In Missouri, a state Senator who’s running for governor fired up a flamethrower and lit a bunch of boxes on fire.
But let me change the subject.
I had a bully in middle school. Maybe you can relate.
Jake’s parents were of the opinion that boys would be boys, which led my parents to believe that Jake’s parents were assholes, but clearly it wasn’t certain what else could be done in that direction, and I added sleeping badly to my response.
Next day Jake added *actually* shoving me into his repertoire. There was a stone retaining wall in one spot, and he really biffed me into that. My parents called the school, and the school wondered if this was happening on school property, and it wasn’t.
And again this was back in 1986, which is a time I have noticed bullies today consider to be a wonderful permissive time when everyone was much more relaxed about jokes, so I could tell that my parents were both deeply concerned and uncertain what to do about this.
The next day Jake told me that on Monday after school he’d be waiting and he was going to beat the shit out me.
And I told my dad this, and my dad sort of looked at me and asked me,
well, do you think you could take him?
This confused me, because again, I had been taught pretty clearly that one should never retaliate.
But I said, yeah, I think so, and I did think so, too, I really did, because I was bigger than him.
And my dad said
well maybe you ought to clean his clock one good time, then
I could tell he wasn’t kidding.
And I slept pretty well that weekend.
Monday at school I saw Jake, and maybe I smiled at him in class or maybe I didn’t. I don’t remember. 1986 was a while ago. I do remember feeling a sense of anticipation different from the growing dread I’d experienced the week before.
It’s possible that there was something in my face that Jake didn’t like, something that said "if you want to do this, you’re going to have to fight."
What I know for sure is that Jake wasn’t at the gap in the fence that day, or any other day.
I’ve noticed some other things about bullies. For example, bullies tend to operate on a sliding scale of permission. They start by pretending to do a thing to see how pretending goes for them before actually doing it.
If they catch any heat, they were just joking.
If they don’t get opposed for issuing threats, then they understand that to be permission, and then they progress to actually doing it, and if that works out for them, then they progress to doing more.
And sometimes much more.
Another thing that occurs to me is that since bullies operate on a sliding scale of permission, they have a pretty finely attuned radar for what is permissible, and how to skirt the margins of permissibility, and when those margins have changed.
Another thing I’ve noticed is, though some bullies are willing to fight, and all bullies like whatever one-sided violence is permissible, bullies don’t actually like fights.
I’m told it’s very important to note that the flamethrower-wielders were not burning books—again, burning books is something they are talking about doing. They were merely burning cardboard boxes, as a way of indicating other things.
Read all about it. https://apnews.com/article/flamethrower-missouri-governor-candidate-violent-6055f2c73bc10c8c58fae1d161c9c91e
I found this passage instructive.
"… his flamethrower stunt was meant to show what he would do to the 'swamp' in the state capital of Jefferson City, but 'let’s be clear, you bring those woke pornographic books to Missouri schools to try to brainwash our kids, and I’ll burn those too -- on the front lawn of the governor’s mansion.'”
A lot of people are alarmed by this, because they understand that burning and shooting things meant to signify certain people is always the precursor to burning and shooting the signified people.
However, I’m told the difference between burning books meant to signify certain types of people and burning cardboard meant to signify books meant to signify people is a very important distinction.
I agree, actually.
It tells us where the permission levels are right now for our national gang of genocidal bullies, by which I mean the Republican Party.
When I say things like this, I’m often admonished for being divisive or polarized.
By framing our current situation as a fight against fascism and supremacy, I'm told I’m passing up a real opportunity to persuade those who are engaged in these things—and persuasion is what’s necessary to drive real change.
So I've been thinking a lot about persuasion.
I've been thinkin about how persuasion works, what it is, what it isn't, how it can be effectively.
Particularly, since our problem is a gang of bullies, I've been thinking about what persuades bullies.
For those who think that the most important thing in the world is persuasion, I have good news: persuasion has been happening all along.
I didn't think used to think that Republicans were fascist. Now I do.
I was persuaded.
Who persuaded me? You'll never guess.
Spot on on the bullying. And the fascists.
I'm 6'6", built like a truck. My mother admonished me *never* to use my strength to get my way. End result being I was a soft target and got bullied until midway through high school, when I realized defending myself wasn't abusing my strength. I got into two fights - one with a lower-rank punk, another with someone slightly higher ranking - and the abuse vanished. The bullies all slunk off looking for a target that doesn't hit back.
To this day, I won't start things. But the moment things leave civil discourse, I'll end it. Never yet with fists - a certain bluntness about what is about to happen has always been sufficient.
So - this is for the fascists: we see you. We see you for what you are. You have two choices - slink off, or fight. You won't like the results of the fight - we'll vote you out of office, strip you of power, money, freedom. We'll treat you just as you've treated others. I'd recommend the slinking, honestly.