In their response to the now-overridden veto of a resolution condemning Jeff Landry, the LSU College Democrats managed to lose their important message in a jumbled mass of dirty politics.
This is a deeply disappointing mistake.
Before that, though, it must be clarified that this has nothing to do with the quality of the resolution or the reasoning behind the veto. In fact, the authors of the resolution were right to introduce it, and the Student Senate was right to pass it and override the veto. Even the College Democrats were right to be upset by that veto.
The problem lies with the actual content of and likely motivation behind the College Democrats’ statement.
Landry’s absence from the Debate LSU forum is one of the many reasons why his candidacy is so obviously dangerous for the state. He has and will continue to ignore vast swaths of Louisiana’s population. It’s imperative to oppose him, but that opposition should not come at the cost of stooping so low.
2023 has been an incredibly difficult year for Louisiana Democrats. Legislators have become Republicans. The state party and governor endorsed a challenger to one of their own incumbent representatives. The official X (Twitter) account quite literally liked a post about the party being secretly run by the GOP.
This dismal leadership combined with the infighting it has caused makes it clear that today’s Louisiana Democratic Party can’t effectively oppose Landry and his ilk.
But the College Democrats’ statement doesn’t instill much confidence in the future generation, either.
The offending passages within their statement claim that the student body president may “not feel a responsibility to [her electorate],” called her veto a “partisan defense” and alleged that she was “weaponizing her office against the Student Body.”
These are all purposefully provocative statements rooted largely in assumptions and exaggerations, but the particulars of the statement are ultimately not what’s so concerning about how the College Democrats handled the situation. That dishonor belongs to the particular brand of politics that their language seemingly reveals.
This is the all too common practice of politics as a show.
It’s the kind of politics practiced by those kids in high school youth and government who give speeches filled with hyperbole, straw men and various other rhetorical ploys intended to trick everyone into thinking they’re knowledgeable and committed when, in reality, they’re just in it for the attention.
They feed off of both the positive and the negative responses.
Some examples of politicians who treat their profession as a show include prominent Republicans like Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri and J. D. Vance of Ohio, Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Lauren Boebert of Colorado and former President Donald Trump.
For all these folks, politics is not about affecting change in government. No, it is just plain fun. And not because of what they can accomplish through debate, activism and lawmaking. It is fun in a vacuum; they enjoy the fight for its own sake.
Of course, the College Democrats are not equal to those fascistic MAGA conservatives. Rather, there appears to be a similar motivation behind their confrontational politics. There is no heartfelt outrage or justifiable frustration in their show, just the pure dopamine rush from adoration or derision.
The showman mentality can and often does accompany a genuine desire for change. Additionally, the statement may have been written from a more selfless place than its content implies. But it’s crucial that our future leaders exhibit positive intentions and behaviors.
The College Democrats should be better than this. And they can be. Indeed, they must be if the extremism of the right is going to be effectively countered.
If the next generation embraces its better angles, then the Louisiana Democratic Party of tomorrow might hope to win.
Matthew Pellittieri is a 19-year-old history and political science sophomore from Ponchatoula.
