Image 01 Image 03

Liberals desperately fight demoralization

Liberals desperately fight demoralization

The Women’s March was more a mass group therapy than the launch of a new “resistance” movement.

The Women’s March on Washington, and in many other mostly liberal cities, is being portrayed as the launch of a new “resistance” to Donald Trump and Republicans.

The use of the term “resistance” is not by accident.

It conjures up the heroism and selflessness of the French Resistance and the Resistance movements in other Nazi-occupied countries. Since Trump is equated to Hitler in so much of liberal rhetoric, it is — in their minds — the appropriate analogy.

“Resistance,” not coincidentally, also is the English translation for the group Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiya (“Islamic Resistance Movement”), better known by its acronym, HAMAS.

This plays into the regressive left’s bizarre affinity for Islamist movements, something put on display at the Women’s March through the high profile role of Linda Sarsour and the widely-distributed posters of women in Hijabs made from American flags created by the same artist who created the Obama “Hope” poster.

The word “resistance” thus plays into many important places in the liberal psyche.

But in reality, the Women’s March was more a mass group therapy than the launch of a new “resistance” movement. It was a way to try to stave off a demoralization of a once hopeful liberal electorate.

We have seen such demoralization play itself out in the crying, group cry-ins, and generally hysterical reaction to Trump’s victory.

It’s likely to get worse before it gets better.

Trump is fast out of the gate, and throwing out so much change so fast, it has liberals demoralized.

First came cabinet nominations which, to liberals, are an abomination going to the heart of liberal control of the culture — the education bureaucracy, environmental regulation, and the Justice Department as political tool.

Barring something startling, it’s unlikely liberals can stop any of Trump’s nominees.

That sense of demoralization is witnessed in the reaction to Trump’s decision to move forward on the Keystone and Dakota access pipelines. One environmental activist group tweeted out that “Trump is pushing DAPL and Keystone because they were stopped by our movements. He wants us demoralized. It won’t work.”

But in reality, it likely will work. Liberals will become demoralized.

There have been reports that Trump will seek to cut funding for the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities. From reactions I’ve seen on Facebook and elsewhere, that move — if it takes place — is seen as a mortal threat to an important part of the Democratic base which depends on federal largesse for their artistic and political livelihoods.

Trump also has signaled that he would act forcefully against a form of protest movement important to liberal self-identification, so-called sanctuary cities. Trump’s press secretary made clear that the administration would look to cut off federal funding streams for cities that defy federal authority on immigration.

And next week Trump will nominate a Supreme Court justice who almost certainly will be a conservative unacceptable to the liberals. Despite Chuck Schumer’s taunts that he will block any such nominee, in reality there is little Democrats can to do stop it without provoking a Republican nuclear option.

In the age of Trump, liberals are anti-change. They liked the status quo, and seeing it slip away is demoralizing for them.

It is in this context that the Women’s March needs to be understood. They put on a heroic face, but I don’t think they believed it.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


The other relevant fact is that George Soros funded all fifty of the fifty groups that organized the march.

Weakened by the electoral repudiation, he’s sending a message to democrats that he still is the Democrat party.

    Tom Servo in reply to rotten. | January 26, 2017 at 9:07 am

    They keep telling themselves that they will create a movement like a “left wing tea party”, but they don’t even understand the many reasons the Tea Party was powerful.

    Probably the most important reason was that it represented an insurgent movement inside democrat and Gop-E controlled areas. Where did the angry marchers come from? Almost all from the most hard core democrat areas, and it’s guaranteed that all of them voted for Hillary in the recent election.

    The question for any movement is, can you CHANGE votes? Not can you must make the people who already support you feel good about themselves, that’s just preachin’ to the choir, easy to do, and meaningless.

    The Tea Party was effective because it was a big factor in turning Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio from blue to red. It was a big factor in electing Toomey in Pennsylvania. In Texas, which was already republican, the Tea Party still had a big effect, because it drove the elections of firebrand conservative Ted Cruz, instead of the milquetoast GOP-E candidate, David Dewhurst (who everyone official said would win easily)

    Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) don’t understand how it works, because they think big, loud, and angry equals effectiveness. No, it doesn’t. Small and focused on the key change points is what is effective, but also very hard to do.

