Teri Kanefield Profile picture
Sep 23, 2020 16 tweets 4 min read Read on X
There may be a few who don't get it, but most do.

In 2016, lots of Trump voters may not have understood what they are voting for—but not this time.

Consider the definition of "liberal democracy" and the meaning of the slogan "Make America Great Again."

1/
Except for a few pockets here and there, for most of U.S. history, until the 1950s and 1960s, Americans lived in a hierarchy.

Think of slavery, Jim Crow, and women's place in the home.

Until the modern civil rights movement, what we now call voter suppression was legal.

2/ Image
Think about what life was like in America in 1850 for a black woman.

People have the idea that the US has always been a liberal democracy . . . and then along came Trump, pulling the wool over his followers' eyes.

3/ Image
We didn't start to move toward a true liberal democracy until Brown v. Board, the SCOTUS case that declared racial desegregation illegal, the modern civil rights and women's rights movement, and accompanying legislation.

Trump is riding the backlash from those changes.

4/
Because Trump voters tend to be less educated, people have the idea that educating Trump voters will solve the problem.

How about a shockingly different idea: Re-educate those who favor liberal democracy so that they understand what it takes to keep democracy working.

5/
If you're like me, before Trump, you had an idea of American history that went something like this:

The founders had some good ideas, but they left too many people out of "we the people." We started out with 'we the people' limited to white, mostly land-owning men.

6/
We imagined the arc of history looks like this as more people came to be included:

The problem is that people started thinking all the hard work was done, we are a liberal democracy. We're in a boat and we don't even have to paddle.

7/ Image
The idea was that the boat is drifting toward an ever-expanding and increasingly diverse future.

People born after the modern Civil Rights movement inherited an expanding liberal democracy,

Sometimes people who inherit something feel entitled to their inheritance.

8/
They don't think they have to work for it. They believe the future is set.

Then, to use @TimothyDSnyder's phrase, "Trump broke the story."

People were shocked. Shock is 'pre-helpless.'

If you think "this wasn't supposed to ever happen!" you are taken by surprise.

9/
You don't know what to do. You think nothing can be done.

Education needs to change so that people understand that forces trying to destroy democracy will always be present in a democracy.

Not everyone wants democracy. Democracy is grinding work requiring compromise.

10/
Some people prefer a hierarchy. They think nature naturally forms a hierarchy. They don't think democracy is possible or desirable because they think it robs the people who are naturally at the top of the hierarchy and gives to the unworthy.

11/
They prefer a strongman who can get things done. Checks and balances naturally slow things down. Change doesn't happen quickly.

We need to educate the people who want liberal democracy so they understand that Trumps will happen in a democracy.

12/
That way they don't dissolve into shocked panic when a would-be autocrat gets more than 40% of the population behind him.

They'll understand what needs to be done.

They'll understand the best way to reach people who think they're better off in a hierarchy.

13/
Shaming people who find the strongman appealing is not the way to show them that democracy would better serve their interests.

We need to re-educate people who want liberal democracy so that they understand how to respond to a Trump.

14/
When people reel with shock, they take the bait, allow Trump to spin them in circles, and inadvertently amplify his lies and his message.

It's natural. Americans who want democracy were simply not prepared for a Trump.

15/
I've noticed this too, which why I wrote yesterday's thread about the Strongman Con.

Believing the con amplifies and gives credence to the lies, which then creates a reality based on the lie, which helps bring about the very outcome you don't want.



16/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Teri Kanefield

Teri Kanefield Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Teri_Kanefield

Mar 11
Finished. (Whew)

As promised, all about Legal pundits and the Outrage Industry, with a few cherished conspiracy theories carefully debunked.

Click here to start:

For years, I was perplexed by what I saw on Twitter. . .

1/ terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Image
It seemed to me that the dynamics of social media were making people more authoritarian.

Then I started reading experts in political communication and it all started making sense.


2/ terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Image
I wrote parts 1 - 5 in November. I thought I was finished, but I wasn't.

There were still things I didn't understand.

Writers often write to understand, so I kept reading, thinking, and writing.



3/ terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Image
Read 5 tweets
Mar 9
Whew! I finished.



Everything I promised: How to listen (or not listen) to legal pundits.

It's also about what is dangerous about the entire industry of punditry, speculation, and cable talk shows.

1/terikanefield.com/invented-narra…

For years I was perplexed by what I was seeing on left-leaning Twitter, political blogs, and partisan reporting.

I had the feeling that, in its way, what I was seeing was comparable to Fox: Lots of bad information and even unhinged conspiracy theories.
2terikanefield.com/invented-narra…
Of course, if I suggested that, I was blasted for "both-sidesing."

Then I discovered an area of scholarship: Communications and the overlap between communications and political science.

I read these books and light bulbs went on.

3/ Image
Read 11 tweets
Mar 2
If Trump can win with everything we know about him, what make people think a finding of guilt would change that?

It makes no sense.
Also what if the jury acquits? It can happen.

I do recall the same people thought impeachment and indictment would cause Trump to crumble.
Another contradiction: when people demanded indictments RIGHT NOW (in 2021 and early 2022) the reason was, "Everyone knows he's guilty! Look at all the evidence!"

We saw the J6 committee findings.

Trump isn't saying "I didn't do it." He's saying, "I had the right to do it."

2
We all know what he did. The question is, "Do people want a president who acts like Trump?"

A lot of people do.

People show me polls that a guilty finding would change minds.

I say rubbish. Use common sense. He lost in 2020 and he lost the popular vote in 2016. . .

3/
Read 6 tweets
Feb 29
The news takes 2 minutes to convey.

"Here is what the court did." That is news.

Listening to people speculate about why the court did it and what it means is not news.

It is entertainment.

But it is a special kind of entertainment.

1/
. . . because it is designed to keep people hooked. People need to stay glued to the screen for hour after hour.

But to hook people, you need to scare them. The Facebook whistleblower testified that content that produces strong emotions like anger gets more engagement.

2/
Fox does the same thing. There is a few minutes of news, but the facts get lost as commentators and TV personalities speculate and scare their audiences.

Before you yell at me for comparing MSNBC to FOX, read all of this:

3/terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Read 5 tweets
Feb 29
If I write another blog post addressing the outrage cycle here on Twitter and in the MSNBC ecosystem, it will be to explore why so many people who believe they are liberal or progressive actually want a police state.

1/
Today alone, a handful of people who consider themselves liberal or progressive told me that the "traitors need to be arrested and prosecuted."

In 2019, back when I wore myself out tamping down misinformation, I explained the legal meaning of treason.

2/
Back then, I now realize, people asked politely: "Can Trump be prosecuted for treason (over the Russia election stuff).

I explained that wouldn't happen.

Now it's different. It's more like fascist chants.

3/
Read 4 tweets
Feb 29
I spent 5 years writing FAQ pages and "talking people off the ledge" each time there was a collective meltdown.

I stopped doing that because it is never-ending.

I keep saying the same things over and over.

1/
In 2021, when people were demanding indictments, I said, "Indictments are the start of a long harrowing process."

I explained that trials are harrowing.

Judges make bad decisions.

Juries don't always get it right. A person can be guilty but be acquitted.

2/
I told people to stop thinking that the criminal justice system will solve a political problem.

Eventually, I came to believe that the 10% of people who are "highly engaged" with politics are the least informed.

They will always be in a misinformation-outrage cycle.

3/
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(