Punching Nazis and the Constitution: It’s Complicated

So you’re thinking about punching a nazi and you’re pretty sure it’s okay because they’re inciting you to violence with their nazi ways and you’re protected under the Constitution.
Quick question: Who gets to decide what is and what is not constitutionally protected speech?
There are only nine people in the world who get to say…Image result for the constitution image public domain

Did you guess the Supreme Court?
Ding ding ding! Yep, in fact, that’s all they do all day is sit around interpreting the Constitution. And, as I understand it, they take a much more careful view of what constitutes incitement to violence.

Hate speech is constitutionally protected in a city park or public space. Do it at work and you might be in big trouble, though.

Speaking vaguely about wiping out all the Albanians because they’re evil and they took your country is constitutionally protected. Saying ‘I hate Albanians and there are some that live at 420 Mockingbird Lane who get home in about an hour–I’ve got a gun,’ could be considered incitement to violence because of its specificity. You could be charged with a crime even if the violence doesn’t happen.

Wearing the insignia or carrying the flag of hideous historical murderers is not specific enough, or direct enough. And just because what they’re saying about Jews and black people really pisses you off doesn’t count as incitement from a legal perspective.

So, instead of punching a nazi, don’t punch one and take the money you’d spend on bail to buy the book ‘Deliberate Intent’ by Rod Smolla. He’s a first amendment scholar who talks about these very issues, so much so that you’ll be full of accurate information about the realities of constitutionally protected speech.

Then take the rest of the bail money and donate it to The Southern Poverty Law Center, The Anti-Defamation League and The Color of Change. Apply the money where it might actually do some good for the people you’re purporting to defend.

Whatever you do, don’t punch a nazi with a weapon in your hands and injure them so much you commit a felony. If you’re serving time or on probation for a felony, you won’t get to vote. In some states, you’ll never get to vote again. And guess which population is the most likely to get disenfranchised by these unjust voter suppression tactics? Black Americans. Voting out nazis and nazi enablers is the best possible way to protect those vulnerable populations you’re so worried about. Definitely stay enfranchised long enough to vote out of power those GOP politicians who pass laws to keep people convicted of a felony from voting.

In short, how about you don’t punch a nazi and instead do something about hate and injustice that might have longer-lasting results.

Posted in Constitution, democracy activism, First Amendment rights, Freedom of Speech, hate speech, politics, resistance, Strategy | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Democrats Must Become the Pro-Choice Party Again–Here’s How

In the midst of an anti-climactic roll-out of a wan new ‘economic’ message, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Ben Ray Lujan dropped a bombshell on supporters. He announced the Democratic Party was spreading out the welcome mat to anti-choice candidates, betraying its committment to a woman’s right to reproductive freedom. This is not the message progressives were waiting for. Here’s what they should say instead.

We the Democratic Party of America would like to apologize for this flagrant display of ethically-challenged stupidity. We suddenly seem to vaguely recall there was a march back in January, the biggest in history, that represented millions of American women and men who are looking for strong moral leadership on progressive values. Our bone-headed attempt to court the anti-choice minority at the expense of our core supporters was obviously a mistake and we hereby rescind all talk of financial backing for those who don’t honor a woman’s rights over her own body.

Clearly, we still don’t understand why we keep losing elections and think the answer is for us to move to the center or to the right. But we’ve considered how the GOP keeps winning elections even though they’re horrible at governing and we realize it has something to do with always playing to their base and sticking to their core values.

Given the rampant misogyny of the Republican Party, it also occurred to us that slapping half of the human race in the face might not be our best tack. We know that we have to court the young generation in order to secure lifelong loyalties, and we know that most millennials have embraced the Obama-era freedoms and equality they grew up with. Young women are already having a hard enough time generating enthusiasm for our aging, unsexy party. We would never want to alienate them and send them running to start their own party, to which we won’t be invited. If the resistance has taught us anything, it’s that we need them more than they need us.

[Bernie Sanders steps up. “Uh, me too. What they said. When I said we just can’t exclude people who disagree with us on one issue, I wasn’t thinking how this ‘one issue’ was one of the left’s core values, as important as economic equality. But now I realize how old and male and privileged this makes me sound, and I take it back.”]

