After Donald Trump’s surprise victory last week, protests against his pending presidency—and against the racism, misogyny and xenophobia he embodies—popped up from New York City to Portland to Kansas City to Austin to Nashville. Thousands of protesters gathered under the banner of #NotMyPresident, expressly rejecting the Trump administration’s agenda of, among other things, forced deportations, Muslim bans and attacks on women’s reproductive rights.
On cue, several center and center-left pundits jumped in to call into question and concern-troll this exercise of dissent and its sometimes “violent” excesses of property damage.
If more anti-Trump people in Oregon had voted, like the New York Daily News (11/15/16) wanted them to, it might have increased Hillary Clinton’s margin of victory in the state beyond the 11 percentage points she actually won by. But it wouldn’t have affected the outcome of the national election.
Take the meme-ready story that emerged out of Portland claiming that most anti-Trump protesters arrested during last week’s unrest didn’t vote in the presidential election (NBC Portland, 11/15/16). This was pounced on by several Twitter personalities and media outlets of the alt-center—the aggressively pro-centrist vanguard who rush to exploit every misstep of leftist activism—and used as evidence of hypocrisy among those taking to the streets:
- “Most People Arrested at Portland Trump Protests Didn’t Vote” (New York Daily News, 11/15/16)
- “Portland’s Anti-Trump Protesters Didn’t Turn Out to Vote” (International Business Times, 11/16/16)
- “Most Anti-Donald Trump Protesters Arrested in Portland Didn’t Vote in Oregon: Report” (Mic, 11/16/16)
The underlying logic of the gotcha-bait being: If you don’t vote, you forfeit your right to any form of dissent for four years.
These write-ups didn’t acknowledge the fact that had every protester in Portland voted for Hillary Clinton, it wouldn’t have affected the outcome of the election one bit, given Oregon’s status as a safely blue state. (You’d have to drive 350 miles from Portland to find the nearest electoral vote that wasn’t virtually guaranteed to go for Clinton.) No matter, dirty anarchists were in our streets causing problems and had to be publicly shamed—up to and including mugshots being plastered all over the news.
Liberal gatekeeper Samantha Bee took to her show (Full Frontal, 11/14/16) to do a little left-punching, drawing the distinction between the proverbial “peaceful” and non-peaceful protestors. For over a year, pro-Democratic pundits have justifiably warned us Trump was a Hitler or Mussolini-like figure. In the face of this looming threat, protests will predictably result in some property damage and arrests. Those wanting to remain in good standing with the establishment will show their reasonable status by jumping in to “condemn” the excesses of protests:
Can we make a pledge right now that we’re gonna leave “moral high ground” liberalism in 2016? h/t @adamjohnsonNYC pic.twitter.com/yNf8h1iR5U
— #J20 (@Delo_Taylor) November 15, 2016
First thing to note is that Bee distinguishes between protesters and “Middle America.” With mass demonstrations in Nashville, Iowa City and Denver, one is compelled to ask, where is this “Middle America,” exactly?
In this moral universe, peaceful or good protesters shake hands with police officers and protest in a subservient, state-sanctioned fashion. Anyone with a passing knowledge of how protest works knows this is about as useful as a strongly worded letter to a congressperson in terms of putting pressure on the state, but the alt-center has above all one goal: the maintenance of social order. Protest, by all means, but not in a way that disrupts the normal course of society.
Bloomberg‘s Leonid Bershidsky (11/15/16): “The liberal cause would be better served if the demonstrators stayed home.”
Leonid Bershidsky at Bloomberg (11/15/16) added some more concern trolling, saying he supports protests in theory, but they weren’t making any specific demands:
I believe the liberal cause would be better served if the demonstrators stayed home….
The protesters also are telling Trump that, whatever he does, they don’t consider him their president. They reject him in advance.
That’s hardly a message designed to extract a constructive response. Trump has already said he’s going to try to be a president for everyone—but he knows many don’t believe him.
