The Name Game: Democrats Keep Asking for Names . . . and Getting Them

In a recent debate with a Harvard Law Professor, I was surprised when my counterpart insisted with (other dubious factual claims) that no one has celebrated the death of Charlie Kirk. He knew that the challenge for me to name one was unlikely to be answered in a debate on a different topic, even though many have celebrated and mocked the assassination on the left. The tactic is part of a type of name game being played on many cable shows. That was again evident this week when Harry Sisson, a liberal commentator, challenged a panel to name one person who analogized Trump to Hitler. It was also on display when Rep. Dan Goldman (D., N.Y.) challenged anyone to name a single Antifa member. The name game is popular because it is rarely challenged on the spot, though that was not the case with Sisson.

Most people had little knowledge of Sisson’s work as a social media influencer until he was featured in the video circulated by the White House showing President Trump dumping human excrement on his head (as well as others marching in the “No Kings” rally). For the record, I thought that the video was juvenile, distasteful, and remarkably unfunny.

The video propelled Sisson into greater public visibility and he appeared on “Piers Morgan Uncensored” and challenged the panel to name one high-level Democrat who’s compared Trump to Hitler. The response was crushing. When rebutted by the other guests, Sisson then demanded an actual date which is consistent with the tactic. After all, if anyone is fast enough to give a name, they would surely be unable to provide a date. Then someone did.

Obviously, this has been a mantra on the left with many Democratic politicians making the analogy. Jen Rubin was one of the first out of the gate after the election with a column titled “Hitler is in power.”

In the case of Goldman, many of us rattled off people criminally charged who proclaimed their membership in Antifa. The Administration then named two more in a major criminal indictment for terrorism.

The whole appeal of the name game is that you make the claim in a forum where no one is likely to respond. It then leaves naive viewers with the impression that it is manifestly true. The saddest aspect of an age of rage is the level of self-delusion that occurs. Many people want to be told that they can ignore troubling facts, leaving narratives unchallenged in their echo-chambered news and social media circles. Figures like Rep. Goldman are the denial agents that many need to avoid addressing their own disinformation or rage rhetoric. They are the Nathan Thurms of American politics:

The point of this game is not that it will convince most people, but will allow many to avoid serious reflection over their own actions or rhetoric. In American politics, there is no Walter White demanding that you “say my name.”

That is the key to the game. No one listening in your echo chamber wants to say the name. The problem is when you invite others to play outside of that silo. Then you end up like Sisson with a virtual Boston telephone book of rebuttals and not a single friend to call.