Thomas Zimmer Profile picture
May 25, 2021 44 tweets 13 min read Read on X
I went on CNN on the weekend to talk about Trump’s “Big Lie,” and what history can tell us about why it’s captured the Republican Party. In the very short segment, I didn’t get to talk about why I’m actually somewhat skeptical of the focus on the #BigLie idea. Let me explain: 1/
The term “Big Lie,” as it is defined today, refers to a specific kind of political propaganda: A lie that is told for political purposes and that is so outrageous, so bizarre, that it’s hard for people to resist. 2/ merriam-webster.com/dictionary/big…
As the theory goes, people believe the Big Lie precisely BECAUSE it is so shocking, because it is difficult to imagine anyone would lie in this shameless fashion about important political matters. 3/
Whether or not you support the Big Lie then also becomes a litmus test of political loyalty for a movement or a party. Trump’s outrageous claim that he is the victim of a massive conspiracy that stole the presidency from him certainly qualifies under this definition. 4/
The origin story: The term itself was actually coined by none other than Adolf Hitler in the 1920s – he criticized the German Jews for deploying what he called the “Big Lie” that Germany’s military was defeated in World War I. 5/
Of course, the German military definitely was defeated in the war - but that’s not what the German Far Right wanted to believe, instead clinging to the myth that the German army had been stabbed in the back by internal enemies. 6/ encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/stab-i…
The term is often associated with chief Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels, but there’s little evidence he ever used it in an affirmative way to describe his own tactics. Certainly fair to say though that Nazi propaganda did tell a bunch of big lies. 7/
In our current context, the term Big Lie was brought up occasionally during the Trump presidency to warn of the dangers of authoritarian propaganda. But it really only became a prominent part of our political debates AFTER the 2020 election… 8/
…and in particular after the insurrection of January 6. It’s since been used to oppose Trump’s outrageous claims. 9/
But interestingly, and that is the latest turn in this story, Trump himself has started adopting the term – he is now attacking all those who insist on the facts as propagating a Big Lie. 10/
cnn.com/2021/05/19/pol…
So we’re now in a weird situation in which the term is everywhere, and it is used for wildly differing political purposes, to either defend the democratic process – or to completely undermine it. 11/
Trump and his supporters are all in on various conspiracy theories that together form the Big Lie nexus. But the real problem, as so often, is not just Trump, but the fact that Republicans have decided to support his lies and to enact policies based on Trump’s lies. 12/
That’s primarily happening on the state level, where Republicans have introduced hundreds of bills designed to restrict and suppress the vote, always citing “concerns” over “election integrity.” 13/ motherjones.com/politics/2021/…
And in some places, they’re simply 100 percent “We’re looking for traces of bamboo because we want to find the Chinese fake ballots” committed to the idea that the 2020 election was stolen. 14/
So, the crucial question we must face is: Why are Republicans so willing to support Trump’s outrageous claims? And not just Republican elected officials, but somewhere between 60 and 70 percent of Republican voters as well! 15/ theguardian.com/us-news/2021/m…
This, I believe, is where the term “Big Lie” isn’t very helpful and can easily obscure the real problem when it is taken to suggest that Republicans were wholeheartedly embracing democracy until they were seduced and overwhelmed by Trump’s brilliant propaganda. 16/
That is absolutely not what is happening. As a general rule, Big Lies are effective when they are deployed in an environment in which people are primed to believe them – when they channel and crystallize certain ideological core claims and beliefs. 17/
In our current situation, one reason Trump’s lies can flourish and have such a massive effect is because they can build on longstanding anti-democratic tendencies and impulses on the American Right and among conservatives. 18/
This great episode of the @KnowYrEnemyPod with @Joshua_A_Tait, for instance, does a great job of dissecting the ideas of some of the intellectual founding fathers of the modern conservative movement and their preference for minoritarian elite rule. 19/
Or listen to how William F. Buckley, the godfather of the modern conservative movement, explicitly defends disenfranchising black people and tells a stunned audience that he believes many (poor) white people shouldn’t be allowed to vote either. 20/
(And really, if you haven’t seen the famous 1965 debate between James Baldwin and William F. Buckley, please watch it soon. It is an unbelievably impressive document.) 21/
