“Is it too late to save democracy?”
“Will the fascists win?”
I answered these questions by talking about Susan B. Anthony.
(Talking for 10 minutes to my Ipad is feeling less weird each week)
Subtitle: Everything you never knew you wanted to know about Susan B. Anthony
If you prefer an [edited] transcript, it’s here: terikanefield.com/susan-b-anthon…
I’ll come back and do a brief Twitter summary.
But first, more ☕️
2/
I think we start with the fact that there will always be people trying to undermine democracy, and they are motivated and acting from fear and desperation.
Then, when they land a blow, instead of reeling with shock, we figure out how to respond.
See:
One of the more interesting (and painful) incidents in Susan B. Anthony's life was the fallout among the liberals (reformers) after the Civil War when women were left out of the 14th and 15th Amendments.
The biggest setback for women's rights came from liberal men.
4/
The women activists (they called themselves 'reformers') also split into two groups. They carried anger and bitterness for decades.
There is a lesson. If your goal is to destroy or take the nation backwards, there is only one direction (go back where we were).
5/
If you want to go forward, there are lots of different directions and possibilities. Progressives rarely agree on the best way forward.
There are other reasons liberals tend to splinter while right-wing fascists stay in formation, but this splintering weakens progressives.
6/
Adding to the unhealthy situation is that spreading despair and laying out simple fallacies "If X doesn't happen, all will be lost," garners a lot of attention.
Fear grabs people.
People like Susan B. Anthony ignore the noise, deal with the despair, and do the work.
7/
I checked my YouTube analytics (social media platforms give too much info!).
When "fascism" or lies from the Republican Party is in the title, lots of people look.
But Susan B. Anthony? Less popular.
Well. Like Susan B., I must remain committed to an unpopular cause 😉
8/
Agree.
This was tweeted before this thread, and it's what I was trying to say.
The idea that something will happen, some X and the Democrats will win and the anti-democratic forces will be forever beaten leads to despair and anger.
The idea that there is a magic bullet leads to despair when X happens but the anti-democratic forces regroup and come back to hit harder, and it leads to anger if X doesn't happen.
From Levitsky (co-author of 👇) the greatest danger to democracy is the government slipping into dysfunction, which will erode public confidence.
When public confidence erodes, people become vulnerable to the appeal of a strongman, who promises to get things done.
1/
When the public loses confidence in democracy, they are willing to torpedo democratic processes. Using anti-democratic means to save democracy has obvious problems.
McConnell wants to break the government because he doesn't like what America has become.
2/
Just a friendly reminder that if the people who abused power are not held "accountable," it's because they are being shielded by a major political party that holds a lot of power.
You can't say Schiff and Swalwell haven't been doing their best.
Underestimating how entrenched the anti-democratic forces are? Unreasonable expectations? Thinking change can be swift?
Think about what would be happening right now if Trump was in the White House and compare.
In this fabulous lecture, Harvard prof. Steven Levitsky explains that the Republicans are engaging in hardball tactics because they feel their backs are to the wall and they're desperate.
If this is the kind of thing I've been saying, it's because I've been reading Levitsky's work for years. He writes about democracies in Latin America, democratic erosion, and competitive authoritarianism. He's also a co-author of 👇
1/
Also, 👇
His point: For most of the 20th century, American politics "worked."
That’s because through the 1970s, both parties culturally and demographically similar.
Specifically, they were white. White men controlled all major American institutions.
2/