Antifa is suicide for Democrats. Trump loves the idea that it is the face of resistance to him. Antifa makes him look good, useful, and correct.
Democrats: Distance yourselves from Antifa.
The following three photographs tell a powerful story. They are creating brand awareness of "antifa", the supposed antifascist, anti-capitalist, social justice advocates.
 |
| Berkeley, at Martin Luther King Park |
 |
| Portland, at Tom McCall Park |
 |
| Portland, at Tom McCall Park |
The images of "antifa" protesters have saved Donald Trump from his unforced error of neglecting to criticize Nazis by name, and indeed have turned racial violence back into a positive for Trump. "Anitfa" legitimized the "all sides, all sides" comment by Trump. Donald Trump got to position himself as the spokesman for civic order and social harmony.
"Anitfa" protesters look at least as frightening as do KKK/Nazi protesters. Indeed, by wearing black clothes and face masks, they look more dangerous. The KKK/Nazis look silly; "Antifa" looks organized.
Below, here is Trump, getting to sound calm, reasonable, and unifying, something made possible by "Antifa."
 |
| Video clip of Trump, speaking for order and nonviolence |
The face of public opposition to Trump has taken a very bad turn. Democrats are rebranding street opposition to Trump in a very bad way. They are letting "Antifa" replace the image of an aroused citizenry of ordinary, orderly, tax-paying aroused citizens. That opposition looked widespread and credible. Women marching in Washington. Senior citizens holding rallies. That branding was very favorable.
Below are scenes which strike fear into politicians because it positions the story as "the people" petitioning their government.
 |
| Town Hall, southern Oregon |
 |
| Town Hall, southern Oregon |
 |
| Indivisible Rally, southern Oregon |
It is hard to change the face of a brand, but that change is underway right now, accelerated by the conservative media jumping on the images of leftist protest appearing to seek out violence in their effort to counter it. They became equivalent. It requires vivid imagery and evoking a strong emotion to change a band, but that is what is happening.
"Anitfa" images are powerful: angry men in black wearing masks. They shout. They fight. They throw things at the police. They look bad.
This is a gift to Trump. Democrats need to get back in front of this, if it is not too late, and re-claim the face of Trump resistance with nonviolence and earnest order. A Democratic candidate for president will need to risk offending Democrats who passively--or actively--support "antifa" tactics--and there may be many of them--because a Democrat with an hope of unifying the country and winning election needs to be clear in his or her message in condemning street violence.
Trump has already beat that candidate to that position. "Antifa" handed that opportunity to Trump.
4 comments:
Exactly the leadership we need was provided by Nancy Pelosi in condemning Antifa violence. She made clear that Antifa is not the Democrats' militia. See The Hill,
https://t.co/lRhr9bniLX. Only after The Hill carried this report was Antifa's unprovoked violence against the right fairly reported by the Washington Post, New York Times and CNN. Such headlines are rare with a liberal media too stuborn to write anything that might normalize Trump. Bravo to the Speaker for her leadership in helping us avoid yet another self inflicted wound. See Washington Post, https://t.co/lI0YOPNoDy.
The alarm over violence is encouraging.
The majority want to preserve peace even as we struggle with regressive encroachments, knowing that violence solves nothing. There is a danger of state intimidation when in the hands of regressive authoritarians and that is fueling the activism, including Antifa.
Progressives rightly condemn violence in their name as strongly and forcefully as Muslims condemn ISIS. However, this matters little to those regressives who will use any excuse to crush opposition.
How many of the masked folks are 'agents provocateurs'? It certainly happened at demonstrations in the 1960's. Exactly the kind of stuff the far right is willing to do.
Rich Fairbanks beat me to it by asking if some of these are "Agents provocateurs". I have thought that for some time. Especially in the Berkeley riots. I remember the good ole '60's, where the loudest ones yelling and creating violence were shown to be FBI or other people.
Post a Comment