Bershidsky, for some odd reason, thinks these protests are about convincing Trump in some interpersonal manner. They’re actually about demonstrating mass disapproval of the pending regime and its stated goals, not appealing to Trump’s better angels.
The Bloomberg columnist went on:
Wouldn’t it make more sense, however, to begin protesting when—or, rather, if—Trump actually proposes some action that smacks of bigotry? For example, if he actually attempts to make good on his promises to build a new border wall or to ban Muslims from entering the US.
What Bershidsky theory of power is is anybody’s guess, but he’s wrong on the facts. Trump already is mapping out several of his most dangerous campaign promises, from deporting millions of immigrants, to “the wall,” to the creation of a Muslim registry. Bershidsky expects those most threatened by Trump’s clearly stated goals to display outrage… once they’re underway?
To the Washington Post‘s Petula Dvorak (11/14/16), “Sore losers protesting the democratic process are just as useless as hate-filled winners sneaking around towns painting swastikas and racist graffiti.”
Worst of the alt-center attacks on the protests was Washington Post columnist Petula Dvorak who, in “Stop Protesting Democracy. Saying #NotMyPresident Is the Same as Saying #NotMyConstitution” (11/14/16), took false equivalency to heretofore unseen levels of vulgarity. She began:
What was lost in the election last week?
Decency. Humanity. Morality. All the way around.
From protesters destroying property in Portland, Ore., to racists destroying a sense of safety in Silver Spring, Md., too many people are undermining the foundation of our country in the aftermath of a polarizing election. And our first order of business is to fix it. Because this is about democracy, really.
Setting aside the adolescent writing (Gratuitous. Periods. Make. Platitudes. Seem. Important.), Dvorak is, quite shockingly, equating dumpster fires in Portland with spraypainting “Trump Nation. Whites Only” on a Spanish-language church in Maryland. From the outset, we have two “extremes”: those protesting–and occasionally causing property damage–in the face of emboldened fascists, and the fascists themselves. To the alt-center, these two poles are moral equals, two sides of the same ideological coin, and must be condemned in equal terms:
Sore losers protesting the democratic process are just as useless as hate-filled winners sneaking around towns painting swastikas and racist graffiti.
OK. Go on….
I want to say that the only difference between the two is that one is ridiculous while the other is dangerous. But that’s not totally true, either…. Protesting the simple fact of our democratic process is dangerous, too.
Dvorak is unsure of her own facile point. She hedges a 1:1 equation, but then steps back from that. What Dvorak fails to understand is that the protestors aren’t protesting “democracy” as such, they’re protesting the pending presidency of a man who is stocking his White House with white nationalists, Islamophobes and gay-baiters—not to mention people with a notorious hostility toward democracy itself. They’re protesting someone who has pledged—and to a large extent already begun planning—the deportation of millions. In the face of this crisis, many have chosen to take to the street to send a message his agenda will not be acquiesced to without resistance, both legal and extralegal.
The protests against the pending Trump administration and the forces he emboldens are likely to go on until his inauguration in January and beyond. During this time, these protests, like all before, will have instances of property damage and clashes with police, and each time, the alt-center will be there to highlight and hand-wring over those excesses in pursuit of civility and order.
Adam Johnson is a contributing analyst for FAIR.org. You can follow him on Twitter at @AdamJohnsonNYC.
An even more interesting criticism of these execrable, cynical, subservient creatures is to point out that USAmerica is probably the ONLY alleged “democracy” on the Planet that is installing as its pResident the one who received only the 2nd most popular votes…
Most democratic nations do not elect their Head of State via popular vote. Instead they choose their elected representatives and those reps elect the Prime Minister/President/ Whatever they call it.
