Several people recently have used the phrase "broken system."

I'm curious about the thinking behind this term. It seems to me as flawed as MAGA.

Broken implies that it was once functional and working, now then it broke.

Two questions . . .
(1) Was it ever not broken?
(2) If so, when did it break?
In 1870, women couldn't vote.

In many states, they couldn't own property.

It was perfectly legal to have all-white juries, and they often were all white.

There were no worker protections or consumer protections.

How about some nuance.

🔹The system gradually improved over the past 240 years.
🔹There is still much to be improved.
🔹There are good judges and bad judges.
🔹Juries generally try to do what's right.
🔹We have democratic processes in place for changing laws.
Nihilism . . .
. . .is destructive.

Change is brought about by people with ideals.

Cynics and nihilists do not bring positive change.
They discourage people and hamper change.

My view: Don't be a nihilist or cynic. It's ugly and destructive.
People are still assuring me that a single bad apple, a single bad jury, a single injustice means the entire system "sucks" and is "broken."

One bad judge and the whole system sucks.

They're telling me it has always been broken. It was born flawed.

Y'all see the problem?
One person told me she was on a jury once, she didn't like the outcome, therefore it all sucks and she'll never serve again.

Democratic institutions are run by human beings. We can never have perfection.

All we can do is strive to improve them.
Perfection is an ideal that we can never reach.

All we can do, as individuals, is try to leave the world a little better than we found it. Each generation must try to make improvements.

Purity tests don't work in a democracy, which requires give and take.
"The outcome wasn't what I wanted, therefore it all sucks, therefore, I'm just going to complain and spread doomsday nihilism" also destroys democracy.

My son is in an AP Government class.

The textbook opens by saying democracy requires citizen involvement.
Corrupt has two meanings. (1) to use power dishonestly for personal gain and (2) impurity.

Remember when Trump promised to 'drain the swamp' and said the entire government was corrupt?

He meant definition (2). The government contained impure elements.
Purity tests in a democracy don't work. Democracy requires compromise and give and take. It's hard work.

Putin said democracy is "messy."

People who want or demand purity and perfection will never be happy in a democracy.

People have different responses to imperfection.
Many lawyers who become public defenders do so because they see injustice and want to make the system better by making sure that indigents have good representation.

They see imperfection and say, "What can I do, even its small, to help?"
I said in my first video that liberals see history as an upward slope. youtube.com/channel/UCTPM0…

In my second video, I said reactionaries see history as a downward slope.

Until now I haven't thought about the nihilists. They see a straight line.
People are imperfect. Systems are imperfect. They've always been imperfect. They will always be imperfect.

The nihilist, therefore, sees no point.

The nihilist doesn't try to bring about improvements because what's the point?

There will always be a bad apple.
When people used to tell me "the criminal justice system sucks," the only thing I could think to say (as someone who dedicated 12+ years to representing indigents on appeal) was, "What have you done to improve the system."

I suspected nothing.
It's sort of privileged, right?

It's the expectation that other people should have already done the work, mixed with hopelessness because a system run by mortals will never achieve perfection.

I lost a train of thought back there about corruption.

When fascists apply purity tests, they mean 'others.' Brown people. Jews. Whoever the "others" are.

Purity tests as applied by nihilist says, "a single bad apple ruins the entire system."

In fact . . .
. . . a single bad apple is a problem to solve or to work around.

Right now the danger to democracy is happening at the state level in state legislatures as Republicans are trying to jam through bad voter laws.

Everyone should be involved in their local politics right now.
Maybe I should make this into a video. How about this title:

"Lots of people hate democracy. Are you one of them?"

(Subtitle: How Teri can publish a video and make people hate HER)
One more thought: as long as I'm ranting.

The system:
🔹An independent judiciary
🔹Independent prosecutors
🔹A jury of your peers
🔹The right to counsel
🔹Lots of bad apples

You'd miss the "system" if it were to disappear because there is only one alternative, and it's worse.

