D
Deleted member 365
Guest
Um. We all see where this is going… right?
christopherrufo.com
The question: How should the president respond? Many on the right may feel an instinctual reaction to “send in the troops.” While this concern for law and order is natural and merited, it must be pursued in a way that maximizes the chance for success and minimizes the chance for blowback. As the president considers his options, he might keep in mind a number of strategic points that, if implemented, will increase his leverage in the fight for large-scale deportations.
The administration must deny the Left a strong visual counterargument. It’s easy to see how scenes of militarization, abuse of demonstrators, or a violent death could reverse public sympathies and present the administration as abusing its authority. The language of politics is visual—and therefore emotional, which means that a single mistake can reverse the flow of opinion and imperil the president’s immigration agenda. Left-wing tacticians have trained their foot soldiers to bait law enforcement into confrontation and to play victim for the press, to great effect.
To prevent this scenario, Trump has a number of strategic options available to him. First, rather than sending in more troops to stop the fires, the president might be better advised to hold off. Right now, California governor Gavin Newsom has sided with the demonstrators, but if the riots spread further, this stance will cost him in public opinion, and eventually, he will have to assume the mantle of authority. The public will expect Newsom to restore order, and he’ll have to incur the risk of using force.
Second, the president should pressure local leaders to buy in to the task of quelling the riots. He could wait for Governor Newsom to request the National Guard or appear at a press conference with Los Angeles County officials, bringing state Democrats into the risk-reward calculus and creating the option for the president to shift the blame in the future if they fail to respond effectively. California Democrats are anticipating that Trump will assume all the authority and, therefore, relieve them of any responsibility. He should resist the temptation to be the only player on the field with skin in the game.
Third, the president should direct federal agencies to create a hard-soft, or visible-invisible, approach to riot control. In public, the National Guard should mobilize with enough manpower to smother the protests and avoid protracted conflict or hand-to-hand combat, which carries with it the highest level of risk. At the same time, as we saw demonstrated in Portland, Oregon, during the George Floyd riots, the agencies should dispatch unmarked vans to follow key agitators and snatch them from the streets while the media are not looking.
- Large scale deportations (to ethnically cleanse America)
- Smother protests
- Unmarked vans disappearing people while the media isn’t looking
Trump Should Crush the L.A. Riots—with a Subtle Hand
How the president can restore order and win the war for visual symbolism
christopherrufo.com
The question: How should the president respond? Many on the right may feel an instinctual reaction to “send in the troops.” While this concern for law and order is natural and merited, it must be pursued in a way that maximizes the chance for success and minimizes the chance for blowback. As the president considers his options, he might keep in mind a number of strategic points that, if implemented, will increase his leverage in the fight for large-scale deportations.
The administration must deny the Left a strong visual counterargument. It’s easy to see how scenes of militarization, abuse of demonstrators, or a violent death could reverse public sympathies and present the administration as abusing its authority. The language of politics is visual—and therefore emotional, which means that a single mistake can reverse the flow of opinion and imperil the president’s immigration agenda. Left-wing tacticians have trained their foot soldiers to bait law enforcement into confrontation and to play victim for the press, to great effect.
To prevent this scenario, Trump has a number of strategic options available to him. First, rather than sending in more troops to stop the fires, the president might be better advised to hold off. Right now, California governor Gavin Newsom has sided with the demonstrators, but if the riots spread further, this stance will cost him in public opinion, and eventually, he will have to assume the mantle of authority. The public will expect Newsom to restore order, and he’ll have to incur the risk of using force.
Second, the president should pressure local leaders to buy in to the task of quelling the riots. He could wait for Governor Newsom to request the National Guard or appear at a press conference with Los Angeles County officials, bringing state Democrats into the risk-reward calculus and creating the option for the president to shift the blame in the future if they fail to respond effectively. California Democrats are anticipating that Trump will assume all the authority and, therefore, relieve them of any responsibility. He should resist the temptation to be the only player on the field with skin in the game.
Third, the president should direct federal agencies to create a hard-soft, or visible-invisible, approach to riot control. In public, the National Guard should mobilize with enough manpower to smother the protests and avoid protracted conflict or hand-to-hand combat, which carries with it the highest level of risk. At the same time, as we saw demonstrated in Portland, Oregon, during the George Floyd riots, the agencies should dispatch unmarked vans to follow key agitators and snatch them from the streets while the media are not looking.