In a parliamentary syatem, it is the party organization that selects the party leader – who then becomes the prime minster if the party achieves a majority by elections. But in all republican type systems, such as all of the other Americas except Canada, presidents are elected by direct popular vote, and the candidate must get a majority not just a plurality (via ranked choice voting or runoffs), to become president. No nation in the world that dares call itself a representative democracy elects a president by this idiotic hyper-contrived, “electoral college” system, where even a indicate who does not even get a popular plurality, win the election.
The USA actually considered that method.
1) “atl-center” is terrible branding.
2) We face a fascist takeover who are slavering for a reichstag burning. encouraging property damage is solipsistic at best. At worst, it stinks of agent provocateur.
3) Adam is a very sour young lad.
Not to mention, in the words of a… um… great man, the Electoral College is “a disaster for democracy”. It’s perfectly reasonable to protest that.
Not when it is cynical, self-serving because the Hillbots want to change the rules and steal the presidency, just like they stole the primary.
Kevin, asking the electors to vote with the popular vote isn’t “changing the rules”. If the electors were meant to be a rubber stamp, we wouldn’t bother with the rigamarole of having electors in the first place. We’d just do the math and be done with it. They’re supposed to be free agents. That’s literally “the rules”.
The Electoral College was designed because back in the day, the Founding Fathers needed to safeguard against those who don’t truly understand the pertinent issues. It was the first line defense against mob rule. Its fair to argue that it is POSSIBLY an archaic system designed for a time when people did not have the media to inform them of the issues. The irony is that even with the media, I do not think that the people know as much about the issues as they claim to. The mob is protesting the system designed to protect from mob rule. They are also protesting because they did not get their way, which is not exactly a great reason for protest in the first place.
” It was the first line defense against mob rule.”
Actually, it’s the elites’ last line of defense against democracy.
Exactly.
Oh, let’s not kid ourselves. Hamilton’s claim in the federalist papers is that the electoral college would prevent us all from voting in a popular demagogue, but it’s plainly obvious that what he really meant is that it would protect the landed elite from the people.
I’m a bit ambivalent about these protests. I attended one, but I’m beginning to see them as counterproductive. I think that protesting Trump before he’s even taken office doesn’t do much to win the hearts and minds of those people in his coalition who progressives need to win over.
I really liked Bernie’s speech that was played on Democracy Now today. He basically said that we should look for points of agreement with Trump on things like preserving jobs, opposing bad trade deals, raising the minimum wage, expanding family leave, and protecting Social Security and Medicare. These are all things he actually promised, and we shall soon see if he was sincere. Bernie might have also mentioned war and militarism, because many of the things Trump said offer a lot of hope that the US may modify its posture of reckless imperialism.
Some initial signs are good:
-Obama abandoned the TPP after meeting with Trump
-relations with Russia may thaw
-he called gay marriage “settled law”
-The pending appointment of Michael Flynn as National Security Advisor -the man has a good head on his shoulders, he’s not an ideologue, and a Democrat to boot.
-Some of the comments about deportations are already being walked back
I still think there will be PLENTY of opportunity to protest something awful he does. I’m just saying maybe we should wait until he actually does something worth protesting first.
“Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL. Islam is a cancer.” – Michael Flynn. Yeah, he’s great.
You mean like stacking his cabinet with actual bigots, people who believe that democracy is contrary to freedom (especially if women and blacks are voting) and that whites need to outbreed everybody else?
Yet, it was Neoliberal Fascist Hillary and her brown shirt thugs who destroyed democracy and stole the Democratic Primary from Bernie.
Yeah, okay. There’s a fascist in our government right now, and it’s not Clinton.
C baker,
After the Democratic Party establishment crushed the hopes and aspirations of millions of Americans who supported Bernie , there were no good options left among the two parties. That’s why I voted for Stein. I’m not happy Trump won, but I’m happy Hillary lost. At this point it’s water under the bridge; I think it’s more productive to look for points of agreement first. That way we don’t look like knee-jerk idiots when and if Trump does screw up and there’s cause for protest.
Greg, I wanted Sanders too. But that didn’t happen. Clinton was a good option. Trump was a horrific option. Stein was never going to win. The choice is easy if you don’t want to vote your ego.
