As part of Saturday’s “Women’s March,” Madonna gave a rather unhinged speech in which she said: “Yes, I’m angry. Yes, I am outraged. Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House. But I know that this won’t change anything. We cannot fall into despair.”
Let’s put the shoe on the other foot. Would it ever be acceptable for anyone, let alone a celebrity, to say they wanted to “blow up the White House” because Obama was president? No. The individual who said such a thing would be labeled a racist, bigoted, fear-monger. Moreover, they would be accused of inspiring the mentally unwell to harm the president.
Exhibit A) In November 2015, Salon‘s Chauncey DeVega published an article in which he wrote:
“In the United States, the right-wing media and movement conservatives have for decades consistently used eliminationist and other violent rhetoric to describe liberals, progressives and other people with whom they disagree. As was seen in the recent attacks on a Charleston-area black church, and other violence by right-wing anti-government militias, such rhetoric does not float in the ether of the public discourse, harmless and unacknowledged. No, it does in fact lead to action.”
Mysteriously, neither Salon, nor DeVega have mentioned anything about Madonna’s remarks. As DeVega said, “such rhetoric does not float in the ether of the public discourse, harmless and unacknowledged. No, it does in fact lead to action.”
DeVega hasn’t simply remained silent either; he’s gotten in on the “violent rhetoric” himself:
I want Donald Trump’s minions to get every bit of pain and suffering they have coming to them for supporting a fascist. https://t.co/nE6iUw2daE
— chauncey devega (@chaunceydevega) January 20, 2017
DeVega is a perfect example of the doublethink that leads progressives to condemn Republicans or conservatives for “violent rhetoric,” only to turn around and use violent rhetoric themselves.