Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #TheFieldOfBlood
Most recents (2)
1/ A podcaster asked me what insight my last book #TheFieldOfBlood offers about politics now.
My answer:
* It shows how violence has been woven into even high politics for generations.
* It shows the power of emotion in moving political mountains, for better & worse.
My answer:
* It shows how violence has been woven into even high politics for generations.
* It shows the power of emotion in moving political mountains, for better & worse.
2/ * It shows what bullying can accomplish in politics: the power of threats in gaining submission
* It shows how people who fear defeat by demographics often grasp at violence to maintain power
*It shows how a nation can be torn in 2, how Americans learn to turn on each other
* It shows how people who fear defeat by demographics often grasp at violence to maintain power
*It shows how a nation can be torn in 2, how Americans learn to turn on each other
3/ * It shows what happens when one party / group plays by the rules & the other doesn't -- the imbalance of power.
* It shows how new technologies (the telegraph / social media) can dramatically change the workings of democracy, sometimes in dangerous ways.
* It shows how new technologies (the telegraph / social media) can dramatically change the workings of democracy, sometimes in dangerous ways.
1/ My research for #TheFieldOfBlood showed me something interesting about institutional dynamics.
In the antebellum Congress, one "team" blatantly broke rules, reveling in it & gaining power.
The other team upheld rules, scolding violators & insisting that rules be followed.
In the antebellum Congress, one "team" blatantly broke rules, reveling in it & gaining power.
The other team upheld rules, scolding violators & insisting that rules be followed.
2/ For the institutionally responsible, well-behaved team, following the rules was expected of them. It was part of their identity.
And when someone broke that rule of civility, they were roundly criticized for it -- by the routinely uncivil opposite "team."
And when someone broke that rule of civility, they were roundly criticized for it -- by the routinely uncivil opposite "team."
3/ This imbalance of institutional responsibility contributed to an imbalance of power
Bullies -- one team -- had more power.
Rule-followers -- the other team -- protested w/o punch.
Bullies -- one team -- had more power.
Rule-followers -- the other team -- protested w/o punch.
