The fundamental irony of this tweet is that cable news only exists *because* it was given an exemption in the late-70s from FCC rules like the Fairness Doctrine.
Beyond that, the problem with Yang's proposal of a revived Fairness Doctrine is that when it was enforced not only did it fail to achieve the outcomes that he desires, it actually led to the opposite. It is more accurately titled the "Unfairness Doctrine."
What grounds do I have to say that? Simple. I wrote the book on it.
Here's a ~100,000 words on how the Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon administrations weaponized the Fairness Doctrine to suppress political dissent.
It was the most successful episode of government censorship of the past half century and it's been almost completely forgotten (or, more accurately, covered up). Resurrecting the rules now would have a similar chilling effect on both left and right-wing speech.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Based on the latest info I could find, here's why what happened on Jan. 6th was worse than we thought.
It was coordinated. This was not merely a crowd of protestors accidentally incited to storm the Capitol by the intemperance of the President & other speakers at the rally.
Security experts are combing through the online chatter leading up to the rally and have found extremist groups planning violence. People came w/ malice aforethought, thus armored insurrectionists pushing to the front of the crowd, pipe bombs, & so on.
But it gets worse. The feds seem to be investigating several Republican members of Congress for connections to the organizers of the rally. (The FBI has warned lawmakers in closed door hearings that they may be shocked with what comes out.)
This is a great question from @HeerJeet and it has very old roots. In my book, I discuss a similar period of anxiety in the 1960s about the possibility of Air Force officers being involved in a coup. Thread.
Given the size of the US military in WW2, afterwards there was a spike in concern that some of these demilitarized veterans would be amenable to radicalization and supportive of insurrection. These fears heightened after the coups in France/Algiers in 1958 and 1961.
This was the peak era of the Cold War, so anti-communist anxiety was layered over top. The Right feared that communist infiltrators in the government would subvert the Republic. The Left feared that anti-communist military officers would launch a preemptive, paranoid coup.
On Wednesday mid-afternoon, I found myself simultaneously alarmed and mildly amused by the events on the Capitol. The first photos that came out were of quixotic, not particularly threatening folks like the QAnon Shaman.
It certainly was a bad sign for the state of our politics, but it fit with the "what if Watergate but stupid" view of the Trump regime. It didn't seem particularly sinister, in other words.
But then more photos started coming out, photos that were not amusing in any way. I felt the turn viscerally as my stomach dropped. Maybe for you it was the barricaded Senate chambers. For me it was this photo:
I'm going to walk you through several common responses from Republicans to the insurrection yesterday and show why they are incorrect.
- "It wasn't Trump supporters. It was Antifa."
Claims of false flag operations are always tempting because it redirects blame. We all prefer it when *our* side is straightforwardly good and the *other* side does all the bad stuff. It's very natural to want this to be true.
The problem is that it is only rarely correct. Usually, when someone wears MAGA clothing, shouts about their support for Trump, and does so in the company of thousands of other people doing so, they are what they appear.
Trump knows he's going to have to leave office in two weeks. He knew that Pence didn't have the power to reject state electors. So why then would he spread misinformation, undermine our democracy, and incite today's violence?
Because it works whether or not it changes the result. It's a pattern he's followed Trump throughout his term.
He identifies a wedge issue, fans the smoldering embers of that controversy into open flame, and then enjoys the adulation, attention, and donations from the slice of America who falls for the trick. The only way he knows how to lead is via division.
10 former defense secretaries felt the need to assert the military's neutrality in partisan politics. That's disconcerting, sure, but when the coup comes someday, it's not the military you need to worry about the most. Thread.
Remember, there are 132,000 armed federal agents, most of whom are based around Washington, DC. That's over a quarter of the size of the actual, active-duty US Army, and many of them are military veterans with access to military-grade firepower.
After all, when Trump needed a paramilitary force to do what the military was reluctant to do--clear peaceful protestors out of Lafayette Park for a photo op--he turned to a mix of forces from the Bureau of Prisons, Park Police, Secret Service, and so on.