So while we’re out touting our new, wan ‘economic’ message, we’ll bear in mind that you can’t separate a woman’s right to reproductive freedom from her economic opportunities, or her children’s. And we want to make it clear we would never say to progressive women, as had been said to them many times in the past, “Support us now on the important work we’re doing courting white men, and we’ll get to your stuff later–what was your issue-thingy again? And, oh yeah, get me some coffee while you type up this memo, would you?”

Here’s how we’ll address this issue instead. If you want fewer abortions, you should vote Democrat. Abortions go way down when Democrats are in charge because we ensure access to birth control and pregnancy prevention information. We also make it easier for women to continue with unplanned pregnancies because of access to health care, education and the social safety net.

Most of all, we want to reassure our despairing supporters that we understand why they’re upset. It’s because we keep acting like we have no idea what we’re doing, as though we’re a bunch of quivering, spineless jellyfish stumbling over each other in the dark. We’d like to course-correct and step into the role of moral leadership that the left so desperately craves right now. We promise not to do anything this short-sighted, anti-woman, and morally cowardly again.

Yours in progressive values,
The Democrats #TheBestDeal

(Oh, and we also realize trumpeting a slogan that isn’t even a superlative is bad messaging so now it’s #TheBestDeal, or something even better if you can think of it. We’re completely unable to read a book on moral messaging. Send help.)

Mother Jones: People are really mad at the Democrats

Of Course Abortion Should Be a Litmus Test for Democrats

Posted in Democrats, liberal values, Moral Framing, reproductive rights, women | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Reluctant Patriot, or How I Learned to Love the Flag

In a February article in The Atlantic, conservative David Frum gave some advice to the Resistance, an example of the strange alliances that have sprung up since Trump. Frum is a Never Trump-er and he wanted to let left-wing activists in on his observations from years of seeing our protests from the other side.

Photo credit Kristen L. Will

Some of his advice was easily dismissed, too much of a departure from progressive core values. But one suggestion struck me as completely sensible–start carrying flags. Frum writes:

“Remember Trump’s tweet about stripping citizenship from flag burners? It’s beyond audacious that a candidate who publicly requested help from Russian espionage services against his opponent would claim the flag as his own. But Trump is trying. Don’t let him get away with it. Carry the flag… Trump’s presidency is itself one long flag-burning, an attack on the principles and institutions of the American republic. That republic’s symbols are your symbols. You should cherish them and brandish them.”

As much as this perspective makes sense, it is also profoundly challenging. I’ve always had an ambivalent relationship with traditional symbols of patriotism. Starting in junior high school, I refused to stand for the flag at assemblies even though my classmates gave me a hard time. The way I saw it then, I was forced to go to school, forced to listen to teachers, forced to give certain answers on tests about America and democracy. Yet I was expected to praise the symbol of the very government that was oppressing me (by making me go to school, sort of the ideology of Pink Floyd’s Another Brick in the Wall.) I was also completely outraged by America’s abuses of Native Americans, black people, women, gays and radical activists.

I grew up during the Vietnam War. No American war since I’ve been alive has been an unqualified ‘good war’ as WWII was for that generation. U.S. military actions have been fraught with controversy and moral ambiguity, a sense that America was only involved for greed and power, not for defending the values of the constitution.

Rather than symbolizing the love of liberty, flags were like a warning sign that the people carrying them were not my people. Flags meant Republicanism, jingoism, being pro-war and anti-gay and anti-choice, believing in a police state, being racist. Flag wavers were also bible-thumpers who didn’t believe in the separation of church and state.

However, concepts once familiar and long-held have been put through a blender since Trump. Like many Americans, I’ve had to challenge my own biases and re-examine my comfort zone. For me, patriotism began to take on a whole new meaning when Trump attacked the Gold Star Khan family, whose son had died for America. Trump was running to be Commander in Chief, surely the most profound and important duty of the president, and here he was trying to hurt these loyal Americans as much as he could. I thought his chances to win were over then, because people who vote Republican are usually the ones who are for law and order and to always support the military no matter what.

