Monday, February 20, 2017

Acting vs Reacting

I'm not sure that this post is going to have a point. Not the kind of point I would like it to have, at any rate. Mostly, this is just going to be me talking out some thoughts.

It's pretty clear that most people don't like Trump, or, as one of my friends calls him, 45. I kind of like that, but I haven't talked myself into using it, yet. It's true that 45 does have some very staunch supporters, but they are very much the minority, and it's a minority that's getting smaller as the less staunch continue to fall away. He's a horrible person and, as I have said before, in a couple or few years, you're going to have a hard time finding anyone who is willing to admit that they voted for him. It's a good thing we have social media and blogs where people have recorded for all time their ill-conceived support of a horror.

There's a strong movement against Trump. He may have sparked the greatest protest movement against an individual person ever. May have. I don't have the data for that, but that's how it looks. Yeah, I could do the research, but I don't think it's that important. That there is such a protest movement against him is sufficient, whether it's the largest one or not.

And the protests are good. They have an impact. Some. And there has been a lot of follow up and organization to make sure that the pressure stays on, and that is also good. And necessary.

But there's a problem with it:
Right now, everything being done, at least everything being done by the populace in general, is being done on a reactionary basis. One thing I know is that you can't win a war by only reacting to what your enemy (Maybe I should use the word opponent?) is doing. We can't win by only playing defense.

I mean, I get it. Reacting is easy, and 45 gives us SO MUCH to react to.

But I think it's time to figure out proactive actions we can take. Even if it's deciding that we're in a war of attrition like Washington decided during the American Revolution. Make the war too costly for England to maintain it. With Trump... With 45, maybe, that's just constantly expressing our dislike for him, our utter contempt. You know, since being liked is what he wants most.

Of course, what I think would be the maximum strategy is something known in psychology as extinction, which is when you ignore an attention-seeking behavior because, if the person doing it doesn't get the desired attention, he will quit doing that particular behavior. Of course, that's impractical on a gross scale, because it would require the entire nation to pretty much pretend that Trump wasn't in the White House at all. To just ignore him and everyone associated with him.

Man, that sounds pretty awesome!

But that's not a thing that can happen.

And, maybe, we're doing all we can do at the moment by putting constant pressure on congressmen so that they know we don't like them either. The more people who do that, the better. And it is an action.

Like I said, I don't really know where I'm going with this. I suppose it's more of an idea starter than anything else. All I know is that we can't grow complacent, even when things seem to calm down a little. Not that I expect THAT to happen. We just move from one crisis to the next with Tr... 45. From immigration bans to Russian sympathizers and facilitators to... well, it could be anything. And that's the problem.

So! Be prepared for the long haul.


  1. I prefer "Dump" myself. It just seems accurate.

    Acting is definitely better than reacting. But it's all so exhausting. These are trying times we live in.

    1. Jeanne: It is exhausting, which is what I'm sure people like Bannon are relying on. Eventually, we'll all just get tired of opposing what their trying to do and let them win.