Staff Reports
Once again, the theater of modern politics puts on a show so absurd it’s almost comedic. A new crew of anti-authority activists, or as they’ve whimsically dubbed themselves, the “No Kings” crowd, has emerged. Their rallying cry seems to claim that the specter of an authoritarian leader, none other than Donald Trump, supposedly looms over them. The irony, though, is sharper than ever. Just five years ago, the same voices that are now shrieking about the impending doom of autocracy were quite content under a different set of controls. It seems their memories, much like their principles, are conveniently selective.
The leaders of this “No Kings” movement are familiar faces, and not in a comforting way. Randi Weingarten, a prominent figure in the teachers’ union, who was a staunch supporter of lockdown measures, is one such leader. During the pandemic, she was the one insisting that children stay home, isolated from in-person education. Back then, she demanded—and got—essentially what amounted to a reign of enforced inactivity under the guise of public safety. Now she stands as a self-appointed sentinel against tyranny. The stark turnaround would be impressive if it weren’t so transparently hypocritical.
It’s truly an astounding phenomenon to witness. The very individuals who once applauded unprecedented restrictions on personal freedoms now claim to reject authoritarianism. They argue for freedom while wearing symbolic costumes, all while having championed measures that made daily life anything but free just a short time ago. This sudden pivot begs the question: is their opposition to so-called tyranny genuine, or is it just a convenient stance against a political opponent?
The inconsistency on display would be amusing if it weren’t so disturbing. In reality, their protests seem to be less about true freedom and more about political theater. It’s easy to shout “No Kings” when it fits the narrative of the day, particularly when the supposed king is someone like Trump, a figure who draws such visceral reactions. However, their previous actions scream louder than their current words. Their past support for control and regulation now hangs heavily as they protest superficially against the notion of authoritarian rule.
In the end, the real concern is not a few figures decked out in costumes bemoaning theoretical tyrants. It’s the genuine threat of forgetting history and the lessons it teaches about true freedom and control. The contradictions of being a part-time warrior against authoritarianism expose a larger issue—one of consistency and honesty in political discourse. Americans are keen observers; they remember, and the irony is not lost on them. Let this serve as a reminder that genuine advocacy should not be swayed by the ebb and flow of political convenience.
