Post AddsRvD5ISKIrHcHjM by Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
(DIR) More posts by Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
(DIR) Post #AddsRFLSwu4j17DNxo by Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
2024-01-08T00:12:12Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
I had an "ah ha" moment when thinking about the angry responses to yesterday's blog post.(This one, if you missed it.) https://terikanefield.com/section-3-and-the-spirit-of-liberty/First, I'll share a positive response. (Screenshot #1)(Screenshot #2 was typical of the angry responses.) About 5 years ago, I took the tact of responding to "there are never any consequences" by listing the consequences. I figured, you know, facts. For example, see #3 1/
(DIR) Post #AddsRJtI35VZ7B4SEy by Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
2024-01-08T00:15:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
People pushed back against my list with complaints that the consequences were not harsh enough and what about all the other horrible people? "Huh, Teri? What about them? Well?"For about 2 years, I updated my list of consequences, and when the usual chorus of "there are never any consequences" would show my list.I stopped when I realized it didn't matter how long the list was, the chorus of "there are never any consequences" would continue.2/
(DIR) Post #AddsRijDhfJ89BYGW0 by Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
2024-01-08T00:21:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Another tactic I tried was explaining that the criminal justice system cannot solve a political problem. I did things like cite the evidence about deterrence. When people insisted that putting them all in jail would solve the problem, I explined that (1) not everything bad is a crime (2) bad things also happen in prison (3) prison sentences have limits and people often come out more hardened.This only frustrated people more.3/
(DIR) Post #AddsRsGWFEI7j4CUAS by Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
2024-01-08T00:26:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
An irony was that people were adopting the conservative "tough on crime" rhetoric that led to a corporate prison system.I showed this chart:The chorus continued. Now I get it. (Me = 💡 ) At least I think I do.People look around and see bad guys who keep being bad.They see people who are anti-democratic.One person told me that people who are anti-democratic shouldn't be allowed to run for office.The opposition, the GOP, is anti-democratic.4/
(DIR) Post #AddsRtKSI52B1Z38wS by Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
2024-01-08T00:29:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Peter Thiel even said he no longer believes that "freedom and democracy are compatible.” (The Learned Hand quotation in my weekend blog post explains what he means.) https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education-libertarian/I now understand that people either don't understand democracy or simply don't have a stomach for it.They want the opposition to disappear.There is no opposition in a totalitarian government because the government doesn't allow it . . . 5/
(DIR) Post #AddsRvD5ISKIrHcHjM by Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
2024-01-08T00:32:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
A democratic society, by its very nature and under its terms, will contain people who are hostile to democracy.A democratic society cannot get rid of all opposition. There will always be anti-democratic elements.Here is the twist: When a democratic society attempts to rid itself of all opposition, it becomes totalitarian.Because to get rid of ALL opposition, you will have to catch a lot of people in the net.6/
(DIR) Post #AddsRwycjBwoL0rlT6 by Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
2024-01-08T00:34:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
The only way to have a democracy is to allow people to have anti-democratic views and opinions.That's the catch. People with anti-democratic views and opinions will try to win office and force their government on everyone else. That is what they will try to do. When I post my "to do" list and explain that democracy is slow grinding work and requires lots of civil engagement, people say snide things. (One person yesterday referred to it as my "cut and paste" list.)7/
(DIR) Post #AddsRytNbewQHKQbZY by Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
2024-01-08T00:37:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
I started to tell him about my hundreds of volunteer hours over the years, but some of my volunteer work is somewhere on my website.Instead I deleted his comment from my blog and marked him as a spammer 🤷♀️ (I have a totalitarian blog 😂 )Even a totalitarian regime can't get rid of all the opposition.Stalin tried valiantly. But you can't get everyone who opposes you and the ones left fight harder.I keep asking the same question: Do enough people have the stomach for democracy?8/
(DIR) Post #AddsS0oUSoDcEk9jEG by Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
2024-01-08T01:01:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Adding: I'm so sorry if it seemed like I was complaining about negative responses.I do that sometimes, I guess.This was more like a revelation: they keep thinking the opposition will disappear.It's either ignorance of how democracy works or authoritarian tendencies.I generally only block people who are aggressive when negative (probably because they're more likely to be coming from an authoritarian personality rather than ignorance of how rule of law works.)9/
(DIR) Post #Addt126zczzOOoVeym by pthenq1@mastodon.la
2024-01-08T17:04:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield No all the antidemocratic opposition should be accommodated in a democracy.Popper's paradox of tolerance is right and should be exercised.Besides, any political system should generate results. And always, all the time, all the regimens not delivering were replaced by others that did. It includes democratic regimens. We never must lower our guard.