And today in Saudi Arabia, a woman was beheaded in broad daylight by men in power there. Just lovely.

USA needs to be ENERGY INDEPENDENT and off the middle east oil teat.

I could give a rat’s patoot about idiotic women prancing around in veejay costumes beclowning themselves. Millions of women, especially in Islamic run countries are butchered daily.

Oh and one of the ‘leaders’ of the women’s march this week promotes Shariah law.


    Ragspierre in reply to LisaGinNZ. | January 26, 2017 at 8:51 am

    Sorry, but your hysterical nonsense has to be opposed.

    We execute women in Texas. Night-time broad daylight, whatever.

    Nobody is slaughtering millions of wimmins a day.

    And I doubt we import much…if any…oil from the Mid-East any longer. We are pretty much happily using our own oil, along with that of Canada and Mexico. But pretty much all Western Hemisphere oil for us.

    Although, in his truly bizarre remarks to the CIA the other day, Der Donald seemed to be day-dreaming about TAKING oil from Libya for some weird reason.

    Just keeping it real…

      Tom Servo in reply to Ragspierre. | January 26, 2017 at 9:33 am

      “We execute women in Texas. Night-time broad daylight, whatever.”

      6 women have been executed in Texas since 1976. One of the most infamous, Betty Lou Beets, killed 5 husbands in various ways. She claimed that the last 2, who had both disappeared, had just run off, but then authorities dug up her flower bed over near Athens. Oops! There they were, pushing up daisies! Her last husband was a well respected former Fire Chief from Dallas, and his relatives were why she finally got caught. The most recent woman executed was in 2014, when Lisa Coleman, 38, underwent lethal injection for the torture and starvation death of her girlfriend’s 9-year-old son. A vicious murder of a child is a pretty good path to death row, at least in Texas.

      And all of these women were accorded full due process, under our law.

      Meanwhile, in Saudi Arabia: “A WOMAN in Saudi Arabia who dared to defy the authorities and venture outside without a hijab is now facing calls for her to be executed.”

        Ragspierre in reply to Tom Servo. | January 26, 2017 at 11:39 am

        There are idiots calling for the execution of various people on social media world-wide.

        What does that have to do with any-flucking-thing?

        I have to wonder about your capacity for reason, dude.

great unknown | January 25, 2017 at 9:39 pm

First they lost their morals. Now they’re losing their morale. Karma.

I fully expect Schumer and the Dems to force the nuclear option on the SCOTUS pick. At this point, their need to fund raise is paramount, so pretending that they can stop this will keep the cash coming until the lose this battle. The Dems may put on a brave face, but they all know their party is in ruins right now.

Hissy-fit as group therapy? Could be; nothing else seems to fit.

It was politically incoherent. Everybody got her oar in; free abortion, outright misandry, and a bizarre dream of submission to Islam. There’s noting meaningful in that pastiche.

And it wasn’t a plan of action. As a revolution or even a “resistance movement” it didn’t take even the first step. The Spartacists and the Kriegsmarine paralyzed Berlin with an eleven day strike in 1919; street barricades were the main weapon in the days of the Paris Commune; and the Suffragettes caused disruption of the Crown’s business by attacking pillar boxes with acid, ink, lampblack, and tar. While none of these adventures worked out terribly well, they were at least not eminently ignorable. But the Half-million Pussy March was nothing at all; just a reminder that, oh dear, it’s that time of the month again. Just ignore it, and it’ll blow over … until next time. Macbeth’s sound and fury, signifying nothing.

When I think of “resistance” I think of the Warsaw Ghetto and the like. Marching as group therapy doesn’t show up on the radar.

They lacked a consensus to qualify progress, so all they got was monotonic change. Principles matter.

Great post, Professor.

