On April 2, the Los Angeles Times Editorial Board published Our Dishonest President, the first in a four-part series examining Trump’s 70-day presidency. The series pulls no punches, calling Trump out as a ‘narcissist’ and ‘demagogue’ in its first line.
“He is a man so unpredictable, so reckless, so petulant, so full of blind self-regard, so untethered to reality that it is impossible to know where his presidency will lead or how much damage he will do to our nation.”
While not quite time for ‘wholesale panic’, the editorial calls on activists, voters and lawmakers to stand up to the nation’s leader.
There are signs that the institutions that once resisted the tides of progressive politics are now taking up arms in solidarity. Earlier in March, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) announced it is offering a “Disobedience Reward” of $250,000 for individuals or groups taking part in “extraordinary disobedience for the benefit of society.” The University’s Media Lab cites anti-establishment activists like Pussy Riot and Ai Weiwei as examples of the kind of actions they would like to support.
Another NGO, Fight for the Future, is offering scholarships for full-time activists. “This is a proposal for defending the world,” they boast on their website. But when activism gets pulled into the mainstream, when it follows the rules and accepts the law as natural and immutable, can it truly change anything at all? Why are those fighting structures of power now finally worthy of grants, scholarships and financial support?
This is the changing face of activism in Trump’s era. Is it enough to really rock the boat?
We wondered who is going to “be the first to throw a pie in that lying bastard’s face.”
We’re still waiting!