Monday, July 16, 2018

Our passive and/or aggressive obstruction of trumps (#3454)

     We must obstruct the trumps and their agenda, of this most all we fair minded citizens agree. It is to the level or degree of obstruction that we must find to fit with what we individually see as acceptable. I have heard from both sides of each extreme as to what we find as acceptable and the only conclusion I can come to is that those two extremes, when within the bounds of normalcy, not necessarily etiquette, have valid points as to their effectiveness. The subtlety of our obstruction can be as small as refusing to buy products from the right wing corporations that fund republican politics. The argument there is that keeping our finances, what little we have, from being used against us is wise and sound. In just that passive form of obstruction we find it a mighty tool as right wing corporations are hurt most by a dwindling profit margin.
     Other more passive/aggressive forms of obstruction come in the acts of contacting representatives at their workplace and demonstrating our views in the form of protestations. It is a time honored tradition for a democracy to rise up when it's citizens wishes are being left out of policies that affect them. This form of obstruction is widely popular with an unsettled citizenry as a focal point for the expressing of our anger and a determination to oppose. I cannot think of a better way to reach out to those who are supposed to represent us and make sure they feel a rebutted heat of their condescension toward us. The larger the crowds and the longer the protests make for a better way to get the point across about our frustrations with their representation.
     Then there is a more aggressive form of protest. Where the actual representatives are booed and heckled in the public square wherever that may be. At a store or restaurant, no matter, as being in the public eye is part of being a public servant. With many of our representatives, most exclusively republicans, we find that they do not respond to our demands that they address our questions about their decisions. They make their decisions without our input and then do not make themselves available to interact with us about them. So there are those of us who seek them out in the public square and attempt to interact with them or if they choose to flee, follow them while questioning their decisions. I see no wrong in any of the scenarios since being a public representative is accepting that they are accountable to the public despite their desire to hide from us.

No comments: