Kevin D. Williamson
"Back Off from the ‘Resist’ Nonsense"
"Perhaps we should back off from the Third Reich analogies and begin to take our duties as citizens seriously."
National Review, September 15, 2019
Once again, Williamson's latest hot take of the week is a fiery jab at elitist left-wing America. Rather than poking fun at one specific individual or occurrence, however, he decides to take a closer look at the "Resist" movement that has taken America by storm since November of 2016 and analyze its effects and consequences henceforth. To give sufficient context, the aforementioned political movement is centered around the "resistance" to the actions and behaviors of our current President of the United States. With that said, I must applaud Williamson for taking a much more mature stance in this piece by abstaining from a childish and defensive reaction--typical of most popular political writing in the modern era--and instead relying on the truths of political theory and societal stipulations to support his argumentary appeals. While he remains liberal in his use of humor and sarcasm, it comes much more sparingly in this piece compared to his last, and they no longer consist of his argument's main support. Instead, his use of historical context and comparative evidence makes for a much more compelling form of journalistic political discourse.
Leftist "resistance" is laughably hypocritical. What exactly is there to resist? I'm not going to defend each and every action of the White House like some GOP puppet, but the President's behaviors and rhetoric provide little evidence towards the argument that he or his party are some new-age Fascists. Perhaps if progressives (and many modern "conservatives") truly believed in what their party tells them to, they would be able to look in its direction and see the lies and corruption that has degraded this democracy.
ReplyDeleteI think it is worth noting that there is a difference between being defensive and childish. Childish is definitely the more objective term which can lead to almost any argument being called "childish" simply to discredit it. It is a logical fallacy that many fell into so be careful with word choice. Make sure what you say is what you mean.
ReplyDeleteI personally think this article takes it a bit too far. Really, both sides of politics are. But Williamson, like the other National Review columnists I've read today, does not take into account the other side's argument (I'm sensing a trend). The reason people are protesting is because they believe what President Trump has said and done has brought down the country. The right would do the same thing if a Medicare for All system was implemented. So while I think the Democrats are flawed in their protests, so is this op-ed. It neglects to see both sides, which would greatly up its appeal to logos. Instead, it is one large appeal to pathos that can honestly be almost insulting at times.
ReplyDelete