Thread by @tamanosou

We need to talk about Trump, little d democracy, how we got here in the first place and how we got out. Again, this is going to piss a lot of people off. If you are one of those people, sit with yourself.

Little d democracy was introduced to me from a Madeline Albright book, but I don't the term originated with her. But it's a fragile thing. And it's a fragile thing she saw failing even before 2016.

The reason democracy is fragile is because it let's the powerless decide who will have power.

The powerless determine the powerful.

That's sociologically speaking, really weird. It's not something we really understand and it demands we ALL act with a sort of generosity of spirit that we're really not programmed to on a macro level.

In smaller groups determining a leader democratically is a bit easier because everyone knows them.

I can actually go back to Obama and to a degree HRC here because in both cases in 2008 and 2016 respectively the reason they were successful with the people is that they made personal connections.

Personal connections are really hard to establish when you're working on a national scale which means democratically electing a leader for an entire nation is HARD.

Note: I'm not talking about campaigning for a specific candidate, I'm talking about the entire process.

No candidate can leave a personal and positive impression on 330 million people or whatever we're up to. It's not a thing which can be done. And that's where danger to democracy can creep in.

Remember pizzagate? For those of you who don't it was a conspiracy based on an email Hillary or an aide sent asking about getting pizza. Conspiracy theorists decided that it was code for molesting children in the basement of a basementless pizza parlor.

Honestly, if that's what they came up for for the suggestion of pizza I kinda don't want to know what they would have made of her going for sushi or something. Had she felt like ice cream people would be calling her "Dr. Freeze."

But, we get these sort of absurd conspiracies because most voters will never personally meet their candidate and even fewer will meet the candidate in a context where they can tell that person their problems and hope for resolution on them.

Obama and HRC explicitly made themselves directly available to their potential constituents, but it was impossible for them to have detailed conversations with everyone. That's why you have local elected representatives.

There is nothing the President shouldn't try to solve and address but given that there's 330 million of us they might not know about or be able to solve specifically your problem. And it's perfectly okay to be a bit put out by that. But that's why you have a vote.

Now consider our country was formed on the PREMISE that 'all men are created equal.' But it was formed by imperfect men who didn't really know what they were doing although ... again .... read the Federalist Papers, ...

and even if the founders genuinely did envision a world where all people would have suffrage and an equal voice in politics, we are not there yet. White people, particularly white men are listened to more than anyone else, and have more power than anyone else.

Earlier today I noted that there were a lot of angry white men yelling at me. It's because I said something they don't like so, because I'm not a white man, they feel entitled to try to silence me. To the hegemonic group any dissonance or suggestion of equality is status threat.

Name for me one black woman besides Joy Reid who hosts news shows or opinion shows. Now, how many white men or women can you name? What was the male to female ratio? Now do it for printed media. See? That lack of diversity in media is *problematic.*

Hell, we can even do this for comedians with political commentary in their acts. The comedians are at least trying, but the lack of diversity is still pretty stunning. And it means that we are really only hearing what white men want to hear.

This becomes a positive feedback loop in media and politics. White men had and have power and so they endorse and support only other white men for power or media positions. Those white men in turn support only their mentors or other white men who support them ...

If a woman or person of color agrees with them then they're used as justification of the system and if they disagree, then they are quickly silenced, blacklisted, and ignored. Effectively all anyone ever hears is the opinion and preferences of the white man.

When women and PoC start breaking into media and politics the usual reaction is to relegate them to "special interest" groups and thereby ignore them or comment about how weird they are and how Americans as a general concept will never totally accept them.

And this is a huge problem because this implicitly ties the general concept of an American to white men. The idea behind all of this is that only white men are real Americans and only white men should have their votes counted.

Even people who would NEVER say they're for voter suppression have basically espoused this idea that power and the arbitration of power should only be handled by white men.

So for example there's these twin conspiracy theories that the DNC "purged" it's voter rolls before the NY primary and that three million people voted illegally in CA in the general.

Both of these are obviously false, but the reason they've had so much traction is that if they WERE true white men would have been both the victims and beneficiaries.

