Is it ethical for Democrats to keep SNAP recipients in a protest without their consent? [View all]

]https://erichensal.substack.com/p/consent-for-protest?utm_source=democraticunderground&utm_medium=forum&utm_campaign=consent_for_protest&utm_content=discussion_post

How ethical is it to make children go without food for a political fight without any consent?

For every person talking about senators “caving” to Trump—you are not getting call after call about hungry children back home. If your voicemails were filled with people pleading for food, your attitude on “caving” would change if you could prevent that hunger. If a progressive screams about Schumer f’cking up without giving consent to protest serious thought, we must discuss ethics in political strategy—now.

It is immoral enough that shutdowns injure federal employees, putting them into difficult financial situations and creating unwarranted family stress. But within the civil service culture there has been for decades an understanding that shutdowns are always possible. These are never a surprise, giving workers time to plan and save to get through one. Then, at the end, federal employees will be paid. So, while powerless to prevent shutdowns and often forced to work without pay, it is, sadly, a hazard people knowingly accept when swearing their oath to the Constitution as civil servants. And we should thank them for their service.

For the rest of us, a shutdown presents a range of inconveniences we do not choose, from air travel reductions to closed national parks. However, Social Security checks go out and essential functions continue. But the trauma Trump inflicts on people receiving SNAP is different. Accepting SNAP benefits is not a political decision, but one made for survival. There is no history of SNAP being cut off during a shutdown. This is new ground to fight on, and people on SNAP did not sign up to fight in the first place.

**SNIP**