Thread by @1JoshGreenberg

THREAD

DENIALISM—PART I: A CONSTRICTION OF THINKING

Even as we come ever closer to descending into an authoritarian abyss, our society continues to adjust the boundaries of normalcy, in a continuation of the generalized numbing that has taken place over the past four years.

1/

In this thread, I use a recent case from the news media to illustrate the constricted thinking that is at the heart of this denialism.

In a follow-up thread, I will concretely discuss how we must escape the denialist trap—and the moral urgency to do so.

2/

As an optimist, I typically aim to deliver a unifying and uplifting message that is grounded in the reality and urgency of what is at stake. It is not my business to tear down anyone.

However, the truth cannot be left unspoken. Because we must learn. And we must do better.

3/

This opinion piece is a prime example of the denialism we must overcome in our society—promulgated by our nation’s leading newspaper—if we are to save our freedom.

4/

nytimes.com/2020/08/18/opi…

Please take this from someone who researches governance and human rights and who has lived under an authoritarian regime.

5/

There are no second chances in this work, folks. Now 𝘪𝘴 the time for alarm, and it has been for a 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨 time.

I am sorry to put it so bluntly: the loss of your freedom may cost you and your children your lives.

6/

In attempting to assuage fears over the Postal Service’s handling of election mail, the author of the @nytimes op-ed asserts that the USPS remains capable of processing the mail surge and warns us not to “fall prey to the alarmists on both sides of this debate.”

7/

The fatal mistake: she conflates capability with execution.

There is little doubt that USPS has the requisite 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘺 to handle the ballot surge. But the fundamental question is about the 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴 to use that capacity appropriately.

8/

Feeding our society’s never-ending denialism, this conflation is dangerous and confusing, especially since readers look to the writer as an authority.

9/

The piece is plagued by contradiction as well. While the author tells us not to worry, she also fully acknowledges that it is unacceptable that election mail may “now be treated like regular nonprofit mail,” requiring three to 10 and possibly even up to 15 days for delivery.

10/

Yet, somehow, the author expects the reviews now being conducted by Congress and the Office of the Inspector General of the Postal Service to resolve the problem.

Based on what rational evidence, I wonder?

11/

How can we forget the big picture facts?

No one in the Federal Government—neither Democrats nor Republicans—has managed to stop Trump in nearly four years.

So why should we believe that anyone using the traditional institutional mechanisms will succeed in stopping him now?

12/

Moreover, why should we expect a postmaster general who is a Trump campaign megadonor with major conflicts of interest vis-à-vis USPS competitors to ever faithfully execute his duties?

13/

Let’s be clear: less than three months before the election, 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘺.

But Congress is on vacation, and all we get is a promise for a review and a bill that will never survive the Senate, let alone the White House.

14/

All in all, the op-ed author commits a first act of denialism in failing to accept the true existence of the problem at USPS, and she commits a second act of denialism in failing to acknowledge the inadequacy of the congressional response.

15/

A third denialist act is to analyze the USPS events in isolation, giving no attention to their connection with Trump’s broader authoritarian agenda.

As this third act is the most perilous, let’s now take a step back and forget about the specific minutiae of this op-ed.

16/

The deepest problem with the op-ed—and with much of denialism—is the obsession with minutiae itself, whether that minutiae is the operational intricacies of the USPS or the particulars of the use of force practices of unidentifiable paramilitary forces.

17/

Exactly as Trump wants it, the minutiae distracts from and obscures the deeper truth.

18/

With each successive assault, he wants us to create obscurity where there is none—to create grey area around a new boundary that keeps getting pushed, a boundary that only becomes further and further removed from any objective moral or democratic standards.

19/

An agenda of oppression masquerades as a narrative of normalcy that insidiously seeps into the mind of our society.

20/

For the sake of our own lives and for others, for the sake of the future of this country, we cannot afford to go for this bait.

Therefore, in my next thread, I will address how we must transform our thinking—urgently—to overcome the denialism.

21/END