Liberals are not at all demoralized. They had a choice of two Democrats in this election. The one that won is proving to be effective. Those who bothered to educate themselves are pleased.

The Democratic Party, especially the commie wing, is well and truly upset.

Henry Hawkins | January 26, 2017 at 5:09 am

You’ve nailed it with the group therapy analogy. Huddle up for a group hug, ladies.

Liberals are fighting reality and it is exposing their weakness. Trump is not your ordinary Republican. He is attracting people from all walks of life. He is attracting people that the democrats think they own. For instance, I was at the concert at the Lincoln Memorial and quite a few things stuck out, There were many young people in the audience. A woman I spoke with who was an African American was so pro Trump, I thought maybe she should be working for him. I spoke with a 26 year old millennial from Michigan who served in the military. Next to him was an Hispanic (Mexican) man from LA. who flew in recently to attend. Then to my right about 10 feet from me were two young gay men (late teens early 20’s) holding hands and hugging from time to time. I never heard one hateful word from anyone near me.

The bottom line is that liberals don’t have a monopoly on love, support and acceptance and that is why they are angry.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to natdj. | January 26, 2017 at 11:31 am

    If you saw any of the MSM coverage of it, you’ll know they didn’t show any of those people – unless accidentally. That doesn’t fit their propaganda.

      While I was there in DC, it struck me how much the media truly lies and that the only power they have is the power give them. As for liberals they are doing more to hurt their “cause” with these silly protests and hysterical personal attacks.

      Oh, one more thing, I forgot this as well. At the Lincoln Memorial Concert we were next to Buddhist Monks who came out to support Pres. Trump. Many many Americans are tired of this identity politics of liberals.

Look at the good side of the Woman’s March.

It only took one day in office for Donald Trump to get more fat women out walking than Michelle Obama could in 8 years.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Rolf. | January 26, 2017 at 11:28 am


    They’re all going to be rail-thin skinny by the end of Trump’s administration if this keeps up.

“Trump is pushing DAPL and Keystone because they were stopped by our movements. He wants us demoralized.

It won’t work.”

What jumps out at me about that tweet is how self-centered it is. It’s all about them. President Trump’s motives in restarting the pipeline construction projects couldn’t possibly be the shovel-ready jobs (the centerpiece of his campaign) or cheaper oil and gas prices in the U.S. or energy independence or any other reasonable policy motivation. No. President Trump is only in favor of these projects because it will hurt the feelings of the protestors. The big meanie.


Insufficiently Sensitive | January 26, 2017 at 9:21 am

The Women’s March on Washington, and in many other mostly liberal cities, is being portrayed as the launch of a new “resistance” to Donald Trump and Republicans.

It was more like the return of the 19th-century revival meeting as self-gratification. Praising the Lord (though they’re not quite sure who that might be), virtue-signaling to one and all by their attendance, and hating on the Devil who just got inaugurated.

And all those unlucky husbands and brothers and sisters who did not attend the marches are now certified Backsliders, and shall be forced into repentance.

“In the age of Trump, liberals are anti-change.”

Which in years past was considered the conservative position. I.e., conserving the status quo.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | January 26, 2017 at 10:34 am

Dying your hair blue, sticking a ring in your nose, and then dressing up like a vagina to protest against democracy doesn’t seem like a message middle America will respond to.

Also, the Free Beacon has a video of some of the language the speakers used at the march. The same people who are worried about Trump’s vulgarity are fine with this:

Poor protestors. They have to similtaneously appeal to flyover America and draw the MSM eye. I’m thinking that ain’t gonna work.

‘Protestor’ is too narrow – it indicates activity about a certain cause. ‘Resistance’ broadens the concept to being broader based and having an aura of righteousness to its cause.

‘Resistance’ also sounds so much better than thug, vandal, looter, bully, arsonist, assailant, rioter, etc.

Democrats are crawling all over each other to get into Thelma & Louise’s back seat. I wish them every success.
Unlike Wiley Coyote, they haven’t the brains to realize someone should have brought an “OOPS” sign.