But the flag-waving “patriots” were able to overlook this supremely vicious behavior by candidate Trump and they made him president and Commander in Chief anyway. Though many of them might feel his highlighting of a perished soldier at his State of the Union speech absolved him of this sin, I don’t. That was a white Christian American. Trump has never apologized to the Khan family, nor acknowledged their Muslim son’s sacrifice for America’s values.

I now feel the right-wing is not the holder of patriotic values anymore. If left to Trump and his supporters, the rights and liberties symbolized by the Stars and Stripes could be obliterated–are being obliterated already. It’s the democracy activists and the progressive blue voters who are holding down traditional American values, like how America is a nation of immigrants and we have equal rights under the law. The Republican party is working furiously to curtail voting rights and take over democratic processes and principles crucial to a functioning democracy. It’s up to the left to assume the mantel of defending traditional American values.

Like a lot of formerly disenfranchised lefties, I didn’t come to patriotism naturally or easily. But this reluctant patriot will now join the folks waving flags and not feel like an outsider. It’s not only our right but our duty to make the symbol of America match the reality of America.

Posted in Constitution, democracy activism, liberal values, politics, resistance | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Change Hearts First to Change Minds on Climate Crisis

David Leonhardt of the New York Times asked his readers what I believe is the most important question about America’s resistance to the threat of climate change: What would a more persuasive message about climate change sound like?

I would go further and ask: How have the GOP won the hearts and minds of much of America on this and many other issues? And how do progressives win them back?

Cognitive scientist George Lakoff has answers to these urgent questions. Lakoff, a retired professor of linguistics, has been politely knocking on the doors of Democrats and liberal policy makers for years, encouraging them to use moral framing in their messaging, like the Republicans do.

Frames are subconscious mental structures that guide how we view the world. Tapping into language to activate those frames is the underlying strategy of persuasive politics. It was conservative Frank Luntz who reframed ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’ in a deliberate attempt to make it sound less frightening.

Deliberate attempt? Isn’t that kind of paranoid?

Not at all. The conservatives have been working on how to communicate their values and their policies using moral framing for decades. That’s what all those heavily funded think tanks are about. They define their goals–how do we keep our coal-and-oil businesses afloat? How do we get the government regulatory agencies off our backs? Then they use language that evokes emotions and they talk in terms of values.

Conservative messaging speaks in metaphors of nature and the Earth as a resource, as property, as an enemy to be conquered. The GOP also won over the heartland on ‘climate change’ by appealing to cultural issues. Coal country is not just about jobs but about identity, tradition, a way of life. Government protections for the environment are cast as the Washington elite choking off businesses with over-regulation. Nowhere in the GOP messaging is environmental impact mentioned. They never talk about issues using liberal framing.

So how to communicate about climate crisis in a more persuasive way? How to take back our planet from the oil and gas barons who have usurped the public discourse by using the language of capitalism and marketing?

Start by describing the issue as what it is. Don’t accept a conservative euphemism. It’s climate crisis. #ClimateCrisis. Spread this subtle but profound shift in wording far and wide. Climate disasters. Climate action.

Instead of trying to argue facts, use the language of emotion and metaphor. In an Alternet article from 2015,, Lakoff suggests we conceptualize nature as ‘the giver of all life, as sustainer and provider, as having inherent value, imposing responsibility, and deserving gratitude, love, adoration and commitment.’ He suggested using metaphors of nature as mother, as a divine being, as a living organism, as a home. These words feel completely different than the conservative concept of Earth as a resource to be exploited for money and power.

Lakoff also applauds Pope Francis and how he framed the perils of Climate Crisis starting with the title of his encyclical on ecology, “On Care for our Common Home.” This is the most important concept for progressives to communicate. The Earth is our home where we live together as a family unit. What you do to harm our common home harms all of us.

“The climate is a common good, belonging to all and meant for all,” writes Pope Francis. This is a progressive moral belief that we feel profoundly but rarely say out loud. But we should begin talking the language of values, of our deeply held beliefs, of nurturance and care, of the common good and the common responsibility to each other and our shared home.

Climate Crisis is a human rights concern. Our shared environment is under threat from pollution and neglect. Our children’s future depends on us to act now. Without a stable climate, our children can’t be healthy and free.