There’s cause for protest *now*. Trump’s proposed cabinet is full of people who think society took a wrong turn giving women the vote, and that all Muslims should be rounded up and put into camps. What is it going to take for you to see this? Are the jackbooted thugs going to literally have to knock at your door?
Sorry, but Clinton was in no way a “good” option. We want to see things in black and white, so it’s hard to admit that there are some things that Trump was better than Clinton on. But that’s just the reality.
I mean, yes dammit! Provoking Russia with aggressive NATO expansion IS making the world a more dangerous place! We ARE spending too much on foreign military bases (besides the fact that it’s just plain wrong). NATO *is* obsolete now that its reason for being, the Warsaw Pact, has disbanded. The Crimean people DO want to be part of Russia, and their hopes and aspirations DO count for something. We ARE supporting terrorists and jihadists in Syria, and that’s friggin wrong, and YES Assad is far, far better than the alternative. Libya IS a disaster and Clinton is a war criminal for pushing for the destruction of that country.
And yes, Clinton is a consummate free-trader and she was lying through her teeth when she said she no longer supports the TPP. It’s obvious that she has nothing but disdain for the working class.
Trump’s horrible in many other ways, but what clinched it for me was Clinton’s support for a no-fly zone in Syria. Let’s not kid ourselves. A no-fly zone in Syria would’ve meant WAR. With Russia. Period. And if a candidate wants to get us into war with Russia, then I don’t give a crap about the Supreme Court, or LGBT rights, or climate change, or Planned Parenthood. Because none of that stuff matters when you’re getting INCINERATED in a mushroom cloud.
That said… I just couldn’t bring myself to mark the ballot for Trump. Because he represents evil. Now that it’s done though, let’s see if he can bring about the good things he promised. If even Bernie says he’s willing to work with Trump on the parts of his agenda where progressives can find common ground on, then I’m willing to give him a chance too.
In the meantime, we can work on creating a viable alternative. I’d like to protest for something instead of just against. The Democratic Party establishment has revealed a complete moral bankruptcy. The Wikileaks emails made that quite clear. It remains to be seen if it can be reformed into something that is worth getting behind.
Well said, Greg. I agree with you completely.
” Michael Flynn as National Security Advisor -the man has a good head on his shoulders, he’s not an ideologue, and a Democrat to boot.”
I’d highly suggest people research Michael Flynn (and his son) before buying this load of crap.
Apparently you missed the speech where Trump plans to vastly expand the US military – and his ongoing advisor and cabinet selection is conforming that. Do you know that?
And is a Trump-Putin fascist axis against the freedom-loving parts of the world really a good thing? You DO know that Putin is a capitalist gangster, right?
“You DO know that Putin is a capitalist gangster, right?”
No, I don’t know that. The demonization of Russia and Putin has just reached epic proportions. The reality is very different. Under Putin, incomes have skyrocketed, economic inequality has actually decreased, poverty rates are way down, rule of law is being imposed, and the capitalist gangsters are being reigned in piece by piece.
The World Bank now ranks Russia 40th in terms of ease of doing business, ahead of places like Italy, Belgium, and Israel.
http://www.doingbusiness.org/rankings
It also happens to be one of the best countries in terms of promoting women into high executive positions:
http://time.com/2861431/female-executives-gender-quotas/
Do I wish this progress was done in a more socialistic manner? Absolutely. Would it be better if he cracked down even faster on the oligarchs? Yes… but you have to understand that he inherited a total kleptocracy from the US-supported Yeltsin, and if he moved faster, he would have probably been removed long ago.
But suffice it to say that most Americans have a very outdated and biased perspective of Russia, one that has been carefully cultivated by US corporate media.
I wish we could upvote on here because you keep knocking it out of the park.
Ah, I see FAIR finally posted my comment after holding it in moderation for a while. Thank you for the kind words. Your own comment was short and to the point… rendered mine superfluous.
