The urge to criminalize the other guy’s politics and advocacy seems to be running especially strong these days. If you doubt it, here’s another data point: a Latino advocacy group called Presente.org, following Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s controversial comments critical of immigration, called for arresting Trump. Not only did this not stir any great outcry, but rival Democratic presidential candidate Bernard Sanders has now hired Presente.org’s executive director to lead his Latino outreach.
One reason our elections and public debates are intensely fought is that they carry high stakes. Their stakes will be higher yet if the price of coming out on the losing side in an election or debate is to face potential prosecution.
2 Comments
T”heir stakes will be higher yet if the price of coming out on the losing side in an election or debate is to face potential prosecution.”
prosecution or, um persecution.
I would divide political cases into two types. In the first, a criminal prosecution is initiated in order to gain specific political advantage, but the act itself is not political in nature. Examples of these include the Clinton perjury investigation; or the Scooter Libby prosecution. In these kinds of cases, the prosecutors publicly maintain that they are merely disinterestedly enforcing the rule of law.
The second type involves the prosecution of political activity itself. The calls for prosecution of some climate scientists (and the criminal investigation of Exxon); the indictments of Rick Perry; the Nakoula prosecution; the Wisconsin “John Doe” cases; and the latest call to prosecute Trump would be examples of this second type.
Although such prosecutions still seem unusual, the broad acceptance of these tactics by major politicians and most media outlets appears to be a recent phenomenon in the U.S.