Avoid divisive language. The environment belongs to everyone and so does the responsibility to keep it healthy. Stripped down to its core, liberal progressivism is about empathy for self and others, for the planet we call our home, for animals and all living things. Lead from this empathy and not from the wounds inflicted on us all by disaster capitalism and Trump’s ‘American carnage’ propaganda.

Using fear can be an effective method; conservatives have been using fear effectively on every issue. However, I feel it’s better for progressives to use the language of hope, of innovation and of the American can-do spirit. Imagine you’re talking to your grandson or your niece. Millenials will inherit this crisis so how can you empower them to tackle it without scaring them to death?

Talk about renewable energy and the promise of careers in this field. Mention innovation and alternatives to the status quo. The future belongs to those who can harness the wind and the sun. All humans will share our home in peace and prosperity with healthier bodies and no fear of climate disasters.

Don’t despair over Trump pulling out of the Paris accords. What’s happening is what always happens when the GOP is put in charge of seeing to our common good. They see to their own self interests instead. Look on the bright side of this development–progressives and moderate conservatives all over the world are waking up to the dangers of treating our earthly home as a resource to be exploited. We’re so offended because we know, deep in our hearts, that something precious that belongs to all of us is being degraded and despoiled.

We just have to take this deep knowing and turn it into language that most people will respond to. The GOP did it, and they did it even though what they were selling was the poisoning of our planet. Offer a real alternative message to the agitprop of the right. Envision the world you want to live in and speak from the heart.

Posted in conservative values, liberal values, Moral Framing, politics, Strategy | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Real Fraud is Voter Suppression and the GOP Have Been Doing It For Years

Instead of getting distracted by more propaganda from the right, stay focused on the need to stop the GOP from suppressing Democratic voters.
1) End the electoral college. One person, one vote. This can only be done by amending the Constitution and the GOP are never going to give up their main advantage in winning national elections. Vote blue and insist Congress eliminate the archaic practice of the failed electoral college.
2) No more gerrymandering–voting districts should be set by an independent, bipartisan panel, not by the winning party.
3) Restore the Voting Rights Act, the dismantling of which by a conservative Congress and Supreme Court opened the way to denying hundreds of thousands the right to vote in the last election.
4) Eliminate state voting restrictions on people serving time or on parole for felonies. This unconstitutional practice has been a way for the GOP to suppress voting for decades, and it should be discontinued at a national level.
5) Everyone is automatically registered when they turn eighteen. This would help curtail making some voters jump through hoops at the whim of the states.
6) Make voting day a national holiday or change it to Sundays.
7) Offer early voting and paper ballot voting, both of which have been shown to increase the numbers of voters and decrease the risk of potential voting machine tampering.
8) Reasonable accommodations should be made for the number of polling places and how to get to them.

Our democracy has been failing to reflect the will of the people for a long time now, instead reflecting the will of the people in power. Make these changes and see how many more Democrats win when more people are allowed to vote.

Posted in Constitution, Democrats, politics, Strategy | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Success!

George Lakoff sees some progress on framing progressive ideals.

George Lakoff

Normally I would never post a link to a story in Reason, a right-wing magazine. But I consider this particular story a tribute to the power of your voices and your actions.

The writer of this piece is upset that we are reframing regulations as protections. He’s upset because he even sees regulations being framed as protections in the pages of the newspapers.

He attributes this to the work we have done to raise awareness among journalists, elected officials, and our fellow citizens that, from the Public viewpoint, regulations are protections. And most regulations come into existence to protect the public from harm by irresponsible or unscrupulous corporations.

Specifically, the author references an essay I posted in January — aptly titled “Regulations Are Protections.” He does a great job of repeating all of our arguments in an effort to negate them. In other words, he’s saying: Don’t think of protections!

Please read…

View original post 40 more words

Posted in liberal values, Moral Framing, politics, Strategy | Tagged , | 1 Comment

An Open Letter to Paul Ryan From a Fellow Irish American on the Occasion of His Moral Triumph

Paul,
Can I call you Paul? It might be informal, but you just look so much like my Irish Catholic relatives, with your black hair and blue eyes. Like a Kennedy, except you’re unlike the liberal, social-safety-net-supporting Kennedys in so many ways.

