“Private” is doing a lot of heavy lifting in this argument.

So perhaps let’s try to bear in mind that while we consider letters (etc.) sent to other people to be personal, by default they are not private.

The distinction between public and private life is not the right to dragoon others into confidentiality just because you’d prefer it.

If @mpark6288 wanted to release nearly every text message I’ve ever sent him, that is *his* right.

There’s no elder-sibling-younger-sibling confidentiality, or neighbor-neighbor confidentiality.

Once you have shared information with someone who is not obliged to keep your confidences, their rights include “tell people that shit”.

What is totalitarian is the idea that someone, particularly a government official, can force people into silence about conversations with him.

The choice of when to disclose personal correspondence is an intensely personal and ethical question.


• • •

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

Keep Current with Actually malicious, no actual malice

Actually malicious, no actual malice 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!


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 @apark2453

23 Feb
Why yes it *is* 60 pages. And it starts as it means to go on:

"We're not challenging the outcome of the presidential election, we're challenging the outcome of the election of the 117th Congress".

My dudes, it's the same election.

Cocaine is a hell of a drug.

1/ Image
I'm going to try to take this seriously-ish, so let's discuss "what it takes to prove a conspiracy" for a quick second. A conspiracy doesn't just mean "did some stuff I don't like" or "acted in ways which support the same outcome and the outcome is bad".

2/ this lawsuit does not depen...
Conspiracy requires an agreement (not the inference of an agreement) to commit an illegal act and at least one affirmative step towards doing it. Just keep those elements in your back pocket and we'll see how close Gondor gets.

Read 80 tweets
3 Feb
Oh goddamn the comments responding to this.

Let's rapid-fire some of these, but to begin with the most basic principle:

A sincerely held belief is protected the same as any other, there is no threshold of legitimacy for either the religion or the tenet.

Yes, it costs more money to abide by constitutional and statutory rights than to disregard them. The fact that the source of his belief comes from Wikipedia rather than the Dead Sea Scrolls is irrelevant.

The precedent that "the courts do not assess the legitimacy of a religious belief, just its sincerity" is long-standing.

People imprisoned by any government *should* take advantage of the right to religious accommodation.

Read 14 tweets
1 Feb
I'm not wont to defend Bernie. But come the fuck on.

"The crotchety old Jewish guy dressed for the cold because it was January in Washington D.C didn't seem excited enough" is not white privilege.

But let's look at how to construct a (very dumb) narrative.

First: deploy recognition of white supremacy not as a matter of real inquiry (analysis of what white supremacists advocate, align themselves with, or portray themselves as), but as akin to Potter Stewart on pornography: "we know it when we see it"

2/ Image
This, then, frames the discussion: if "we" see white supremacy, it is there. The only question left is why *others* can't "see".

Eliding, not subtly, the questions of "why do we think this teacher knows what white supremacy looks like" or "how good is her class's judgment?"

Read 8 tweets
1 Feb
The one wrinkle to this I'd add is that there's evidence for a third group (separate from "people who follow rules" and "people who don't") who will follow rules conditionally.

Specifically if they don't see that other people *aren't* and getting away with it.

These are called "contingent cooperators", and the fastest way to lose their cooperation (e.g. free-riding in a tax game) is for them to see other people refusing to cooperate.

And that seems to be a spectrum, with different thresholds for cooperation loss.

Most people feel like fools if they follow the rules and other people don't. Which is both a support for Lane's argument (don't make rules you won't/can't enforce) but also a support for rule-enforcement as a way to encourage cooperation.

Read 6 tweets
8 Dec 20
I *do* want to pick it apart!

And... Wow. This is art.

154 pages.

One entry on the table of contents: "Motion for leave... page 1".

Typically one can sue a group of defendants together whey they acted in concert. It'd be a weird kind of joinder rule to be allowed to file one lawsuit against three different defendants under three different theories of wrongdoing solely because "it's all election stuff".

Each of these is alleged at a different state. None are *true* of course, but even if true I'm not sure why Paxton thinks he can file one suit against all three on three different theories.

And the third is just silly.

Read 76 tweets
8 Dec 20

This is an interesting set of hot takes from the governor overseeing the highest positive testing rate of any state in the country.

I'm sure it won't come as a galloping shock that her "better" numbers are bullshit.

This is already untrue. Cases in the last seven days/100,000 in South Dakota is 98.6. Illinois is 75.6.

If we include data since January 21st, South Dakota's per capita rate is almost twice as high.

But I'm sure we'll stick with "last seven days" throughout, right?

Recent figures are probably the better measure, and Noem is correct to use them. Otherwise we're getting a lot of noise from the early going based on where the virus cropped up. At this point it's everywhere. So current numbers are more indicative of competence

Read 6 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!