Robert De Niro, Samantha Bee, and the Theology of Liberal "Resistance"
Trigger Warning: This post is, at times, highly critical of the Democratic Party and American liberals. If you are easily offended by the insinuation that the left has not exactly hit a home run in their response to Trumpism, you may want to close this post and retreat into a safe space.
"I'm going to say one thing. "F*** Trump."
Robert De Niro stoked the fires of the political civility debate with his profane remarks at Sunday's Tony Awards. De Niro's remarks appear to be part of an accelerating trend of liberal vulgarities directed towards Trump and hisalt-right cronies administration. On May 30th, Samantha Bee crassly criticized Ivanka Trump on her television program. Shortly thereafter, State Superintendent Tony Evers offended Scott Walker by using the "Lord's name in vain" while reacting to conservative policy. And while each comment varies considerably in its actual vulgarity, from the ramblings of a tired candidate to that which is truly offensive, each speaks to the left's decreasingly civil reaction to the Trump presidency.
Is this really what resistance looks like?
Has the left's best counteroffer to a president who demeans women, attacks hispanics, belittles people of color, and cavorts with international strongmen been reduced to a series of shallow, profane rants in forums outside of the cultural mainstream? Surely, we can do better. Surely we must do better if the left is to build actual resistance in the form of a Democratically controlled House.
The inherent problem with De Niro, Bee, Evers, and countless other profanity-propelled liberals is not the lack of depth in their thought, nor is it a lack of sincerity, or even authenticity. The problem with these visceral reactions is that they surrender the moral and political high ground to those we are trying to resist.
At the root of Trump's racist, anti-western vitriol is the idea that those who espouse anti-racist, pro-western ideals (eg, liberals) are in fact insincere hypocrites. Trumpism rests on the notion that the western, liberal, and politically civil world order we have enjoyed since 1945 is a facade, and that those who have built it have caused great harm to fall on true Americans. The only remedy to such harm is to tear down the facade itself.
Trump supporters understand that they cannot tear down this facade on the grounds of policy or philosophy - in this arena, they have no standing when it comes to advancing their crass authoritarianism. But they can win when they move the fight outside the arena, out of the realm of policy discourse and debate and into the streets of barbs and taunts, slings and arrows, and lots and lots of mean Tweets.
The goal of the Trump supporter is to pull smug liberals, like me, out of their ivory towers for a street fight. But while the smug liberals are engaged in the Twitter bare-knuckler, their ivory tower is being viciously torn down and plundered by others on the alt-right. By stooping to the level of the conservative fringe, the left abandons its post as the last best hope of internationalism, inclusivity, and equality, leaving our post unguarded, and subject to marauders.
Recent insistence on vulgar rhetoric reveals a troubling theological trend at the root of the Democratic strategy. It appears the left has chosen a "resistance" strategy based on the lex talionis (eye for an eye), the law of retaliation, or the idea that our profane tirades are justified by the profane tirades of the 45th President and his supporters. We on the left can retaliate with F-bombs because those on the right did it first - surely, they deserve to hear it back!
For leftist Christians (yes, there are dozens of us!) such a response should be untenable. Liberal Christians like me would likely point to the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) as the starting point for our political theology. Such is a political theology that calls us to acts of compassion for and solidarity with the poor and downtrodden. But if we are to embrace the economic aspects of this message, then we also must also embrace Jesus' admonition to abandon the lex talionis, to forsake proportionate retribution in a conflict, and to seek another way (see Matthew 5:38-48).
Maybe the specifics of that other way are too vague for our social media crazed nation. Maybe Christ's law of love and insistence on the golden rule (Matthew 7:12) is too idealistic for these hyper-partisan times.
But if we affirm the scripture that informs our quest towards economic and social justice, surely we must take seriously Christ's warnings on the dangers of an eye for an eye. Surely we must fear the inherent ineffectiveness of meeting our adversaries at their level of puerile discourse. If Democratic policies are to remained centered on that Mount, so too must Democratic rhetoric.
So, continue to imagine ways to resist the atrocities of the Trump administration. But when you rise to give Robert De Niro a standing ovation, just know that you are rising for the wrong fight - and in so doing, you may be forfeiting the battle all together.
Ryan Panzer is a frequent Trump critic and Democratic voter, whose inner thoughts on Trump almost always involve profanity and vulgarity. He hopes this blog helps his resistance to be more constructive. @ryanpanzer on Twitter.
"I'm going to say one thing. "F*** Trump."
