Why politicians shouldn't use words like "Revolution" so loosely.
I posted this in a previous thread and then decided it should have it's own thread. My intention is not to create discord but to make the point that words have consequences, which is why we should choose out words wisely.
Why politicians shouldn't use words like "Revolution" so loosely.
Words have meanings and when used loosely, can have unintended consequences. You can't get young people all psyched up with talk of a "Revolution" for more than a year and then suddenly say "Revolution cancelled. I'm with her now," and not expect some confusion, hurt feelings, followed by growing pains. I don't say this to demean anyone, but maturity takes time. Words Matter. Words have Consequences. When you call for a Revolution, you essentially have declared war and the result is that the opposition is now an enemy combatant. Bernie made a mistake in calling his political campaign a "revolution" particularly since he was targeting predominately young people. A political campaign is a political campaign.
This nation has been involved in exactly ONE revolution. This was the decision to succeed from under the rule and the oppressive thumb of the King of England. It was Liberty or Death. It was not and should never be taken lightly. Political Parties have come and gone over the course of this nation's history. Within this country, people are free to come and go within the structure of a political party. The reasons parties come and go is because one size doesn't fit all. And sometimes the ideas and philosophy of a party can change, or evolve over time. But make no mistake; this is not North Korea. If you don't like the party, you are free to work within the structure to try and change it or you can leave. But one shouldn't mistake the political party as a revolution in which the members are now sworn enemies and combatants. I think that Bernie needs to do more to fix this and fix it quick. Yes he says he now supports her candidacy, and I believe him. He has appeared on the campaign stump for her. But somehow those speeches aren't as passionate as those which called for the 'revolution'. Also, from the beginning of the end of his campaign, he made such comments as: "It's not my job to convince his supporters to vote for her; that's her job". But he refused to formally drop out like had been done in previous campaigns with the goal of keeping his campaign and followers together all the way to the floor of the Convention, which kept the "revolution" going and he seemed to relish in doing so as if he didn't and couldn't let it go. Even during the Convention Sanders continued to meet with his followers about how the revolution movement moved forward.
So no wonder his followers seemed unwilling to let the 'revolution' subside. Bernie didn't appear to want to see it die himself. Instead he said he wanted to see it continue. No one should be surprised that such turmoil continues. It had a very messy ending and I'm not surprised that many are still conflicted, or may have chosen to leave our party. At this point, the past is prologue. It is, what it is. It was a long an grueling primary. Hurt feelings remain, and there is much healing to be done. We will continue to move forward as a party, with whatever and whomever remains of it. And most importantly, I hope we've all learned from it.
= new reply since forum marked as read
