Pro-choice Groups Mobilize in Response to Anti-Choice Radicalism
The “it’s so distasteful to respond to political threats by raising money” argument becomes particularly bizarre when you have a long memory about High Contrarian Discourse about abortion. A few years ago, the hot HCD argument was that one reason that Roe was allegedly a disaster for the pro-choice cause is that it decreased activism on behalf of reproductive freedom. I think that the claim is often exaggerated — compared to other progressive movements during this period, I think the pro-choice movement held up quite well. But if it’s true, the argument is still illogical. There was undoubtedly substantial de-mobilization of civil rights activists after 1965, but that doesn’t mean that the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts were a bad thing. Political mobilization isn’t an end in itself; you’re trying to accomplish things. It would have increased the urgency of the situation had abortion remained illegal in 46 states, but that doesn’t make maintaining that status quo a good thing.
But, of course, pro-choice groups can never win with centrist pundits, because when they mobilize this is very troubling too. They might might make accurate claims about radical anti-choice legislation, which is bad for unpsecified reasons! They might alienate the mythical group of voters who will abandon their stated policy preferences if Democrats can say that abortion is icky with exactly the right magic words! My position is that pro-choice groups should feel free to engage in politics just like everyone else.
Well, some Very Serious People have consistently argued that Roe is much less of a victory because it was decided by ickly unelected elitist justices instead of passed as legislation by fine upstanding citizens who were elected by the American people. Therefore Roe is bad and wrong.
At least, that’s what the Very Serious People say…
I don’t understand why you guys are going after Dave Weigel’s story. I thought it was excellent.
He didn’t condemn the pushback or write about it as political “theater.” He wrote about it in terms of the political strategy and contest, yes, but he didn’t diminish or demean the significance of the issue.
I don’t think he was being squeamish about the politics of this; I think he was being forthright.
To be clear, I don’t think it was nearly as bad as Sullivan’s comment, but I agree with Pema that Weigel seemed to suggest that it was political theater (particularly in the context of his failed debunking of the SD story.) See especially the last paragraph, which compares the pro-choice reaction Brietbart’s fraudulent sting.
But the “pro-choice reaction” – the nailing of Republicans on abortion bills – is political strategery. It’s not just political strategery, but it’s a calculated effort to amplify certain debates and stories in the pursuit of a political end.
To which I echo your first two words in this post: “Uh, good.”
I just don’t see Weigel’s discussion of the politics qua politics of this issue as a dismissal of the Democrats’ actions as “theater.”
Fundraising has gotten such a bad connotation for being self-serving these days that it can be possible to look at all of it as opportunistic.
Activist groups walk a fine line between being their own entity and being a proxy, and while I its hard to believe anyone would get it screwed up in this case, I am not surprised it could happen.
I must admit that it seemed remarkably like all those times of being informed that our behavior was self serving and unladylike.
Then when the repressive law passes it’s our own fault for not doing more.
I’m not endorsing that discourse, but didn’t some of come from the angle that in many areas of this country abortion is legal but unavailable?
I think South Dakota and many southern states come into play here as having been effective in shutting down women’s clinics through harassment and terrorism.
I will loudly and consistently blame the other sectors of the healthcare industry for systematically segregating this part of reproductive care for any number of reasons. I believe to be a licensed OB/GYN you have to learn these procedures and perform them when called upon. If you don’t like it, become some other doctor.
Well, yes, but the question is how Roe being overruled would make abortion more accessible in those contexts. Even if activism increased, the number of abortion providers in SD would almost certainly go from 2 to zero.
I have heard the argument that it is more a medium-to-long term process. That is, Roe is gone, pro-choice activists mobilize, and then start winning elections and after that abortion is legalized and accessible.
It reminds me of the “kill the health care bill over the public option” argument myself.
Back to the abortion argument, I think for the “let Roe die” argument to be persuasive, you have to assume the only way to make choice a salient issue is to have Roe be overturned. I really don’t know why that has to be the case. Obama could have included federal funding for an abortion clinic in every house district. I suspect that could raise the salience of choice while still maintaining Roe.
I believe to be a licensed OB/GYN you have to learn these procedures and perform them when called upon. If you don’t like it, become some other doctor.
I agree with this in principle, but there’s many ways around it, borne of the high degree of subspecialization within all medical specialities. There is already something of a separation between obs and gyne, between “low risk” and “high risk” obs, etc. An issue that I seldom see discussed in the abortion wars is “who’s training the docs to do the abortions?” Who’s setting the curricula for ObGyn residencies & qualifying exams?
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Matt Duss and LG&M, Scott Lemieux. Scott Lemieux said: Shorter centrist pundits: pro-choicers should unilaterally disarm. http://bit.ly/gxWXlg [...]
[...] I remember when legitimating terrorism was considered a bad thing. Anyway, I just hope that pro-choice groups don’t try to draw attention to extremist anti-abortion legislation; politics is so icky! Share and [...]