What do you mean by “capitalist gangster?” Is he seeking global hegemony (like the US is) on behalf of Russian corporations? Has he conducted “humanitarian” interventions and sought to overthrow elected leaders in countries that don’t wish to jump on Russia’s capitalist bandwagon (like the US does)?
The appointment of Michael Flynn is a “good sign”? On what planet do you live?
The man is one of the most rabid Islamphobes in public life, and a staunch defender and proponent of torture!
And he was fired from his last military post for suggesting things which broke the law. Colin Powell called him “right-wing nutty” and several other high-ranking Generals have claimed he is “unhinged”.
Do you really believe that quoting Powell and ‘other high ranking generals’ as authorities makes you convincing?
Flynn went out on a limb denouncing drones and was the first senior military figure to allege US support for ISIS terrorists. No wonder he gets attacked by his own.
As for the article, the author repeats the exact labels used by the MSM and talks about demonstrators just ‘popping up’ when they are clearly far more organised than that.
Being concerned with the rights of minorities is great until it becomes a void where the wars that Clinton has sponsored and the tens of millions who have suffered from them are concerned.
And the CIA openly supported Clinton. It is certainly possible that the CIA provocateurs busy in every other country around the world for the last 50 years might be involved in the riots. Methinks the author protesteth too much!
As for the article, the author repeats the exact labels used by the MSM and talks about demonstrators just ‘popping up’ when they are clearly far more organised than that.
Well, yes, it’s easy to organize when you have FaceBook. But that’s really all it is. I’ve participated in demonstrations I found just that way. Word of social media.
It is certainly possible that the CIA provocateurs busy in every other country around the world for the last 50 years might be involved in the riots.
If we actually get the EC to vote for Clinton, I’ll consider this position. Until then, it’s ridiculous.
What’s with all the “alts” lately? Alt-right, alt-left, alt-center. What do they even mean? How are they different than the traditional ideologies? FAIR, you should do a piece on just that topic to clarify it for everyone.
From what I understand, it’s internet slang for “alternative.” The alt-right thus refers to right wingers who are nonetheless dissatisfied for various reasons with the mainstream “establishment” right that occupies prominent positions in business, government, and the media.
Wait for the other shoe to drop
While the first one’s on your neck
It wasn’t long ago that Hillary’s brown shirt thugs had their boots on Bernie’s and his supporters’ necks. I’m so glad she lost. We can’t have a president who steals elections and wants to start WWIII with Russia.
Trump actually stole this election. The three states that “flipped” are those in which voter suppression was at an all time high.
Do I want to start a war with Russia? No… but neither do I want a president who lives in Putin’s pocket.
Trump is hardly in Putin’s pocket. One of the worst aspects of this campaign was digging up these disgusting, hateful McCarthyist memes. I’m particularly saddened that the party which was doing it was my own.
The Democrats ran a candidate who would get us into nuclear war, and the Republicans ran a candidate who talked about a more cooperative approach. I wish that weren’t the case, but that’s the sad reality.
What a bunch of whining cry babies Hillary has for supporters! They stole the primary from Bernie Sanders, blamed the DNC emails on Russia, as if Russians forced them to steal the primary. Now they want to change the Electoral College and steal the presidency from Trump. Hillary’s brown shirt thugs are the only reason why Trump is the president. They should protest against themselves. LOL!
ONr protester said it right to the media head : you wouldn’t cover the protests at all if we stayed on the sidewalk. Without the minor vandalism the message of the protests would not get out at all: “we are afraid, very afraid.” The press should take a better look at itself considering its prime directive is, “if it bleeds, it leads.”
brilliant mythbusting piece from the superb Adam Johnson. Once again corporate media hacks and TV comedians on corporate networks smearing those standing up to the right-wing bigots by equating them as being as bad as them, the fake fairness and false equivalency while they themselves normalize the unthinkable by any mean necessary.