Political Targets. That was the answer. However, What Is The Question?
Allo allo allo
I’m here to tell you about an exciting new concept in concepts. It brings together folks who don’t agree at all, in the hope that we can have a calm discussion and end up not hating the shit out of each other so much.
The individuals here will supposedly represent a huge chunk of the general public, but will in fact represent a small vocal fanatical minority.
1st Person: Define “minority.”
“The smaller number or part, especially a number or part representing less than half of the whole.’ — Oxford Languages
1st Person: Fair enough.
Anyway, this week’s topic is, Political Targets.
Me: First, introductions. You are….?
Unnamed Person 1: A supporter.
Me: And you are….?
Unnamed Person 2: A supporter.
Me: Well we can’t have you both named supporter…
Unnamed Person 1: Why not?
Unnamed Person 2: Yeah, why not?
Me: It would confuse the audience. I will call you, Fan, and I will call you, Advocate.
Unnamed Person 1: Why can’t I be Advocate?
Unnamed Person 2: What if I want to be Fan?
Me: Look, this ain’t up for discussion! Lets get on with the show….
Fan [muttering]: Shutting down debate.
Advocate [muttering]: Silencing dissenting voices.
Me: I’ll put forward some quotes for us to discuss.
“Attack the issue not the person.”
Fan: It depends on who the person is.
Advocate: It depends on who the person is.
Me: Your attacks often seem to be based on the cultural identity of the person who you disagree with.
Fan: That’s because they’ve let the side down.
Advocate: They betrayed their community.
Me: Really? Does that justify being, well, ‘ist,’ or a, ‘phobic,’ towards them?
Fan: It’s called political critique.
Advocate: Yes, political critique.
Me: What about death threats?
Fan: I don’t understand the question.
Advocate: Say what now?
“The politician was physically assaulted.”
Fan: Define assault.
Advocate: Define assault.
“Physical assault is when an individual or a group attacks a person physically, with or without the use of a weapon, or threatens to hurt that person. It can include scratching, pushing, kicking, punching, throwing things, using weapons or physically restraining another person.” — University of Bristol
Fan: What do Universities know?
Advocate: What does a Bristol know?
Fan: Context is important. What if the person has fed into a culture of hatred?
Advocate: Background is key. What if the person has promoted division?
Me: Aren’t you victim blaming?
Fan: They’re not a victim.
Advocate: They’re not innocent.
Me: Really? So they’re fair game?
Fan: I wouldn’t say yes, but yes.
Advocate: I could say no, but I won’t.
Me: [showing photo] Do you think they’re fair game?
Fan: Fuck no.
Advocate: Yes, they are! They said….
Me: Wait! [showing different photo] Do you think they’re fair game?
Advocate: Fuck no.
Fan: How aren’t they!?! When they said….
Me: Whoa, stop. Hoster time! Do you not think that you are both behaving the same?
Fan: There is no moral equivalency between them and me.
Advocate: Whoa whoa whoa. You do not get to use moral equivalency; we get to use moral equivalency!
Fan: You do not own moral equivalency….
Me: OK! OK! Let’s move on….
Fan and Advocate [whisper].
Fan: Here’s one for you [holding up photo].
Advocate: Would you help defend them if they were being attacked?
[silence]
Me: Nah.
Epilogue
1st Person: In their defence, I think they said, “Nah,” because they were concerned about getting attacked for defending the person being attacked.
2nd Person: No, more like they said, “Nah,” because they wanted to confirm to a certain community that they approved of the attack.
1st Person: No, I’ve analysed it right.
2nd Person: No, I’ve analysed it right.
[repeat to fade]
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
Thanks to my girlfriend Hen.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