The DNC is has diverse and almost equal leadership. White men don't like this. So they attack the DNC.

And of course this also leads us to voter intimidation and suppression. It's actually illegal to try and influence someone's vote through threat or bribery.

And yet, I alone have received several threats just because white men fear I won't vote as they choose. Guys, there is a difference between a debate and harassment. You know what it is and you cross that line willfully and repeatedly.

But that's just me and literally every woman and PoC I know. Let's talk about suppression on a wider scale. Voter suppression ALWAYS targets PoCs and often goes for female PoCs.

There are some methods purportedly meant to alleviate voter suppression which would actually make it worse. For example people in service positions often still work on holidays.

And particularly on holidays they might get extra pay but they don't get to choose it, the hours are stricter, and if they have children there's not going to be any childcare.

So, while I appreciate the idea of declaring Election Day a national holiday, it wouldn't really help. Now that one's probably an innocent oversight. I get mad, but I get mad at literally everything.

But there are efforts touted as improvements that are cynical attempts to suppress minority turnout and vote. I don't think I need to tell you about voter ID laws and patrols.

Anyways, the macro reason this continues is that ultimately white people specifically but not exclusively white men are uncomfortable with the idea that power might be decided by the 'other.'

And now Trump. wheee. Ugh. Anyways ... *massive sigh* Trump's obviously awful standard disclaimer etc etc btw he's a likely pedophile. But white men across the board are okay with him.

Had they met him in person one would hope they might have defenestrated him, but as a concept for WM, he's just fine. Yes ... this has to do with white supremacy.

Trump was elected because WM didn't want to face the fact that a woman, any woman might be smarter than them. This shouldn't be surprising. Same thing happened for Obama.

But the thing that Obama didn't have to deal with that HRC did and the reason Trump's now in office is that Russia didn't just overtly attack our election. Russia capitalized off preexisting biases.

I've already cited a lot of conspiracy theories in this thread. And yeah they did proliferate because they were bias confirmation. That DID happen in 2008. *but they didn't stay afloat*

Normally what happens with conspiracies or at least what should happen is they appear, the people who want to believe it circulate them, someone goes, "this is false" and then they peter out.

In 2016 conspiracies would appear, people would circulate them, others would point out they were false and then they would be immediately repeated/retweeted.

2016 was all about volume whereas 2008 was about listening.

There was absolutely a ton of sexism and racism in 2008, but for the most part it was - for better or worse - ignored. In 2016 not only did we revel in it, but the most sexist and racist voices were the loudest.

To be entirely honest, I believe there is a better than average chance for Trump to be re-elected and it's specifically because for all our recognition of sexism and racism, no one's actually addressed it.

Again, HRC is only unpopular if you don't count the opinion of women and people of color. The DNC is only 'unjust' if you believe that women and PoCs shouldn't have a place in politics.

And yet, we repeat these myths. Guys .... DT did not win. And he did not win by a pretty sizeable margin. And in the states that ended up switching the ECs his margin of victory was less than or equal to the third party vote.

Now, I have a whole thing on my medium page where I get into why I think we need more female politicians and why I think only a woman can beat Trump. So go there for that.

But to defeat Trump besides nominating a woman a lot of you are going to have to sit with yourselves. Your vote makes you an arbiter of power. But you are one of millions.

This is simultaneously an honor and a serious responsibility. Democracy is fragile and always will be. You cannot just grudge vote. Grudge votes in 2016 were why DT was able to take power.

If you're white, particularly if you're a white man you have to accept that you are not entitled to control. And yeah, it is massively racist and sexist when y'all dismiss everyone but a white man because "no one else can win."

The last time the DNC won with a white man was in 2000 and the last time they were able to seat a white man was in 1996. There's a good possibility that the nominee is not going to be a white man.

So, white guys, are *you* going to "vote blue no matter who?" Because I see a lot of you still erroneously insisting that because the majority didn't do as it was told you were cheated.

The fate of democracy rests in the ability for white people in general and white men in particular to put aside their prejudice and for the first time in history vote for someone who does not look like them.

Yeah, so basically, we're completely f-ed.