The American press and public really need to figure out how to simply dismiss Trump's pretextual claims for authoritarian attacks and then resist the attack itself, not debate the claim. We have spent months asking "but is the Ivy League really antisemitic?" and now "but is DC really crime-ridden?"
It's important to navigate the nuances correctly and not use resisting Trump as rationale for stifling the occasional broader public debate on topics.
In some cases we can just not comment on the issue and critique the how (and achieve broader agreement that way).
Replies
-
There are people, myself included, who would be happy if academia and business peeled back DEI, for example, but we see it as unacceptable for POTUS to use the vast reserve powers of the Presidency to ban them.