(DIR) Post #Addvadwt8tw7nBtK8e by Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
2024-01-08T17:33:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@pthenq1 You are twisting my words, which is what people who deploy the silly Popper's Paradox always do."There will always be opposition in a democratic society" does not mean "all opposition must be tolerated."These two are not the same.I am going to do a thread for everyone.
(DIR) Post #Addx16WHdgkJt2d1g8 by Aviva_Gary@noc.social
2024-01-08T17:49:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield The comments are amazing but I would add: What if it is just general ignorance? People (Americans?) don't know the difference between economic systems, political systems and what is and is not authoritarian. It also doesn't help the social contract was always tilted to rich, old, white men. Consequently they *think* things will go the way it has always gone (esp if good for them) but they haven't a clue as to how any of it works.Or should work. This is deeply problematic
(DIR) Post #AdeHk0dANZCrjkXOXg by philip_cardella@historians.social
2024-01-08T01:13:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield I appreciate your thoughts. For me my concern isn't with people who are undemocratic or anti-democratic. For me, and this is the conversation about Substack, it's when we accept fascism and neofascism as an acceptable form of ideology.Fascism (and neofascism) replace political discourse with violence and threats of violence. At that point freedom of speech that is required in a liberal democracy becomes moot as terrorism, which fascism is by definition, is not protected speech.
(DIR) Post #AdeHk1UhAY1aPla8ye by va2lam@mastodon.nz
2024-01-08T03:27:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@philip_cardella @Teri_Kanefield at some point we get to the paradox of tolerance, right?
(DIR) Post #AdeHk29oheuyTIoz4a by Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
2024-01-08T03:30:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@va2lam @philip_cardella I truly despise the "paradox of tolerance" and I have never in my life heard it deployed in any way other than in support of intolerance.Adding: I don't believe the human race is capable of so much tolerance that the paradox would apply. Political psychologist tell us that 1/3 of the population has an anti-democratic personality. One mark of the anti-democratic personality is intolerance.
(DIR) Post #AdeHk2w1oPTyspNUDg by goodreedAJ@sfba.social
2024-01-08T05:28:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_Kanefield @va2lam @philip_cardella: Hmm. If the only situation in which the paradox applies is to tolerate intolerance, then it seems that the answer must be that the limit of tolerance is that level of acceptance. I recall discussions with my ex-husband and my mother many years ago where he complained that my mother and I were intolerant of intolerance. I never realized there was an articulated philosophical paradox associated with that though.
(DIR) Post #AdeHk3mUfLRxVXvNzs by holyramenempire@kolektiva.social
2024-01-08T17:20:50Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@goodreedAJ @Teri_Kanefield @va2lam @philip_cardella https://mastodon.social/@JuliusGoat/109486257121027249This thread helped clarify a lot of "paradox of tolerance" questions I had. I really VALUE people's heterodox and weird and iconoclast thoughts, and don't like the thought of suppressing anyone, so it was hard for me to draw a line. But the fact is that I just don't think what we're currently doing works, and considering tolerance as part of a social contract, rather than a blank check for bigotry, seems like it would work better."[W]hile you are debating, your opponent is merely *using* debate. The fact that you are engaging means they have already succeeded.Once you're willing to debate whether one group of people or another should be abused, then abusing and expelling people from society is something that is up for debate. It's on the table. It's listed on the exchange."
(DIR) Post #AderBwm1VW9vvmRX2u by JoeChip@mstdn.social
2024-01-08T15:08:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Teri_KanefieldThe question then becomes why does that 1/3 remain inactive for long stretches of time and emerge at specific points as a potent force? @va2lam @philip_cardella
(DIR) Post #AderByHxsFIsd8OYTI by JessTheUnstill@infosec.exchange
2024-01-08T18:02:03Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
Similar to how fire needs fuel, oxygen, and heat, anti-democratic populists need a particular set of ingredients to be a danger.They need fear and stress - economic, racial, nationalistic, etc.They need the ability to communicate, coordinate, and recruit - Individual and small groups aren't much of a threat, it's only when they can start communicating and working together, radicalizing other people who are under stress they become dangerous.They need A Leader. One of the things you learn about the ultra right is that they hate and fear one another about as much as they hate anyone else. Oftentimes this distrust keeps them from being able to coordinate and communicate, because nobody will agree who can be the one on top.@JoeChip @Teri_Kanefield @va2lam @philip_cardella