For instance, in your zeal to overturn the life-saving ACA. You boasted (on St. Patrick’s Day, no less) of college keggers where you dreamed of destroying Medicaid, the public health care program for the poor. Most college boys, no doubt including the Kennedys, partied while dreaming of hot women and being superheroes. But you, Paul, you were jerking off to the glories of sending American health care back to the Dickensian slums of 19th century Britain. One hates to speculate that you spent many a fevered night reading Jonathan Swift’s A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Poor People from Being a Burthen to their Parents, or the Country, and for Making them Beneficial to the Publick, thinking it was a serious proposal to feed the children of the poor to the rich. Something tells me you don’t get satire, like you don’t get so many other skills most of our people have mastered, like liberal democracy.

Speaking of Britain, I noticed you wore a green tie on St. Patrick’s Day, but you seemed to have gotten everything else all wrong. (The Irish didn’t invent golfing and were not impressed by royalty. Oppressed by them, but not impressed.) You seem to have forgotten your O’Roots, Mr. Ryan, and adhere to the free market British economic system that nearly wiped out our people in the mid-1800s.

You see, it wasn’t really a potato blight that plunged Ireland into the Great Famine. It was a cruel and greedy land system imposed by the British government that made it impossible for an Irish farmer to rise above their impoverished station. Even as millions starved to death and millions fled to other lands, Ireland exported more food crops during those years than most. They had to pay the rents on their farms (which they weren’t allowed by law to own).

But, you say, the U.S. government doesn’t impose any such restrictions. Anyone is allowed to be free and follow their destiny and should do so ‘free of government assistance.’ Government programs rob people of their individuality, their ability to realize their full potential.

And yet, you took advantage of a government program–survivor’s benefits–to go to college, a luxury not afforded everyone. This was in addition to your well-off family’s support throughout your life as well as marrying a very wealthy wife. You were also born at the top of the food chain in the American social strata: a straight, white, upper class, Christian male. You can have no idea what life is like for millions of people who try to survive in a system without any government protections for their health. I could tell you, I could go on and on, but let’s not make this about me. (Here’s a link to Michael Patrick MacDonald, a fellow Irish American who grew up poor in Boston’s Southie neighborhood in the 60s. All Souls: A Family Story From Southie. I’ll let him tell the story of one of his siblings dying because the hospital wouldn’t take in indigents.)

It wouldn’t surprise me if there were some Congressional shenanigans going on here where you caved to the far-right Freedom Caucus’s heartless demands in order to get the bill passed (and placate your conservative billionaire funders). You figure the Senate will cut out the worst of it and send it back to you. But regardless of the politicking involved, that smile on your face as you slash the freedom of health care out from under millions is genuine. You honestly believe that what you’re doing is righteous and moral and true. You, like so many conservatives, believe that there are people who are worthy of life and liberty and health care, and there are those who deserve to starve to death, their mouths blackened from rotten food, the gnawed bones of their neighbors and families littering the countryside. (I am not engaging in Irish blarney here. Cannibalism likely practiced in Irish Famine.)

You have become a 19th century British politician, completely forgetting that you came from people who were lucky to have escaped the violent poverty their brutal laissez-faire “self sufficiency” inflicted.

For a while, you drank the Ayn Rand kool-aid like so many fiscal conservatives, crowing about how her monstrously selfish ideas provided the best argument for moral conservatism. (That is, until someone at the Jesuit Georgetown college whispered in your ear that she was an atheist and you recanted.) But why do you struggle so hard to find a moral justification for stripping poor people of health care? Could it be that there’s some sliver of Irish peasant in you after all, one that remembers the horrors of a political belief system that supports the ruling class above the very lives of everyone else?

Or maybe this is just wishful thinking on my part, because you should be one of us, one of the liberals, one of those that believes in helping our fellow humans when they’re down. What happened to your branch of the Ryans along the way?

I leave you with a verse from my favorite song when I was a child in Catholic church. I’m no longer Catholic, but I think I got the gist down better than you. If you sing those words in church too, I hope they sink into your cold, dark, blighted heart someday.

Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers, that you do unto me.
When I was hungry, you gave me to eat; When I was thirsty, you gave me to drink.
Now enter into the home of My Father.
Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers, that you do unto me.

Posted in conservative values, free market, laissez faire, liberal values, politics | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment