Share this page!

Robert Saunders Profile picture
Twitter logo
5 Dec, 5 tweets, 3 min read
This is a brilliant article by @rafaelbehr on why we may be looking in the wrong direction for the dangers to liberal democracy. In looking back to old & familiar dangers, we may miss the new forces that are eating at the foundations of our democracy.[1/5] prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/you-h…
As @rafaelbehr argues, what "really challenges the stability of democracy" is not a specific ideology, but a "digital infrastructure" that "facilitates polarisation, sorting people into irreconcilable tribes & spinning them off towards the most extreme iteration of any opinion".
What drives Trump, Johnson & co is not some highly disciplined, common purpose, akin to fascism, but the destruction of any possibility of a common purpose beyond self-gratification. Their lack of seriousness is not a lucky glitch, but intrinsic to the phenomenon they represent.
This is a great passage on the uses of history, too. History remind us that our world is contingent, not fixed; that things we take for granted can vanish into air. It helps us understand the conditions from which democracy emerged - and how those conditions can be eroded.
The full article is here, and well-worth reading. (Incidentally, @prospect_uk is on a roll at the moment, full of really fascinating writing). prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/you-h…

• • •

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

Keep Current with Robert Saunders

Robert Saunders 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 @redhistorian

Robert Saunders Profile picture
6 Dec
It doesn't speak well of our democracy that the most important question in British politics depends entirely on the decision of one man. If Johnson agrees a deal, it happens. If he doesn't, tough. MPs, ministers, the public are all just bystanders, waiting to hear what he decides
As @stephenkb explains in this thread, a trade deal does not need parliamentary approval. If a deal requires changes in domestic law, Parliament may have to vote on those changes - but even there the votes can (and will) be carefully limited.
Concentrating power in the hands of the PM isn't just undemocratic. As @DavidHenigUK points out, it has shut down any serious discussion about what a trade deal *should* do. We've abandoned policy debate for punditry, trying to guess what Johnson might do.
Read 4 tweets
Robert Saunders Profile picture
4 Dec
Was Brexit a product of "imperial nostalgia"? In a new article - currently on free access in the Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History - I argue that it was not. Here's a summary of what it does (and doesn't) argue. [THREAD] tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.10…
1. Britain's European debate has always been closely interwoven with the histories of empire. Membership raised hard questions about Britain's place in the world, its "natural" markets/allies, & its relations with its former colonies, all of which were soaked in the imperial past
2. Since 2016, it has become common to argue that "imperial nostalgia" drove the Leave vote. You'll find this argument in the British and international press and in a lot of academic commentary. But it obscures more than it reveals about the relationship between Brexit & Empire.
Read 16 tweets
Robert Saunders Profile picture
28 Nov
"The Brexiteers’ definition of sovereignty has always been the core of the problem. It is the greatest failure of the Remain campaign that they scarcely engaged in, let alone won, this battle". blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2020/11…
This was not a mistake made by Remainers in the 1975 referendum. Pro-Europeans made a compelling argument that, in a modern, globalised world, sovereignty could *only* be defended by pooling decision-making across national borders.
As Margaret Thatcher told voters in 1975, the idea that Britain could "regain complete national sovereignty" by withdrawing from the EEC was "an illusion". "Our lives would be increasingly influenced by the EEC, yet we would have no say in decisions which would vitally affect us"
Read 4 tweets
Robert Saunders Profile picture
20 Nov
Every healthy democracy in the world imposes checks & balances on the exercise of power. Those checks may be constitutional, legal, conventional or merely ethical, but they're crucial if democracy is not to become the tyranny of the largest faction. How are they faring in the UK?
2. Since taking power in 2019, the Johnson govt has:
- unlawfully suspended Parliament
- threatened to ignore legislation
- imposed its own chairs on Select Committees
- switched off the hybrid Parliament
- overseen a huge expansion in lawmaking by ministerial decree
[cont...]
3. cont...
- attacked "activist" judges & "do-gooder" lawyers
- tried to lift itself above international law
- sought to curtail judicial review
- torn up the Ministerial Code
- suspended procurement rules
-expelled 22 MPs for disloyalty & pledged a "hard rain" for civil servants
Read 7 tweets
Robert Saunders Profile picture
16 Nov
Important lecture by the Chair of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, warning of a fear "that those in public life no longer feel obliged to follow the so-called Nolan principles of selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty & leadership".[1/8]
2. The speech offers a stark warning of the direction of travel in British politics: "a democracy without ethical standards ... where those elected make decisions solely in the interests of their supporters or paymasters".
3. The outsourcing of public services to private companies poses a particular challenge to the Nolan Principles. Even before the pandemic, 1/3 of public expenditure went on services delivered privately. Post-Covid, that figure will now be much higher.
Read 4 tweets
Robert Saunders Profile picture
15 Nov
Britain's uncodified constitution seems more vulnerable to manipulation today than it was in the past. Why? The answer, I suggest, is about two ideas that were once central to British politics - one of which has gone Absent Without Leave. [THREAD]
2. The Victorians embraced two key ideas about the constitution. The first was that it should not be "fixed" or "rigid" but "flexible" & "organic". It should evolve with changes in society, constantly reworked -as Lord John Russell put it- like a sculptor with a favourite statue.
3. Political writers praised the "elastic adaptability" of the constitution & its "irresistible instinct" for "the constant development of its institutions". The history of the constitution, wrote Macaulay, was a tale of "constant change in the institutions of a great society".
Read 14 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

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

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @redhistorian has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @redhistorian!

Read all threads by @redhistorian