More Things In Heaven and on Earth

That public “whatever” is called public sentiment.

And wielding the power to shift it is how we actually achieve meaningful change in this country. https://t.co/u6JtgwwRsk

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) July 7, 2019

I'm old enough to remember when public sentiment was pro-atheist and religion, especially Christianity, was doomed. "South Park" even had an episode envisioning an atheist future. That was all internet based, too. If you weren't on-line, that episode made little sense (and like most of "South Park," it's badly dated now).

 How'd that atheist ascension work out?

Atheism was the public sentiment of the internet, until it wasn't. They were the "New Atheists" until suddenly it was "Stop calling us that, we never called ourselves that!," and their decline was fixed. Where is Richard Dawkins now? Who mourns Christopher Hitchens? Who reads Sam Harris? And beyond the confines of a small portion of the internet, nobody was ever that interested, anyway. Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens never became household names.  Jerry Falwell is dead, Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart disgraced, Pat Robertson reduced to a minor TV character, and yet evangelicals enjoy a renaissance today. When Twitter establishes mega-churches and a Liberty University, let me know. Until then, TV still rules and FoxNews still runs the man in the Oval Office.

Public sentiment on the internet ain't necessarily public sentiment. And public sentiment ain't necessarily controlled. It took decades and more than just Dr. King to sway public sentiment on race and segregation in this country. Kamala Harris illustrates the political perils of pointing out that struggle isn't over.  Public sentiment is never a unitary thing one group can control, and it is still most effectively expressed in representative government. Annoyingly, other sentiments than your own are expressed that way, too; because public sentiment is never unitary.  Which is why Nancy Pelosi is counting votes in the House, not followers on Twitter. And is it funny that Trump thinks he controls public sentiment via Twitter? Or just ironic? Maybe even cautionary?

As to how functionless Twitter truly is, allow me to illustrate how silly this particular controversy has already become:

Lionization of them seems to have become seriously untethered. But I agree Pelosi’s attitude telegraphs weakness. It diminishes her to talk this way and she needs to be be in a push and pull, a relatiosnship with this part of her caucus, not at war with it.

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) July 8, 2019

That list doesn't actually represent accomplishments. Outside political Twitter, do three people know what the "Green New Deal" is, or what it aspires to be (aside from a catchy name resting on the actual accomplishments of a much more savvy politician)? And I don't agree with Marshall's argument (aside from the opening) so much as I wanted to note the reaction to it:

Weird statement of your own here. "Lionization ... untethered" of four first term congressional representatives who've received more criticism than praise from most quarters. I mean who are you reading that would lead you to this conclusion?

— Jim Buhler (@JimBuhler) July 8, 2019

That begins a really tedious back and forth about the word "lionization" that reflects the usual level of argument on the internet. And why using it to gauge "public sentiment," or to shape it, is a mug's game.

And frankly, who is even reading JMM's Twitter feed? Not as many people as watch FoxNews. And FoxNews isn't the power it was. But AOC ran in a district she could win. Beto O'Rourke almost defeated Ted Cruz, and he didn't do it on Twitter, or on her platform. And he did it in a stay where AOC couldn't win a primary. One size does not fit all, which is perhaps the perspective of a politician with more years of experience than AOC has been alive. And has a larger perspective seeing the country from the opposite coast.

I like AOC. I just think she's fighting the wrong fight. Then again, outside of a portion of Twitter, who's really paying attention to this fight anyway?