I've been meaning to rework and update the Hardball / Anti-Hardball thread.
I'll attach it to the next tweet.
In their book, How Democracies Die, Harvard profs Levitsky and Ziblatt talk about how Republicans have resorted to hardball tactics.
I'll attach it to the next tweet.
In their book, How Democracies Die, Harvard profs Levitsky and Ziblatt talk about how Republicans have resorted to hardball tactics.
In the lecture that I discuss in this thread⤵️ Prof. Levitsky explains in more detail why it would be a terrible idea for Democrats to fight like Republicans.
If you have time, listen to his lecture.
Georgetown Law Prof. David Pozen. . .
If you have time, listen to his lecture.
Georgetown Law Prof. David Pozen. . .
. . . coined the phrase Anti-Hardball Tactics, for those who wants to resist the totalitarian-style power grabs of a minority regime fighting desperately for its life without further stressing the democratic institutions.
Here's his paper: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
Here's his paper: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
Yes, I can attach my thread on the history of the GOP for people who missed it.
Levitsky's idea, in a nutshell, is this: We are experiencing a political earthquake as America transitions from white-male minority rule to a true liberal democracy . . .
Levitsky's idea, in a nutshell, is this: We are experiencing a political earthquake as America transitions from white-male minority rule to a true liberal democracy . . .
. . . ethnic majorities rarely give up their dominant status without a fight.
In an earthquake, you hold steady, and quickly move to reinforce the battered institutions.
Fighting fire with fire, or playing hardball back, further stress the institutions.
Because . . .
In an earthquake, you hold steady, and quickly move to reinforce the battered institutions.
Fighting fire with fire, or playing hardball back, further stress the institutions.
Because . . .
. . . the future belongs to the Democratic coalition (the Republican demographics are shrinking), so it is in the best interests of Democrats and those who want liberal democracy to triumph* to avoid further stressing the institutions.
(Notice I said "triumph," not "survive")
(Notice I said "triumph," not "survive")
I said "triumph" because we've never really had a true liberal democracy. Imagine being black in 1850. Or a woman. Or both.
"Equality for all" didn't really get started until 1954, and we're still riding the backlash.
We're in a transition.
Those are always hard.
"Equality for all" didn't really get started until 1954, and we're still riding the backlash.
We're in a transition.
Those are always hard.
