The word is the Democratic members of the Congress were told that their response to Trump's address would be strong, determined, and dignified. Hey, I am all for strong and determined. That's how we will all get through this if we ever will, but "dignified" is where I turn around and say WTF? I mean there are different ways to be dignified, but I know what that word means in the American political parlance. IN this context apparently it means "no standing, no jeering, no clapping". Yeah, that will show'im. Maybe they can even color-coordinate while they're at it.
"Dignified" is the signature posture of the civil rights era, which was arguably effective back when we were a very different nation at least on people who had a sense of shame and cared about things like dignity of man (including women in the now quaint old use of the term "man"). That was 1960s. 60 f**king years ago! We are now dealing with a shameless, self-promoting clown of a president and his cult-like following that sees dignity as a sign of weakness. Why would you even worry about projecting dignity?
This is the worst legacy of the success of the civil rights movement in my mind. It fomented this notion that progress can be achieved, injustices can be stopped, simply by shaming the oppressors. I remember distinctly how utterly well-meaning liberals and lefties (Michael Moore, for one) would argue that instead of throwing rocks at IDF soldiers, all Palestinians really needed to do was to gather a peaceful protest and march down the streets of Jerusalem or Tel Aviv and how they would gain their rights before they knew it. An astonishingly naive point of view that makes no sense against the realities of the world and prescription for a kind of action that would crumble under raining bullets before any crowds can even assemble. (One upside of the demolition of Gaza is that these well-meaning people are finally disabused of that notion.) But that was the legacy of the civil rights movement, a formula that supposedly[*] worked really well in the '60s in the industrialized, wealthy, sedate US then it's gonna work anywhere anytime, and so it would certainly work in the US of the 2020s.
I'll be blunt. The Democratic Party will never ever be effective as a party in these early stages of fascism and be able to rise to the obvious challenges that the current circumstances throw at us as a nation as long as they don't chase away the spectre of the '60s civil rights movement and the dewy-eyed narratives formed around it. (BTW, there will be a time in the not too distant future where an act of civil disobedience will get you a whole lot more than an overnight stay at a local jail. So theere's that too.) Don't be fools and act like it's still the '60s, 60 years later. Do something real that has some impact and/or draws public's attention in a badass way. Fighting fascism is about being a badass and admittedly, not every political leader is cut out for that job. If you can;'t stomach it, it's ok. Just get out of the day and let someone who can take over. You have a few in your ranks, it's time for them to shine.
And a special word to Jeffries: Dude, I get that the octogenerians would not be able to break out of their civil rights movement habits, but c'mon. You're a young man (relatively speaking of course, otherwise, much love to my GenX brothers and sisters across a vague boundary). You should know better than to fall into this trap. The OGs of the civil rights movement were all about dignity as an act of defiance because they were not allowed to have dignity. In the 2020s, everyone has their dignity (other than MAGA of course) and being dignified is no longer an act of defiance. So if you're going to be a leader, recalibrate. If not, let someone else take charge.
------
[*] I've always thought there was something icky about the common narrative on how the civil rights movement succeeded in this country. It essentially ties the success of the movement to white magnanimity whether consciously or not: yeah, there were so many civilized, dignified, peaceful protests that white folks finally relented and said "ok, we never really intended to subjugate you in the first place; since that you asked nicely, ok, you can be free and equal now", which is really not how the world actually works. (Same thing about the Indian independence movement with Gandhi, btw, in the way that it makes the Indian independence an act of white/British magnanimity. Yuck.)