Robert De Niro stoked the fires of the political civility debate with his profane remarks at Sunday's Tony Awards. De Niro's remarks appear to be part of an accelerating trend of liberal vulgarities directed towards Trump and his
Is this really what resistance looks like?
Has the left's best counteroffer to a president who demeans women, attacks hispanics, belittles people of color, and cavorts with international strongmen been reduced to a series of shallow, profane rants in forums outside of the cultural mainstream? Surely, we can do better. Surely we must do better if the left is to build actual resistance in the form of a Democratically controlled House.
The inherent problem with De Niro, Bee, Evers, and countless other profanity-propelled liberals is not the lack of depth in their thought, nor is it a lack of sincerity, or even authenticity. The problem with these visceral reactions is that they surrender the moral and political high ground to those we are trying to resist.
 |
| March for Our Lives, Madison, WI - one of several beautiful displays of resistance that involved little if any stooping to the rhetorical level of the alt-right. |
At the root of Trump's racist, anti-western vitriol is the idea that those who espouse anti-racist, pro-western ideals (eg, liberals) are in fact insincere hypocrites. Trumpism rests on the notion that the western, liberal, and politically civil world order we have enjoyed since 1945 is a facade, and that those who have built it have caused great harm to fall on true Americans. The only remedy to such harm is to tear down the facade itself.
Trump supporters understand that they cannot tear down this facade on the grounds of policy or philosophy - in this arena, they have no standing when it comes to advancing their crass authoritarianism. But they can win when they move the fight outside the arena, out of the realm of policy discourse and debate and into the streets of barbs and taunts, slings and arrows, and lots and lots of mean Tweets.
The goal of the Trump supporter is to pull smug liberals, like me, out of their ivory towers for a street fight. But while the smug liberals are engaged in the Twitter bare-knuckler, their ivory tower is being viciously torn down and plundered by others on the alt-right. By stooping to the level of the conservative fringe, the left abandons its post as the last best hope of internationalism, inclusivity, and equality, leaving our post unguarded, and subject to marauders.
Recent insistence on vulgar rhetoric reveals a troubling theological trend at the root of the Democratic strategy. It appears the left has chosen a "resistance" strategy based on the lex talionis (eye for an eye), the law of retaliation, or the idea that our profane tirades are justified by the profane tirades of the 45th President and his supporters. We on the left can retaliate with F-bombs because those on the right did it first - surely, they deserve to hear it back!
For leftist Christians (yes, there are dozens of us!) such a response should be untenable. Liberal Christians like me would likely point to the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) as the starting point for our political theology. Such is a political theology that calls us to acts of compassion for and solidarity with the poor and downtrodden. But if we are to embrace the economic aspects of this message, then we also must also embrace Jesus' admonition to abandon the lex talionis, to forsake proportionate retribution in a conflict, and to seek another way (see Matthew 5:38-48).
Maybe the specifics of that other way are too vague for our social media crazed nation. Maybe Christ's law of love and insistence on the golden rule (Matthew 7:12) is too idealistic for these hyper-partisan times.
But if we affirm the scripture that informs our quest towards economic and social justice, surely we must take seriously Christ's warnings on the dangers of an eye for an eye. Surely we must fear the inherent ineffectiveness of meeting our adversaries at their level of puerile discourse. If Democratic policies are to remained centered on that Mount, so too must Democratic rhetoric.
So, continue to imagine ways to resist the atrocities of the Trump administration. But when you rise to give Robert De Niro a standing ovation, just know that you are rising for the wrong fight - and in so doing, you may be forfeiting the battle all together.
Ryan Panzer is a frequent Trump critic and Democratic voter, whose inner thoughts on Trump almost always involve profanity and vulgarity. He hopes this blog helps his resistance to be more constructive. @ryanpanzer on Twitter.
Right! why bury the sincere? Swear words and cheap insults are candy. We need to eat our spinach.
ReplyDeleteTwo additional thoughts:
1) Do we want to remember an aging actor (speaking from a place of privilege) express frustration, or do we want to remember young people boldly singing about love?
2)Talk is cheap. You can say f* trump, or you can actually override trump, using the tools that allow citizens to express power. De Niro, you could meet with political strategists, raise funds, research local and state power-issues, and, most importantly, fly to Elkhart, Janesville, Flint, and Youngstown to have an honest conversation with voters about how Trumpian policies (and rhetoric) are hurting all.
Rob Bell has an episode about Third Way Thinking, a philosophy of creative non-violent resistance. This way of thinking is super relevant to this conversation.
ReplyDeletehttps://robbell.podbean.com/e/episode-142-the-thing-in-the-air-part-4-an-introduction-to-3rd-way/