I have been thinking about Earl's comment that the purpose of the frog and other cute inflatable costumes is to make the police and enforcers look ridiculous for subduing a children's toy. Scott Alexander of Astral Codex Ten thought they looked cringe and disapproved for other reasons, but several of his commenters echoed exactly that sentiment. Others pointed out that the meaning is different in places like Portland and Chicago where there has been actual violence, and the majority of other places where violence never looked like it was going to be much of an issue. In Portland, the violence is after dark. I thought that could be used as an argument in either direction, that it was dangerous disguise in some places, but just silly in others. But people protesting in safe places can have a few reasons for wanting to imitate those in more danger. It was an interesting discussion.
After it all, I still didn't like it but wasn't quite sure why. It may be that I see it as a tactic that the already-convinced think really pwns MAGA, but independents are unlikely to be moved by, and thus, signifying nothing. But that can't be it either, because if it truly signified nothing, I wouldn't be annoyed, would I?
3 comments:
"But people protesting in safe places can have a few reasons for wanting to imitate those in more danger."
My impression was that the people protesting in safe places were not at all sure those places would remain safe.
You seem quite convinced that they won't be and violence is being held in check. I don't share this. I think many of those who are having confrontations with the police are trained provocateurs - not necessarily professionals, but experienced. I think that has been true since OWS, if not before.
Possibly the silly costumes are not meant to communicate with you and I. The combination of slogans and silly costumes communicates to _me_ that the wearer does not respect my intelligence. What it communicates to somebody younger I can't guess.
Post a Comment