Thread by @Teri_Kanefield

(Thread) Demagogues, Fascists, and Confederates

I did another Sunday video (☕️+ talk)


I’ll put an edited transcription in the next tweet for those who prefer to read.

I've mostly tweeted this stuff this past week, but I'll do a Twitter summary anyway.

1/ Edited transcript here: terikanefield.com/demagogues-fas…

Stand by for a Twitter summary. But first, more ☕️.

2/ Before I continue, I had an insight reading some Twitter comments.

At least I understand why some people blame the Democratic leadership for the fact that the Republican Party is anti-democratic and actively trying to destroy democracy.

The insight is this . . .

3/ If you think there's an easy solution — if you think if the Democratic leadership simply does X or Y, the Republican danger will dissipate—it can feel frustrating.

Criticism takes two forms. First: "The Democrats are ineffectual and incapable of stopping the threat."

4/ This is a general "They should make it stop" criticism.

The second is from people who have the answer. "If the Democrats would just X, the problem will go away."

(I'm not talking about frustration with Manchin sticking by the filibuster. I'm talking about something larger.)

5/ I'm talking about the idea that the anti-democratic actions of the Republican Party are the fault of ineffectual Democrats.

The problem is deeper.

The problem, as @SykesCharlie recently said, is that tens of millions of voters support the GOP as insurrectionists.

6/ That brings me to my video.

People were so shocked by the fact that the Republicans killed a bipartisan commission to look into the January 6th insurrection, that I started with this observation.

https://twitter.com/Teri_Kanefield/status/1398651998824656896

You see, the Confederates never went away.

7/ For the past five decades or so, they were shamed into silence.

@jenmercieca’s book, Demagogue for President, explains how Trump awakened the sleeping Confederates and turn them into Proud Boys.

For more, see:

https://twitter.com/Teri_Kanefield/status/1397396340083023873

8/ People on Twitter found my report of Mercieca's book so helpful I wanted to include it in my video.

The rhetorical devices she describes overlap with the tactics used by fascists, as explained by scholars like @jasonintrator and Robert Paxton.

9/In fact, Paxton argued that the world’s first fascists weren’t Italians under Mussolini. They were Ku Klux Klan members.

The Confederacy was decidedly anti-democratic.

So it’s really no shock that one of our two parties is anti-democratic, right?

10/ There are lots of those guys around and they want a party, too.

There will always find leaders willing to cater to them. Or opportunists willing to court their votes.

I also talked briefly about Trump’s motion to dismiss Swalwell’s lawsuit against him. Spoiler: It’s lame.

11/ Trump argued that his speech was protected under the First Amendment (no surprise).

He also argued that Separation of Powers means that courts don’t have the authority to judge how he conducted his presidency— and “rousing speeches” were how he conducted his presidency.

12/ Yup, once again he gave his “Article II means I can do whatever I want” argument, combined with his “absolute immunity” defense, which the Supreme Court already rejected.

13/ Yes, very. His idea is that the constitution forbids a court from judging the head of a separate branch of government.

Except that the Constitution sets up lots of checks. That's why Congress can impeach and remove a president . . .

https://twitter.com/Cherylm56588591/status/1399024313450209282

14/ And courts can overturn legislation passed by Congress. And Congress can impeach and remove judges. And presidents have veto powers.

So his idea that "Article II means I can do whatever I want" is absurd.

I'm actually looking forward to the court's response. It will be a while, though. Responses are due in July.

Not that facts bother the modern Republican Party.

https://twitter.com/stevelatta1701/status/1399032203254718465