Resisting Trump’s Harmful Policies
Frequent commenter MarcoPolo writes: (Your objections to President Trump are) actually damage your own cause…..You are powerless to stop the Trump Juggernaut…..Trump could listen and support his new innovation advisors. Government support could (also) see investment in clean technology reach unprecedented levels.
I’ve heard the “damaging my own cause” argument hundreds of times (many dozens of times from you alone). The problem: there is no evidence whatsoever that you are correct. Raising public consciousness about social evils is an extremely well established tool, spanning millennia, to bring about change in a positive direction.
To say that I’m “powerless to stop the Trump juggernaut” is true if by that you mean me personally, but I become more convinced every day that he’ll be removed from office (legally) before his term is complete, as I’ve joined countless millions of people around the globe who are working hard to push this along at its maximum pace.
And yes, there are thousands of things Trump might be doing behind the scenes to pilot the ship in a rational manner, but again, all the evidence suggests the contrary.
Craig,
This is more or less a repeat of my reply on another thread. You are are correct in saying each person must sail his own ship in his own way.
It’s because of my high regard for you that I try to persuade you from diverting energy to unproductive pursuits.
Removing a US President from office is almost impossible. Being unpopular, or even a bad President isn’t sufficient. Donald Trump is well advised and very tough. Congress would not dare throw the nation into constitutional crises of unprecedented proportions, against a populist President in his first term.
With the mood of the people already against professional politicians of the major parties, such a move would be electoral suicide. (sharks don’t commit suicide).
Trump’s star will soon wane as his policies lose popularity. In fact, there’s good evidence to suggest raucous and fanatical opposition to his administration is his only hope of survival, since he can blame his failures and transgressions on his opponents.
At the present time, any attack on Trump, will be seen by his supporters as an attack on themselves.
Again, I invite (implore) you to forget Trump and concentrate on longer term goals. As Elon Musk points out, Trump has shown an interest in supporting innovation.
Like Musk, I see this as an opportunity to garner support from a whole new sector. While Trump supporters might not be “global warming” adherents, they may, because of Trump, invest and support new technology, which is environmentally beneficial.
(Keeping EV incentives is essential).
The environment doesn’t care about ideology, it’s the benefits that count.
To give you an example of what I mean. Let’s take the issue of resource exploitation in US Parks and Reserves.
There are two approaches to take:
1) Radical . This involves massive demonstrations by the usual suspects, violence, media hysteria, yelling “Trump’s a sociopath’ etc,. Since the demonstrators will largely be urban, the locals (already Trump supporters) will become bitterly resentful of the intruders and the nation will grow more divided.
Trump will blame the loss of jobs and prosperity on the greed of the urban affluent.His supporters will rally behind him.
2) Rational. Welcome the Presidents interest. Compare Trump to President Teddy Roosevelt (a hero of Donald Trump since boyhood). After all, national Parks are Teddy Roosevelt’s great legacy, as ‘Trustee-in -Chief, Trump should personally ensure the behavior of any mining, resource extraction didn’t harm the parks, or jeopardize his and Teddy’s legacy.
Watch the reaction. Trump has one huge advantage, he’s beholden to no one. No oil company, no mining company contributed to his campaign, in fact many backed his opponents.
I might be wrong, but it seems to me at some stage you must decide what’s more important, what is your real objective ? Is just hating Trump and fighting the objective in itself, or working around him to achieve long term goals ?
So yep, we’ll keep reminding you when your passion interferes with your judgement ! But please remember, it’s a form of compliment, no one would bother if they didn’t believe your voice was valuable.
Having said all that on another tread, may I explain why I believe there is a danger of “damaging your own cause”.
Unfortunately, confusing different objectives does detract from the credibility of the advocate.
The evidence for this may not be so evident in the US, but in Europe, UK, Australia, the “Green Parties” once enjoyed widespread support as the voice of the environmental movement.
As the “Green’s” grew, they found themselves becoming a home for disaffected members of Centre-left parties, whose policies lacked sufficient ideology or radical concepts.
The ‘Green’s’ benefited from the organizing talent and commitment of the newcomers, but older members quickly found their was no room for moderates as radical and socialist politics replaced the environment as the principal agenda.
Thus although the ‘greens’ gained a far more professional and political organization, it alienated most of it’s original mainstream following.
The new Green politicians, were content to remain big fish in a small pond, and there influence never rose above 5-10% of the population.
Tgus “green” initiatives became regarded by the general populace with deep suspicion if championed by the “Green’s.
The term “watermelon” became an effective term of derision for green advocates, implying a veneer of “green” disguising a red socialist interior. the term implied a dishonest and hidden agenda.
This accusation is particularly applicable against advocates who confuse issues with extravagant claims.
It is interesting that some will say that they “support innovation” but it is not “carte blanche.” They want only certain types and kinds of “innovation.”
Breath,
What you say is true, different people will support different innovations.
But does it really matter ? Isn’t it more important to take what we can get, than seek perfection ?