Furthermore, this episode of the @SceneOnRadio podcast focuses on the anti-democratic attitudes among some of the most important libertarian thinkers of the twentieth century, like Friedrich Hayek. 22/ sceneonradio.org/s4-e8-the-seco…
Another reason for the Big Lie’s success: It can latch onto the decades-long attempts by Republicans to present themselves as the only legitimate representatives of “real” America, and to denounce Democrats as an “Un-American” threat. 23/
In this interpretation, Democrats are not just political opponents, but a radical, Socialist, Un-American political force, pursuing a fundamentally illegitimate political project of turning what is supposed to be a white Christian nation into a land of multiracial pluralism. 24/
This strand of anti-democratic demonization culminated in the birtherism conspiracy, depicting Barack Obama as a socialist, Un-American “Other,” elected by an illegitimate coalition – and still, today, about 50 percent of Republicans are birthers. 25/ fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-b…
Even the practice of alleging voter fraud after Democratic election victories has been part of the Republican playbook since the late 1980s, as @HC_Richardson lays out here: 26/ heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/february-21-…
It was also around that same time that the Heritage Foundation began its crusade for “election integrity” and against “voter fraud” that has never been based on any kind of substantive empirical evidence. 27/ brennancenter.org/our-work/analy…
Never forget that Paul Weyrich, co-founder of the Heritage Foundation, was very explicit about his disdain for democracy: 28/
Take all this together, and it is no longer that big of a leap to buy into the idea that these radical, Un-American forces have conspired against “real America” to steal an election, and that anything is justified to ensure Republican rule going forward. 29/
Where does all this leave us? There’s this idea out there that, rather sooner than later, the GOP will necessarily moderate because in its current radical form it can no longer compete in democratic elections. But that is clearly not what’s happening. 30/
Faced with the choice of either changing course to retain their chances within a democratic system or turning their backs on democracy and turning the system into something that can no longer be called a democracy, Republicans have chosen the latter. 31/
That’s not going to change any time soon. This is not just a phase, not just a temper tantrum, not just a party that has temporarily lost its mind but will soon see the light again. 32/
And as @ThePlumLineGS has argued, Republicans aren’t simply relitigating the 2020 election because they’re a bunch of sore losers who aren’t quite ready to let this one go. To them, this is about what comes next and how to undermine the democratic system going forward. 33/
None of this is new, none of it started with Trump. The Republican Party has been on this anti-democratic trajectory for a very long time. 34/
The GOP is focusing ever more narrowly on the interests and anxieties of white conservatives; at the same time, the electorate has become ever more multiracial and pluralistic, due to cultural and demographic changes. 35/
In this situation, these longstanding anti-democratic tendencies have become more pronounced, especially since the 1990s, and they will only become even more pronounced going forward. 36/
Trump, Trumpism, what we’re seeing right now: It’s a radicalization of existing trends, yes, but not an aberration. 37/
Which means that the fundamental reality of American politics going forward is that one of the major parties is committed to the idea of multiracial democracy – and the other is determined to do whatever it takes to prevent exactly that from ever becoming a reality. 38/
Democracy itself has become not just a contested issue, which it has always been since the founding, but a partisan issue, one that divides the country along party lines. It is imperative that we acknowledge this reality and grapple with it in earnest. /end
Addendum: Highly recommended this article by @ThePlumLineGS on the GOP’s attitude towards democracy. Very glad it highlights an excellent piece by @lionel_trolling - who you should definitely follow and read because few people provide such incisive analysis of the American Right.
Since I wrote this thread last week, a few excellent pieces and podcasts have come out that really delve deep into the anti-democratic traditions on the Right - which Trump’s #BigLie can build on. I’d like to highlight a few:
This, by @Joshua_A_Tait, is excellent - a must read on the topic of longstanding anti-democratic ideas and tendencies among conservatives.
Here’s a great discussion between @HeerJeet and @willwilkinson on what they aptly call the “Deep Roots of GOP Extremism”
Finally, I have already linked to an episode of the always excellent @KnowYrEnemyPod in the initial thread. The podcast often explores the anti-democratic impulses on the Right - and does so again in the latest (bonus) episode, which is great.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Thomas Zimmer

