the commenters, the only one who has an idea what it is like to be in Kelce’s situation would be Reynolds. And the difference between his prominence and Kelce’s is massive.
If you couldn’t tell from my post, I was much more interested in pushing back against the football players are dumb meatheads trope than anything to do with Kelce, or his relationship with Taylor Swift.
I am not among the group criticizing him for an anodyne statement. I am not among the group wishing he would have made a slightly more anodyne statement, especially because the other one, imo, risked the response staying in the news far longer.
On the other hand, I will say that I do admire Kaepernick for doing what he did. And I think it is good if someone prominent is willing to put it out there; I just don’t think it should be an expectation.
I admire Kap even more for adjusting his approach after a conversation with a veteran. In a world of performative politics, it shows that he is a thinker and committed to change.
My reference to JJ Watt was his tweet about kneeling during the anthem–if you think it is about disrespecting the flag, you are not paying attention.
As Kap’s situation showed, those guys do risk something if they make a political statement.
But that’s my point. If I admire Kap’s actions, and praise Watt for his statement, it highlights their willingness to put something on the line. But it does not impact my view of those who would rather not talk about it.
Appropros analogy: If a player makes aspectacular catch on a high difficulty play, one cannot then criticize that same player if he can’t quite squeeze the ball in a similar situation on the next drive. If it is spectacular in the first instance, it cannot then be called terrible if he fails to complete the catch in the second.
Or:
If a particular behavior is expected, then there is little reason for admiration or praise.
Final thought: I do take Zinn’s adage that one can’t be neutral on a moving train seriously. But that is an opinion.
Do I wish people were more engaged? Of course! But that does not suit everybody’s skills or pique their interest. And quite honestly, expecting increased engagement would lead to more agreement with my views is not only arrogant, but ignorant of human behavior.
@Kurtz: Thanks for the clarification. As to pro athletes being meatheads, I don’t care one way or the other.
@Mimai:
Your posts are Kurtz bait for those reasons.
Let me explain what I had in my mind when I responded. I was thinking of the posts and subsequent discussions about whether we should classify Trumpism as fascist. It is, and remains, an important, much-discussed question. But if the answer is yes, or perhaps, if it is fascism-adjacent, then we have another question that animates the first:
What do we do about it?
To the extent that scholarly treatment of the second question exists, it suggests that traditional means of political mobilization are ineffectual.
I guess the best way to word my thoughts about authoritarian movements in general, but fascist movements particularly, is that they weaponize the central conceit of democratic, free societies against itself: live and let live.
If that’s the case, then the best we can hope for from mass demonstrations is brutal overreaction by the authoritarians, rendering neutrality untenable for those who remained silent or ambivalent.
And that entails an enormous amount of suffering.
Trumpists, at least the most vociferous ones, the true believers as it were, make no secret of their belief that they see their opponents as, at the very least, stupid, many of them criminal, and the worst, actively evil. In the case of the particularly religious, actual demons.
I agree with you, these things need to be discussed. It’s a shame that, at best, they are being talked around, rather than debated.
@Kurtz:
Thanks for the additional explanation. This is good stuff:
I mean, it’s bad stuff. But it’s goodly worded.
@Mimai:
Thank you.
I gotta say, I occasionally get a little assho-aggro vibe when you include parentheticals in your responses to me.