It is quite apparent that governments in local municipalities have in fact put themselves in quite the comedic conundrum.  Anywhere there’s a Democrat holding those official positions, they’ve allowed it, paid for it, and placed police to guard it.  It is in fact these Black Lives Matter street paintings that are popping up all over cities nationwide from small towns to large metropolises.  If we are to win the culture war, playing to their level can be effective in shedding light on hypocrisy, but it also takes a long haul marathon mentality that the Right just doesn’t seem to get, until now.

But First, the Context

A perfect example of the conundrum that the Right should use is New York City mayor Bill DeBlasio.  On July 9th, the mayor not only sanctioned the use of taxpayer money to paint a large street canvas that screams “Black Lives Matter” in street lane yellow paint, but he took part in the painting of it in front of Trump Tower.  Then allocated 27 police officers to defend the painting, from the same police department that they are pushing to defend.  This whole matter has afforded many in cities to follow suit and do the exact same thing.  On Juneteenth on Atlanta’s historic Beltline thoroughfare, a large Black Lives Matter painting is sprawled along the walkway.  In Washington D.C. the mayor Muriel Bowser inaugurated Black Lives Matter Plaza just blocks away from The White House.

These taxpayer funded, city official sanctioned, works of permitted “art” that are appearing on our roadways are now officially, based on the actions of these political figures, the new public forum.  Now, let that sink in.  Streets everywhere based on these actions are the new Twitter.  

Respond in Kind

So what is our response?  We could follow suit with what Bevelyn Beatty did and splosh black paint which is one way to do it.  It definitely sparks up the conversation when you have a black woman who is defacing a street painting of “Black Lives Matter”.  It is especially interesting to note that it is black men that cuss and denigrate her but that’s that’s not a conversation we want to have.  While Bevelyn Beatty’s method is provocative, some are regarding her methods to be amateur and clownish.  Others are praising her for her actions and defend her stating she’s destroying the BLM narrative.

But there is another response that is proving to stir the pot and open the doors for the Right to move in a way that is effective.  In Redwood City, CA which is a small town about 30 miles south of San Francisco, Dan Pease, a local grabbed a permit from city officials and painted a street mural of “Black Lives Matter.”  Two weeks later, Redwood completely removed the mural stating that it was going to be a traffic hazard.  That was Redwood’s official statement.  But what prompted the city to remove this woke message in the first place?  Well, as the Jokester of the Universe would have it, a Trump supporter is the cause for removal.  Now, upon reading that, the thinking is, “Well this redneck gun toting tobacco spitting racists guy must’ve done something crazy to roads making the city remove the mural!”  Now, if you thought that, you are part of the problem.  It wasn’t the stereotypical redneck you would think of.  The person who “stirred” up the city was a real estate attorney.  Maria Rutenberg simply saw what was done by the city with taxpayer money and approached the city and said in essence, “Since the city sanctioned this to be created, I would like a message painted on the same road as well which is MAGA 2020.”  The city immediately removed the BLM street art overnight!

Putting Them Back In Their Place

This has opened the door now for the Right to take advantage of.  It puts the Left in quite a predicament.  On one hand, you have city sanctioned and city protected street art that is paid for by taxpayers to have a political message sprawled on the roadways.  That is an expression obviously protected by the First Amendment.  But what happens when someone else with another message petitions the city to allow them to paint what they want using the city to do so.  The city by its own standards must allow it if it does not want to face litigation which will cause the city to lose pretty much on principle and show a glaring hypocrisy that the Left is known for having.  It’s a lose for the Left no matter how you spin it!  This is the kind of tactical long game we on the Right need to embody.  The Left has been using dirty tactics for the last few decades but now it is high time the Right learns to market better, message better, and use the very systems the Left set in place against them.  This is how you do it, but making the government let you use their streets as the Twitter, as the new public forum to post whatever message you want whether it’s “My cat is amazing!’ or the 14 words found in Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” or even less controversial, “All Lives Matter.”  If the city officials do not comply, then it will equally be necessary for the city to also remove any BLM mural on principle of equality alone lest these corrupt city officials do not want to be served.  It’s a hilarious conundrum and one that we on the Right need to milk to the point of abuse for all its worth!  Then we get to sit back and laugh because it stirred up the city to have a conversation about it as well as puts the city and its officials back where they belong, under the employ of its people.