• • •

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

27 Feb
If you have multiple parties in a constitutional democracy with a president, the president can come to power with 33% of the vote— or less if the vote is split multiple ways.

Do you really want that?

A majority requires a big tent, which means compromising.
The drafters of our Constitution deliberately avoided a parliamentary system.
If one party jumps on the crazy train, that's when you need all other people to come together to outnumber the crazy party.

10 parties mean each person gets to find the party that fully embraces that person's views (Purity!)

But then the crazy party seizes power.
Read 6 tweets
27 Feb
All we are seeing so far are pretrial motions for release pending a trial. A judge decides (no jury).

The judge isn't considering a defense to the actual crime or deciding whether a person is guilty.

There are particular factors a judge considers. . .

1/
Incarcerating someone after arrest but before a trial is somewhat problematic because of that whole innocent-until-proven-guilty thing.

If a person is nonviolent and not a flight risk, the person shouldn't be imprisoned without a trial.

2/

justice.gov/archives/jm/cr…
One consideration is the probability that the defendant will be convicted and face jail time because otherwise, you run the risk of ruining an innocent person's life.

(A jailed person probably loses his or her job. What if there are kids to support, etc.)

3/
Read 4 tweets
26 Feb
I remember when Roger Stone was greeted with a standing ovation after Mueller indicted him.

We shouldn't be surprised that the Republican Party will cheer Trump, despite the role he played in the insurrection.

1/

thehill.com/blogs/blog-bri…
The goal of the GOP is to dismantle the federal government and return to that time (before 1920; for others, before 1860) when white men could basically do what they wanted.

On the frontier, they could grab land!
Before modern rape laws, they could grab women!

2/
Before the alphabet-soup regulatory agencies (the "deep state") they could cheat!
🔹They could fix prices and manipulate markets!
🔹They could sell rotten goods and it was the buyer's fault for not inspecting better!
🔹They could pollute rivers!

🎶Those were the days🎶

3/ Image
Read 4 tweets
26 Feb
Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963, held that all defendants in criminal matters are entitled to a court-appointed lawyer if they cannot afford one.

Do you want to go back to the days when poor people went from accusation to prison on a conveyor belt, but the rich had good lawyers?
Mr. Gideon was a poor man accused of theft. He represented himself because he couldn't afford a lawyer. He was convicted. He appealed to the Supreme Court on a handwritten letter from prison. The Court heard his case and held that poor people get court-appointed lawyers . . .
. . . he had a new trial with a local lawyer who understood how the false accusation happened. The lawyer did some investigating, presented facts that Gideon has been unable to obtain, and Gideon was acquitted.
Read 6 tweets
25 Feb
(Thread) Lies, Liars, and the Capitol Riot

This is #7 in my video series:

If you’re like me and you prefer to read, here it is on a Twitter thread.

Lying and presenting myths as a way to solidify power goes all the way back to the ancient world.

1/
Take the Behistun Inscription.

In huge lettering on the side of a cliff, King Darius, who was born in 522 BCE, presented the story of his life. mcadams.posc.mu.edu/txt/ah/Persia/…

If you believe him, power was given to him by the gods and he never suffered a single defeat.

2/
Moreover, he single-handedly killed anyone who dared question his authority. Scholars call this a pseudo-autobiography.

Donald Trump came to power with a pseudo-biography, which went like this: “I am a successful businessman.”

3/
Read 28 tweets
24 Feb
A little history.

Our current criminal justice system took form after the Civil War, when the reactionaries and White Supremacists found a way around the Thirteenth Amendment, which prohibited slavery except in the case of punishment for crimes after conviction.
1/
The solution: Convict lots of Black men, put them in jail, and put them in chain gangs. At the time, there were no limits on what police could do.

So they often beat confessions out of innocent Black men.

Along came Charles Hamilton and his protégé Thurgood Marshall.

2/
As a result of literally decades of work (and one of the few times we had a liberal Supreme Court under Earl Warren), we got rulings that the Fourth Amendment outlaws things like beating confessions out of people.

It was a step forward.

3/
Read 9 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!