Nicholas Grossman Profile picture
Apr 30, 2021 5 tweets 2 min read Read on X
Jan. 6 was an attack on US democracy in a way 9/11 wasn't—incited by a POTUS' lies, aimed to overturn a US election—but at least 9/11 was an attack. The difference is who, what, and why.
The 1965 Immigration Act is a duly passed law that reduced discrimination by national origin.
Was the Jan. 6 insurrection "the worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War," as Biden said? Debatable. How do we measure "worst"? Hoes does an attack "on our democracy" differ from an attack on America?
But is an immigration law an attack on our democracy? Absolutely not.
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 removed preferences for northwest Europe, and gave priority to relatives of US citizens & permanent legal residents.
You can criticize it, sure, but thinking it an attack on US democracy is accurately called “white nationalist” or “racist.”
If a relative of US citizen whose parents came from France immigrates to the US or a relative of a US citizen whose parents came from China or Nigeria immigrates to the US, the effect on US democracy is identical.
Unless, of course, you define US democracy as for white people.
The question “is the US dealing with a white nationalist movement, with Tucker Carlson as one of its leaders?” has been answered with a clear yes.
The remaining questions are “are you supportive, opposed, or indifferent to it?” and, if opposed, “what should we do about it?”
(END)

• • •

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

Keep Current with Nicholas Grossman

Nicholas Grossman 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 @NGrossman81

May 20
For Project 2025—for all Team Trump’s plans to backslide the US into authoritarianism—the only counter is beat them in the election so they don’t get the power to do it.
If they have the institutional power, there’s no brilliant idea, not glorious resistance, that can prevent it.
The strategy of democratic backsliding—get power legally, abuse it to break checks & balances, rule of law, and free elections—has worked in Turkey, Hungary, India, more.
It wouldn’t be Trump term 1, where they start not understanding the system. They’ve planned for years now.
Team Trump are not the most competent people, but they are relentless.
As Hannah Arendt argued, incompetence functions as an asset for would-be authoritarians in breaking institutions.
It’s Trump’s opponents—pro-democracy Americans—who want these core parts of govt to function.
Read 4 tweets
Feb 12
"Ceasefire now," demand critics of Biden's Gaza policy. But what, exactly, does that mean? Brokered Israel-Hamas agreement? Unilateral Israeli cessation? Something else?
And what do the American people want? It depends.
I unpack the data in @thedailybeast
thedailybeast.com/do-americans-w…
Some prominent critics of Biden's Gaza policy, who want the US to push hard for a ceasefire—eg @RepRashida @mehdirhasan @Tyler_A_Harper @BenBurgis @QuincyInst @thrasherxy—claim a majority of Americans, esp Dems, agree with them.
Appears based on this one weighted poll question
2/ Image
@RepRashida @mehdirhasan @Tyler_A_Harper @BenBurgis @QuincyInst @thrasherxy But the arguments aren't symmetrical.
Red is realistic, saying that no permanent ceasefire means Hamas remains in power and Israel will kill more civilians in Gaza.
Blue is a hopeful hypothetical: a permanent mutual agreement with no more fighting and all hostages released.
3/ Image
Read 6 tweets
Jan 28
Iran wouldn't mess with tough Trump, says MAGA? Opposite of reality.
First, Iran and militias it backs got more aggressive after Trump broke JCPOA. Attacked tankers, Saudi oil fields, US bases.
Then US killing Iranian Gen. Soleimani ended it, right?
No. Wrong again.
@mehdirhasan Image
Does this mean Iran was cowed into complacency by the toughness of Bush, Obama, or Biden?
No, of course not. That's not how the world works.
But there were fewer Iran-backed attacks on US and allied forces when diplomacy was alive than with Trump's shallow display of "toughness."
In multiple ways, Trump's Middle East policy led to the current regional turmoil. He let Iran out of nuclear restrictions in exchange for nothing, and sowed chaos. By the end of his term, Iran was stronger in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Qatar, Lebanon, and Gaza.
thedailybeast.com/trumps-overrat…
Read 4 tweets
Sep 16, 2023
Rep. Ken Buck tells the truth about Biden-Ukraine (screenshots 1 & 2) only to blatantly lie about Trump-Ukraine (3).
Trump-Zelensky transcript (4) show Trump blocked military aid to push the very lie about corruption in Ukraine Buck calls out as false. What a weird time we're in.


Image
Image
Image
Image
Trump's infamous call came after Giuliani spent months trying to drum up dirt on the Bidens in Ukraine, and after Trump removed the corruption-fighting US Ambassador to Ukraine.
And still the transcript shows Trump concerned about Mueller, not about actual corruption in Ukraine. Image
It's so obvious I shouldn't have to say it (but these are the times we live in):
An open, bipartisan US effort in partner with the EU and IMF to fight corruption is not at all like a hidden effort by the president and his fixer/lawyer to make more corruption. Those are opposites.
Read 4 tweets
Sep 10, 2023
On Elon Musk stopping Ukraine attack on Russian ships:
1st reported by Oliver Carroll, 2nd mention in Ronan Farrow's investigation and 3rd in Walter Isaacson's biography say Musk intervened. Only Isaacson's "clarification" says it already wasn't on and he merely didn't turn it on
Most focus is on Musk thwarting Ukraine's attack on Crimea because he (wrongly) thought it'd cause WWIII.
But Isaacson also printed an exchange with Ukraine Deputy PM Fedorov showing Musk denying access in Russian-occupied south and east Ukraine, thus validating Russia's conquest Image
So even if we dismiss the Economist's Carroll, the New Yorker's Farrow, and Isaacson's book, and go with Musk/Isaacson's revision re: Crimea, he still took action to protect Russian forces on occupied Ukrainian territory.
At best, badly ignorant.
At best.
thedailybeast.com/us-government-…
Read 5 tweets
Jul 6, 2023
In every democracy, people say the economy is doing better when their party is in power, regardless of actual economic numbers.
But that doesn't mean everyone in each country does so to the same degree.
In the US, rejection of politically inconvenient data isn't symmetrical.
You can see it clearly here.
The US economy in 2017-19 was basically on trend from 2014-16. The biggest thing that changed is Republican leaders and conservative media went from saying the economy was worse than it was to saying it was better than it was.
Here is US GDP and unemployment from Jan. 2012 to Jan. 2020.
See the big change that happened from 2016 to 2017? No?
That's because there isn't any. All that happened was an election.
Dems thought the economy was decent/mediocre and still was. GOP said it was awful then amazing.

Read 4 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

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

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

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(