8
"As the Republican Party has become more homogeneous, more regional and more reactionary, it has tended to make up for its growing demographic shortcomings by making sure its supporters are more motivated and energized — and the most effective way to energize them has been to make sure they're constantly enraged. When the GOP didn't have the votes to stop healthcare reform from passing, their strategy — and it almost worked — was to scare Democratic elected officials. That was the point of telling everyone to shout themselves hoarse at the town halls: to terrify House members."
—Alex Pareene rounds up some recent revolutionary rhetoric.
They bullied my congressman into not running again. Guess what? They got his seat!
Another bit tutting at irresponsible political speech. I'm sure Stephen Timms would approve.
Needs more blingees.
Minority political movements are always insurrectionary. Majority political movements are always totalitarian.
This is a very clear and concise piece, one of the best I read today. The only quibble I'd make is that it doesn’t quite go far enough historically.
This particular rhetorically-exuberant and violence prone political cycle started in earnest with the election (and later impeachment) of Bill Clinton. After 12 years in power, the right was pretty pissed off about losing. The idea of de-legitimizing your political enemies is a powerful one, and they ran with it, and it was effective. The left picked up on that fact quickly and used it to keep their own base agitated after the Bush/Gore election dispute. Now the idea has clearly found renewed potency with the election of Barack Obama, particularly within the Tea Party, which is an umbrella group in many ways for a lot of fringe actors like Oath Keepers.
This is not to say that both sides are equally guilty of the same thing. Both used the strategy of de-legitimacy to their advantage, but one party was clearly content to couple it with vast amounts of guns and ever more incendiary revolutionary language.
Of course, the stated purpose was merely to win elections. But it turns out it’s not easy to keep proxy monsters on a leash.
Also I'm sorry for being such a nerd with this reply
^wha? That piece is utterly vile.
The reason to oppose ugly and violent rhetoric is because it is ugly and violent. We don't need to assert the existence of a causal role in a violent act to oppose it. In fact, when we do that we do not oppose ugly and violent rhetoric but engage in it.
He constructs a dumb argument then immediately proceeds to bludgeon himself over the head with it. To simply assert, with no supporting evidence, that the activities of certain political actors are to some extent responsible for the deeds of a psychopathic murderer is demonization way beyond what I can ever recall hearing from Sarah Palin. Isnt Pareene merely sending out the message that we can save innocent lives if only we could eliminate the corrosive influence of a Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck? what would an unstable person make of that? By the logic of his own argument his post is nothing more than an invitation for a crazy to bump off a Palin or Bachman.
Added crap points for how he allowed rampant partisan feeling to further encrappen an already crap argument. He concedes that democrats also use the tame everyday 'violent' language he is laying into the republicans for but excuses them because theirs is apparently not revolutionary tinged and therefore cannot possibly be inciting. W T F? On what grounds is he making this distinction? how the fuck does he know that banal metaphorical 'violence' cannot incite violence but if its revolutionary tinged it can? why even write something so obviously retarded and self serving?
Your post is full of interesting points even though it kind of eats itself in some ways.
There is in fact explicit as well as circumstantial, historical and cultural evidence that the activities of certain political leaders do influence the deeds of the citizenry.
You can't say parents who brainwash their children as youth are responsible for what those children do as adults but you can point out that the parents did, in fact, brainwash their kids.