,
9 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
1) I watched the whole Dianne Feinstein video, and I have to say, I'm baffled by the outrage.
I say this episode was a good thing.
Yes, she was at times cantankerous and a bit dismissive of the legitimate political aspirations of these children and their parents.
*THREAD*
I say this episode was a good thing.
Yes, she was at times cantankerous and a bit dismissive of the legitimate political aspirations of these children and their parents.
*THREAD*
2) Feinstein shouldn't have hinted that the fact that the kids are too young to vote has significance.
They and their parents were engaging in political advocacy, and they were doing so effectively.
They and their parents were engaging in political advocacy, and they were doing so effectively.
3) I think Feinstein was too dismissive of the GND.
It's not okay to simply say, "we can't afford it," as if that ends the conversation.
It's not okay to simply say, "we can't afford it," as if that ends the conversation.
4) But the kids got the key responses to this across very effectively:
That the costs of inaction are greater, and that political elites often don't acknowledge that "we can't afford it" disguises hidden priorities that often aren't acknowledged, and should be acknowledged.
That the costs of inaction are greater, and that political elites often don't acknowledge that "we can't afford it" disguises hidden priorities that often aren't acknowledged, and should be acknowledged.
5) At bottom this episode also showcased a deeper dispute over theories of change.
Feinstein simply doesn't see the utility of pushing large, aspirational policies if they can't pass the Senate. That's her view. She's consensus minded.
Feinstein simply doesn't see the utility of pushing large, aspirational policies if they can't pass the Senate. That's her view. She's consensus minded.
6) On this, too, I think Feinstein is wrong to say this ends the conversation. But here again, the kids got the key responses across effectively:
They pointed out that articulating ambitious visions of a far better world inspires people, & that this itself can be good politics.
They pointed out that articulating ambitious visions of a far better world inspires people, & that this itself can be good politics.
7) Also, crucially, the problem with Feinstein's "realism" is that it lets GOP climate denialism place limits on our political imagination.
This is crazy, given that it is its own form of deep delusion, and is far less "realistic" than the animating GND goals and values are.
This is crazy, given that it is its own form of deep delusion, and is far less "realistic" than the animating GND goals and values are.
8) While Feinstein was dismissive at times, on balance she listened to the kids. She even seemed to acknowledge some of their larger points, particularly about the irresponsibility of the political class' inaction, given the enormous stakes on the line for the kids' future.
9) Bottom line: People are angry at Feinstein because she disagrees with the GND's goals and with the theory of change animating it.
Fine: This is the argument we need to be having. The edited clip does disservice to what's actually useful/illuminating about this episode. FIN
Fine: This is the argument we need to be having. The edited clip does disservice to what's actually useful/illuminating about this episode. FIN