Thomas Zimmer 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 @tzimmer_history

May 6
What stands out about this interview with New York Times executive editor Joe Kahn is this pervasive sense among centrist elites that by the summer of 2020, “woke” radicalism had been allowed to advance too far - and people like Kahn see it as their mission to stem the tide. 1/ Screenshot of an interview with NYT executive editor Joe Kahn, titled “Joe Kahn: ‘The newsroom is not a safe space’,” published at Semafor on May 5
Kahn describes the Summer of 2020 as “a crazy period” that “frayed nerves everywhere” - he denounces the “excesses of the period,” meaning the spread of “woke” ideas and too much anti-Trumpism inside and outside the NYT. “A period of peak cultural angst,” he calls it. 2/
This is precisely the spirit that is fueling the elite centrist support for the crackdown on college protesters - an acute anxiety that things have gone too far, that these “woke” radicals who were given too much rope during the Trump era urgently need to be reined in. 3/
Read 7 tweets
May 4
America’s Elites Fear the Ghost of 1968

Mainstream elites are adopting a reactionary tale about the “leftist” indoctrination of America’s youth that verges on the conspiratorial and is destined to give the Right a major boost.

Key points from my new piece (link in bio):
 
🧵1/ Screenshot of my latest “Democracy Americana” newsletter: “America’s Elites Fear the Ghost of 1968: Mainstream elites are adopting a reactionary tale about the “leftist” indoctrination of America’s youth that verges on the conspiratorial and is destined to give the Right a major boost.”
I wrote about what George Packer gets so wrong about the university, critical theory, and the legacy of the 1960s student protests – and what to make of the fact that he is propagating the conspiratorial idea that leftwing radicals have indoctrinated generations of kids. 2/ Image
George Packer’s grand accusation of a direct line of leftwing indoctrination from 1968 to today doesn’t hold up to the least bit of scrutiny - but it provides a window into the elite anxieties that are driving so much of mainstream politics in America. 3/
Read 12 tweets
Apr 28
This is the type of comment I’ve been getting a lot for this piece: Always from self-regarding liberals who never want to grapple with the fact that the civil rights protests of the 1950s and 60s – the legacy of which they surely want to claim – clearly violated those principles.
Image
The polite mainstream widely rejected them with precisely those arguments: too radical, too loud, too disruptive, too divisive. Protests demanding justice, student protests, protests carried by a multiracial coalition are almost always unpopular as they are happening.
And they just keep coming:

“If you engage in civil disobedience you will get arrested.”

Easy! And this from someone who had “Democrat” in their bio and started their previous comment by claiming they - of course! - would have supported the 1960s civil rights movement. Perfect. Image
Read 4 tweets
Apr 23
What an absolute disaster that Republicans are still successfully playing their cynical game of exploiting fears over antisemitism in order to advance their reactionary crusade – and mainstream institutions keep willfully playing along.
 
I wrote about this here (link in bio): 1/ Screenshot of my “Democracy Americana” newsletter from Dec. 14: “We Are Falling Apart: The Right is successfully exploiting fears over rising antisemitism for its reactionary crusade while the Israel-Hamas war is tearing the democratic popular front to pieces”
We have reached a truly bizarre place in our political discourse when supposedly serious people want us to believe that the party of Trump, QAnon, and “Great Replacement” is the bulwark against antisemitism in America. 2/ Image
After pretending to be really upset about campus antisemitism during the congressional hearings in December, Stefanik ran off to meet “her friend,” the leader of a fascistic movement, the guy who is raging against immigrants “poisoning the blood of our country.” 3/ Image
Read 20 tweets
Apr 13
Weekend reading: I wrote about the disingenuous and dangerous folly of anti-anti-Trump conservatism.
 
How “respectable” conservatives normalize Trump, rage against a caricature of “the Left,” and accommodate rightwing extremism:

🧵1/

thomaszimmer.substack.com/p/anti-anti-tr…
Screenshot of my latest “Democracy Americana” newsletter: “Anti-Anti-Trump Conservatives Are Paving the Way for Authoritarianism: Highbrow conservative commentators are giving themselves and their readers permission to support Trump by portraying “liberal hysteria” as the real threat: A case study of National Review”
I dove into how leading conservative commentators in National Review are imagining a second Trump presidency. What they offer isn’t analysis. It is sophistry in defense of the premise that the actual threat isn’t Trump, it’s hysterical Libs and the radical Left. 2/
The goal is evidently not to provide National Review readers with an understanding of what’s been happening on the Right, but to portray Trump and his political project as so mundane and unremarkable that the liberal reaction to Trump must seem unhinged and dangerous. 3/
Read 15 tweets
Apr 10
Anti-Anti-Trump Conservatism Is a Disingenuous and Dangerous Game
 
A case study of how National Review normalizes Trump, rages against a bizarre caricature of “the Left,” and thereby accommodates rightwing extremism.
 
A thread, based on my new piece (link in bio):
 
🧵1/ Screenshot of my latest “Democracy Americana” newsletter: “Anti-Anti-Trump Conservatives Are Paving the Way for Authoritarianism: Highbrow conservative commentators are giving themselves and their readers permission to support Trump by portraying “liberal hysteria” as the real threat: A case study of National Review”
I dissect two recent pieces written by National Review editor-in-chief Rich Lowry and senior writer Michael Brendan Dougherty - who represent that “respectable” spectrum of the American Right the mainstream political discourse consistently asks us to take seriously. 2/
Whether or not rightwing extremists manage to take power depends largely on how much support they get from mainstream conservative circles – it depends on the extent to which the rightwing establishment is willing to make common cause with extremism. 3/
Read 10 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!

:(