This is because they don't believe fairness and equality are possible.

Their goal is to solidify their power and maintain a hierarchy with themselves on top.

With the cynicism of those who don't believe goodness exists, they think all people are interested only in power.
Cynicism has been on my mind lately because (1) it's a hallmark of fascism, (2) it's a characteristic of those with authoritarian personalities, and (3) I've seen it lately on left-leaning Twitter.

How?
Like this: "Nothing will happen to X because the system sucks and is unfair and rich people never face consequences."

There are people who have dedicated their lives to reforming the criminal justice system.

The system is better than it was 30 years ago. . .
. . .and a heck of a lot better than 100 years ago.

If enough people put in the effort, it can improve more.

Will it ever be perfect? No, because democratic institutions are run by human beings and there are too many forces working against people who striving for fairness.
I did not realize until it happened that I was about to have a rant 🤣

I have another bone to pick. This kind of statement: If X doesn't happen it means rule of law is meaningless and doesn't exist.

Rule of law will never be perfect . . .
Rule of law is a system of government that relies on law as the source of authority (instead of the whim of a king or the rule of oligarchs).

As long as law is the source of authority, there is rule of law.

If rule of law is not applied perfectly . . . .
. . . it doesn't mean rule of law doesn't exist, it means that it is not applied perfectly because perfection is an ideal we strive toward.
I'll take a screenshot so I don't pick on anyone (I love you all, even if I pick on you)

If you think the last 4 years were bad, let me tell you about the 1930s when police routinely beat confessions out of innocent Black men.

How about the 1950s. . .
. . . when you could, under the law, be denied a public education because of the color of your skin?

How about the 1960s when a woman could be fired for getting pregnant?

I'm not saying the last 4 years were a picnic.

They were hell.

I'm saying that for the past . . .
. . . 40 years, I think fair-minded and people have been lulled into a kind of complacency.

I just recorded under-6 minute videos on this subject today.

I totally understand.

This is why history is so important. It teaches us what is possible and offers a perspective.

Also, I know I seem old, but I wasn't around during the 1930s either 🤣

Also, don't be cynical.
Just don't. Hold on to ideals.
I once spent an entire flight trying to persuade a young man (a liberal) that the entire system doesn't suck.

Our institutions (an independent judiciary, prosecutorial independence) will never work perfectly, but they're better than any alternatives.
One goal of Russian active measures was to undermine confidence in American institutions because when enough people lose confidence in them, they fail.

That's why our heroes tell us things like this ⤵️

• • •

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

22 Feb
I put up another video in the series I'm calling "How we got here and How we Get Out"

Why the heck am I doing this? 🤷‍♀️

I feel a need (and a value) to going back over what I've written about (including in my books) and summing things up

1/
My natural inclination is to put it all in a book (but I have two books in press and a third in progress) ENOUGH BOOKS!

This is way easier than writing a book, anyway.

And it's allowing me to synthesize my thoughts and put it all together.

2/
They are supposed to be viewed in order, but as I said once, if you go out of order the GO IN ORDER police will not come knocking on your door (so don't worry).

3/
Read 5 tweets
17 Feb
This is what Yale Professor @TimothyDSnyder calls "governing by crisis and spectacle.

The purpose of a fascist government is to maintain order, which means keeping the ruling oligarchs rich and everyone else poor.

This raises a problem for fascist leaders . . .

1/
. . . how do they keep their constituents happy as they rob from them and keep them poor? (Things like give tax cuts to the rich and eliminate health care for all?)

They create a show. They do battle with enemies.

(Snyder quotes fascist philosopher Ivan Ilyin who explains)

2/
Made-up enemies are safest.

The next best are powerless enemies. That's why Trump picked homeless migrants as enemies.

That way the ruling oligarchs don't get hurt and their property doesn't get damaged.

It's also why Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.

3/
Read 9 tweets
16 Feb
(Thread) New Lawsuit against Trump, Giuliani, the Proud Boys, and Oathkeepers

Subtitle: More legal troubles for Trump and pals

The complaint is here: naacp.org/wp-content/upl…

The @NAACP brought the lawsuit on behalf of Rep. @BennieGThompson

1/
He accuses Defendants of violating the KKK act, which outlaws (among other things) preventing an official from discharging duties. law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42…

Fittingly, the Act was passed after the Civil War when White supremacists violently interfered with lawful processes.

2/
Facts: When Trump, Proud Boys, and pals incited the insurrection, they hindered Thompson in the discharge of his official duties and deprived him of his right to be free from intimidation and threats in the discharge of his duties.

3/
Read 6 tweets
16 Feb
I agree with @WalshFreedom.

What looks like a "Civil War" is moderates, conservatives, and proponents of rule of law leaving or being pushed out.

The Republican Party is shrinking and hardening into a far-right, white nationalist, reactionary Trump-style party.
Both, sort of.
First: They will go full-on fascist.

Second: They are vastly outnumbered, so if the remaining Americans come together, their power (and the threat they pose) can be contained.

However, they'll remain dangerous . . .
Fascist parties usually represent about 1/3 of the population. Hitler came to power with about 1/3 of the vote.

Not coincidentally, political psychologists tell us that about 1/3 of the population has an anti-democratic, authoritarian disposition.
Read 6 tweets
14 Feb
The idea that Trump got off on a technicality is not only false (he got off on a made-up technicality) it's also a slur on "technicalities" which are procedures put in place in the interests of fairness.

1/
If the police screw up, you go free.

If you are guilty, but the only evidence is that the police beat your confession out of you, you get off because we decided that making sure police don't beat confessions out of people is more important than jailing every guilty person.

2/
I understand "getting off on a technicality" means you're guilty but you get off for a reason other than your factual guilt.

Well, one job of a defense lawyer is to check to make sure procedures were followed. Did the police violate the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights?

3/
Read 6 tweets
11 Feb
Rep Neguse now debunks Trump's "First Amendment defense."

Trump's defense is based on
🔹misreading the law
🔹distorting the Constitution, and
🔹misconstruing the facts.

First: the "fact" Trump asserts is that he was an ordinary guy giving a politically unpopular speech.

1/
The First Amendment doesn't allow a president to incite an insurrection based on the lie that the election was rigged against him. (Duh, right?)

The Defense doesn't actually claim the president can do that.

They say Trump didn't do any of this.

2/
From Rep. Raskin: In addition to Trump's First Amendment defense having nothing to do with the facts, the First Amendment can't be a defense to impeachment.

First problem: He was a public official with lots of power.

3/
Read 8 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!