I’m not sure what these pundits think a fascist assault on liberty looks like, but this is it: the occasional slow trickle, occasional bombardment blast, of outrageous proposals and policies meant to utterly shock a populace into submission. This is the calculation made by Trump’s team, but especially Steve Bannon: If they heave enough batshit concepts at us, eventually we’ll become numb to the horror. Any watered-down version of said policies will begin to look rational by comparison, and we will consent. Part of that paralysis looks like pundits saying, ‘Don’t focus on this one! This one is the distraction.’
No, it isn’t. Each monstrous statement is part of the same puzzle
yeah agreed
I was thinking about this earlier today because a guy in front of me at the protest had a sign that said “I’m so angry I made a sign” on the back (I never saw the front) and I realized that I have A Problem with signs like that. Signs that say things like “This is my protest sign” or “Down with this sort of thing” or “No to bad stuff” or something like that.
Sure, it’s funny, but it’s the exact kind of passive-aggressive (mostly passive) vague sloganeering that belittles and undermines what the actual protest is about. It makes light of signs that actually have something to say, and it makes light of the visual power of sign-holding and of a crowd of people holding signs that actually show intent and anger and need for action or change.
The only sign I’ve seen so far that sort of straddles the line is “This is very bad” because it manages, through semi-serious and semi-sarcastic understatement, to explain and underline why exactly people are protesting.
But I am just frustrated by those passive signs that seem to mock and belittle people that have something to say. Especially because those are the signs that get attention because they’re “funny” or “dumb” instead of the focus being on the signs and speeches and pamphlets of those who actually have something constructive or critical or important to say.