[Catherine Chandler]

I agree with Julie 100%.


I only hope that my poem (Votive) in the latest issue of First Things, which addresses doubt, and criticizes Washington's inaction on gun control, will somehow make a positive difference.

[Michael F]

Originally Posted by Mark McDonnell

What's the alternative? (Genuine Question)

I have the same genuine question regarding the derided civility and civil discourse.

What is being proposed?

[Andrew Szilvasy]

You can't negotiate with people who want to destroy you or your way of life.

Remember being an 10 year old and being able to have a civil discussion with a bully that made him stop? No?

That's Fascists, Trumpists, etc. Reason and Civility is meaningless because they don't operate in good faith; because they don't believe in these ideas themselves, they weaponize it to get people in the middle to both-sides issues while all along they are normalizing white nationalism, xenophobia, etc.

I'm supposed to be civil to people who believe Trump should be able to, by executive fiat, remove birth-right citizenship? Who peddle the types of conspiracy theories that led to the synagogue shooting?

[Curtis Gale Weeks]

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum?

.....The barbarians are due here today.

Why isn’t anything going on in the senate?
Why are the senators sitting there without legislating?

.....Because the barbarians are coming today.
.....What’s the point of senators making laws now?
.....Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating.

Why did our emperor get up so early,
and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate,
in state, wearing the crown?

.....Because the barbarians are coming today
.....and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader.
.....He’s even got a scroll to give him,
.....loaded with titles, with imposing names.

Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today
wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas?
Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts,
rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds?
Why are they carrying elegant canes
beautifully worked in silver and gold?

.....Because the barbarians are coming today
.....and things like that dazzle the barbarians.

Why don’t our distinguished orators turn up as usual
to make their speeches, say what they have to say?

.....Because the barbarians are coming today
.....and they’re bored by rhetoric and public speaking.

Why this sudden bewilderment, this confusion?
(How serious people’s faces have become.)
Why are the streets and squares emptying so rapidly,
everyone going home lost in thought?

.....Because night has fallen and the barbarians haven't come.
.....And some of our men just in from the border say
.....there are no barbarians any longer.

Now what’s going to happen to us without barbarians?
Those people were a kind of solution.
.....

By C. P. Cavafy
Trans. Edmund Keeley

[Aaron Novick]

Mark, it isn't about fucking tribalism.

It's about not getting shot in a synagogue for being Jewish. It's about not getting shot in a grocery store for being black (and it was only a grocery store because the Church the shooter tried first was locked). It's about not being beaten to death for being gay or trans. It's about not coming to the US seeking asylum (legally) only to be murdered by the US military, which the president has sent to the border to await you, justifying it with overtly fascist rhetoric.

That's what it's fucking about, Mark.

[Mark McDonnell]

Andrew S, can you address the point I made here?

Are all those Americans who changed their votes from Obama to Trump inherently different, and suddenly irredeemable, people? Or are they the same human beings who simply allowed themselves to be persuaded? And couldn't they be persuaded back? Or is this only about tribalism and being seen to be on the right 'side'?

Are all these people no longer people but simply 'fascists and Trumpists' to the extent that they are not ever worth attempting to reach? Or do you just like the sound of your own firebrand rhetoric?

Aaron, don't attempt to make the ridiculous leap of logic that anything I've said makes me less appalled by those things than you are. Michael's question 'what's the solution?' still stands.

[Aaron Novick]

Mark, whether they're redeemable or not is beside the point. I'm sure they're mostly lovely human beings who are nice to their friends and family and are trying their best to be good, something I also believe was true about the Germans who sat idly by during the Holocaust. And I think they'll act the same way as those Germans, if it comes to that.

But all of that is beside the point, because conversation with MAGA types is absolutely not going to do a damn thing to halt the rise of fascism in this country. What is? I honestly don't know. These days I feel like nothing is. I hope I'm wrong, and am trying to figure out what I can do to make it more likely I'm wrong. But I don't know. I don't know.

Mark, I never suggested you aren't appalled by those things. Of course you're against them, and of course I know that. And you know I know that, so please try to interpret my posts in ways that are consistent with what you know I believe. The point of my post was exactly what my post said on the surface: the issue isn't tribalism, the issue is being murdered. To expand on this: when you frame the issue as one of tribalism, then conversation across tribes looks like a solution. But conversation across tribes isn't a solution. One of the lessons of history, current history included, is that debating fascists accomplishes nothing except helping the fascists to recruit.

I'm leaving for a conference and then vacation in an hour; this will be my last contribution to this thread for some time. Hopefully ever.

[Mark McDonnell]

Well, I'm leaving for my brother-in-law's Halloween party so, y'know, we both have important stuff to do!

You're still not addressing my question. I'm not talking about debating fascists. Statistically, a lot of those 'MAGA types' once voted for Obama. While America is still some kind of democracy surely they are more important than anything. Are in fact the main thing standing in the way of rising fascism. But you're just going to wash your hands of the idea of even attempting to reach them (for instance by offering a reasoned alternative viewpoint in a publication they might be likely to read) because you assume they'll 'act the same way as those Germans, if it comes to that'. Yet you admit to having no other solutions.

[Andrew Szilvasy]

Mark,

I largely agree with Novick here on all his points. I also find the accusation of virtue signaling ('Or is this only about tribalism and being seen to be on the right 'side'?') absurd. The idea of removing birthright citizenship in this country is terrifying; the moves of Bolsonaro in Brazil should be enough to suggest what awaits people who want to "both-sides" this. You nitpick the title of a magazine in addition to criticizing statements like "I’m favorable to torture and you know this” or “The situation of the country would be better today if the dictatorship had killed more people” or “I would never rape you because you don’t deserve it.” That's exactly what fascists want. It's exactly how they have won and, if we are not careful, they will win.

What do I care whether people love their children and spouses if they'll vote to allow Trump to overturn the 14th amendment by EO and deport members of my family? What do I care how many pieces of extra clothes they want to donate if they actively celebrate a sexual assaulter's promotion to the Supreme Court? Or want to take away Walter's rights?

You have faith in a system to protect people. That system has been eroded. The GOP is actively not securing polling stations, they are actively disenfranchising people, they are actively whipping up anti-semitism and xenophobia and white nationalists. I have little patience for talking to people who continue to support such measure, and marginally less for the pearl-clutching associated with calling a spade a spade here.

[Andrew Szilvasy]

Originally Posted by Mark McDonnell

(for instance by offering a reasoned alternative viewpoint in a publication they might be likely to read)

I mean, this is silly. First Things is it's own thing. Let's leave this out of the discussion (not that I don't share Roger's position; I can imagine a liberal Catholic disagreeing, though I wouldn't, and atheist that I am, it is moot).

But, to the point. The people who read and are Trump supporters already read and saw and heard the terrible things Trump has done and didn't care. "If bragging about sexual assault doesn't do it, and saying that there were good people on 'both sides' of a tragedy that literally involved neo-Nazis as one of the two sides, maybe this well-reasoned counterpoint to [absurd position 1,240,302 Trump has taken] will" is essentially the definition of insanity. If these people are still Trump supporters--and I know a number who are not--then they're more than willing to get into bed with misogynists, white nationalists, and homophobes to get their tax cuts and deregulation regardless of what any reasonable person says.

And if they aren't in the reading public that voted for Trump, they ain't gonna see it anyway, so who cares? You're just lending your own personal credibility so that a pro-Trump outlet can pretend they are--what do they call it again?--"fair and balanced."