Well, sure. But I bet those angry extremists from both cities would probably get along better with one another, if they were to have an open discussion of their respective concerns, than either of them do with their "elected officials".
Left vs Right is just the old divide & conquer. Arbitrary lines that are constantly being forgotten and redrawn. It's not the ends against the middle here, it's the bottom of the pyramid against the top. The establishment isn't ever concerned about being disenfranchised, because these "public comment" sessions are just an unpleasant little appendix of ceremony that these political lackeys must perform, while they get on with the real business of their donors and other worthy constituents. The opinions and desires of the important people have much more effective channels and venues. Always have.
I couldn't possibly agree with that any more than I do, and what California is trying to do right now with SB 1100, which would allow local legislative bodies to throw people out of the room during meetings if they're "disruptive," is strip away the last little piece of government where the peasants can actually raise their voices at the top of the pyramid and their lackeys.
Adding that it takes me back to the problem of "acting as if." I think we have to act as if elected officials give a shit what we think, even though they mostly don't, on the hope that repetition and fear of defeat might force them to take some notice of some of it.
Don't get me wrong, I do think there's a real value in being able to petition the State, verbally and in person, for the redress of grievances. They invariably don't listen, but It's not just an empty gesture. It's a form of protest, like posting forbidden memes on corporate intermedia, or waving signs in the streets. The real audience is always the public, the citizenry at large. We demonstrate to express not merely the specific content of or dissent but, more fundamentally, our presence. Our existence as dissenters. Our numbers.
That's why this bullshit legislation is of a piece with the current trend of enforced social distance, not granting permits for public gatherings, and hair-trigger censorship of all popular forums.
They will "take notice" only when it's clear that the population has a real will to fight, and that the impending fight is one they're sure to lose. The implicit threat of mob violence is always the subtext of mass protest, in any form. All the niceties and trimmings of participatory governance only serve to channel and modulate this basic, primitive fact.
I respectfully submit: if they need to make a law to “shut us up” then somebody’s listening somewhere. Even if it’s just annoying at least they’re listening, right? And if they get to propose their law to “shut us up”, Then maybe we, as Citizens, can make a law that forces them to make good decisions that don’t drive us so crazy that we have to go to public meetings and shout at them for two hours. Oh, wait. Isn’t that the point of the public comment? To get direct feedback from the actual public they represent so they can make course corrections? “We the people“ Are not sophisticated enough to understand the intricacies of local politics and the complexities of budget management and how the disruption of the corruption causes so many problems for so few people. Sit down shut up and get with the program. Oh wait, what’s the program again? As soon as they figure it out maybe they will tell us. Maybe the extremists are the ones sitting behind the desk holding the gavel? Some of the laws that they are proposing at this point are certainly extreme if not outright illegal. I suggest that SB1100 Is a symptom of the problem, not actually the problem….and is another major alarm bell for what is going wrong with the state of CA at this time, make no mistake - we’re in trouble.
Any simpleton can pretty quickly grasp which riotous mob is a group of Mostly Peaceful Protestors and which is a group of Horrible Insurrectionists.
And if you're slow on the uptake, our wise legacy media will help coach you along.
Firebombing the Portland federal courthouse is Good, and wandering through an open door on Capitol Hill is Bad - depending mainly on the perpetrator's feelings about the Orange President.
It's not turtles, my friend; it's who/whom, all the way down.
You've got to pick a side and move in and integrate yourself with like minded folks who share your values. Pluralism failed. "Live and let live" is just an invitation for the other guy to pillage you.
I might have preferred classical liberalism, but that isn't on offer any more. Pick one activist agenda and stick with it: Newsom or DeSantis. Remember, whichever place you choose to live, heretics and traitors will be hounded out ruthlessly.
Well, sure. But I bet those angry extremists from both cities would probably get along better with one another, if they were to have an open discussion of their respective concerns, than either of them do with their "elected officials".
Left vs Right is just the old divide & conquer. Arbitrary lines that are constantly being forgotten and redrawn. It's not the ends against the middle here, it's the bottom of the pyramid against the top. The establishment isn't ever concerned about being disenfranchised, because these "public comment" sessions are just an unpleasant little appendix of ceremony that these political lackeys must perform, while they get on with the real business of their donors and other worthy constituents. The opinions and desires of the important people have much more effective channels and venues. Always have.
I couldn't possibly agree with that any more than I do, and what California is trying to do right now with SB 1100, which would allow local legislative bodies to throw people out of the room during meetings if they're "disruptive," is strip away the last little piece of government where the peasants can actually raise their voices at the top of the pyramid and their lackeys.
Adding that it takes me back to the problem of "acting as if." I think we have to act as if elected officials give a shit what we think, even though they mostly don't, on the hope that repetition and fear of defeat might force them to take some notice of some of it.
Don't get me wrong, I do think there's a real value in being able to petition the State, verbally and in person, for the redress of grievances. They invariably don't listen, but It's not just an empty gesture. It's a form of protest, like posting forbidden memes on corporate intermedia, or waving signs in the streets. The real audience is always the public, the citizenry at large. We demonstrate to express not merely the specific content of or dissent but, more fundamentally, our presence. Our existence as dissenters. Our numbers.
That's why this bullshit legislation is of a piece with the current trend of enforced social distance, not granting permits for public gatherings, and hair-trigger censorship of all popular forums.
They will "take notice" only when it's clear that the population has a real will to fight, and that the impending fight is one they're sure to lose. The implicit threat of mob violence is always the subtext of mass protest, in any form. All the niceties and trimmings of participatory governance only serve to channel and modulate this basic, primitive fact.
Love this.
I respectfully submit: if they need to make a law to “shut us up” then somebody’s listening somewhere. Even if it’s just annoying at least they’re listening, right? And if they get to propose their law to “shut us up”, Then maybe we, as Citizens, can make a law that forces them to make good decisions that don’t drive us so crazy that we have to go to public meetings and shout at them for two hours. Oh, wait. Isn’t that the point of the public comment? To get direct feedback from the actual public they represent so they can make course corrections? “We the people“ Are not sophisticated enough to understand the intricacies of local politics and the complexities of budget management and how the disruption of the corruption causes so many problems for so few people. Sit down shut up and get with the program. Oh wait, what’s the program again? As soon as they figure it out maybe they will tell us. Maybe the extremists are the ones sitting behind the desk holding the gavel? Some of the laws that they are proposing at this point are certainly extreme if not outright illegal. I suggest that SB1100 Is a symptom of the problem, not actually the problem….and is another major alarm bell for what is going wrong with the state of CA at this time, make no mistake - we’re in trouble.
I guess the flak-catchers are finally tired of being Mau-Maued (peace be unto Tom Wolfe).
"You can’t accept one but decline the other."
Why not?
Any simpleton can pretty quickly grasp which riotous mob is a group of Mostly Peaceful Protestors and which is a group of Horrible Insurrectionists.
And if you're slow on the uptake, our wise legacy media will help coach you along.
Firebombing the Portland federal courthouse is Good, and wandering through an open door on Capitol Hill is Bad - depending mainly on the perpetrator's feelings about the Orange President.
It's not turtles, my friend; it's who/whom, all the way down.
You've got to pick a side and move in and integrate yourself with like minded folks who share your values. Pluralism failed. "Live and let live" is just an invitation for the other guy to pillage you.
I might have preferred classical liberalism, but that isn't on offer any more. Pick one activist agenda and stick with it: Newsom or DeSantis. Remember, whichever place you choose to live, heretics and traitors will be hounded out ruthlessly.