Went on the @KreuzundFlagge podcast for a conversation about the past and present of U.S. democracy and what is animating the anti-democratic radicalization of the American Right.
I am more pessimistic now than I was a year ago - and unfortunately, @ardenthistorian agrees…
This is part 1 of a 2-part conversation. Here is an incomplete list of the topics we discussed - and I’ll include a few links to previous reflections on the state of American politics to provide some more evidence and receipts (in English):
Why Donald Trump is the favorite to be the next Republican presidential candidate, as the GOP and the American Right in general are basically unified behind him and, more importantly, his political project…
Why the reactionary counter-mobilization from the Right is not coming from a place of strength: Conservatives are radicalizing because they understand they are in the minority and feel their backs against the wall, leading to a veritable siege mentality.
How religious conservatives like Harvard law professor Adrian Vermeule or former attorney general William Barr propagate a deeply anti-democratic, authoritarian idea of forcefully transforming the polity - something that is adequately described as a theocracy.
Why much of the mainstream media is still clinging to the “neutrality” dogma that demands keeping equidistance from #BothSides, and why this “neutral” position provides cover for extremism and leads to distortions, as the GOP is rapidly radicalizing.
How two powerful myths – that of American exceptionalism and that of white innocence – conspire to make it hard for many Liberals to accept that it could absolutely “happen here,” that it is actually happening…
Why the Democratic establishment has been unable / unwilling to effectively counter the authoritarian onslaught on democracy, and that has a lot to do with the fact that many Democratic leaders are themselves members of the old white elite.
Finally, the long tradition of anti-democratic tendencies and impulses on the American Right and how the Republican Party turned into the political vessel of white Christian nationalism over the past few decades…
It’s a great, wide-ranging discussion, and I’m very grateful to @ardenthistorian for having me on. If you care about the fate of democracy, this conversation is unlikely to cheer you up. I do believe, however, that we are tackling some absolutely crucial issues here.
As January 6 comes to an end, I am filled with a sense of admiration and gratitude for the many academic observers of American history, politics, society, and culture who have put themselves out there, offered their perspective, and for whom this week must have been stressful.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not going to pretend we have the hardest or most important jobs in the world; we don’t. But please, if you’ll indulge me: I’ve only done a few media appearances and interviews this week, a fraction of what many others are doing - and I’m pretty exhausted.
For the vast majority of academic observers, all these public efforts and appearances - while certainly welcome as opportunities to present our work - come on top of the core responsibilities and duties. There’s a syllabus to design, a book to write, a paper to grade…
What is the meaning of #January6th – what is its place in American history?
As of right now, this is an entirely open question. The answer will depend on what happens next. This captures the current moment precisely: American democracy at a crossroads. A reflection: 1/
We now have a fairly clear picture of the attack of January 6 and the events leading up to it. We know that it was not a “spontaneous” protest, but a deliberate assault on democracy, organized and led by far-right militants and white nationalist groups. 2/ nyti.ms/3AfdRZB
The assault on the Capitol must be seen in the context of a larger attempt to disrupt the transfer of power and nullify the result of a democratic election – an attempted (self-)coup, deliberately planned and strategized by Donald Trump and people in his orbit. 3/
I’m grateful to the @nytimes editorial board for publishing this. After all, the key question in America today is whether or not enough people in positions of influence and power are as committed to preserving democracy as Republicans are to abolishing it.
However, it should also be noted that the NYT - just like other mainstream media outlets - is often complicit in obscuring the anti-democratic radicalization of the Republican Party and the acute threat to American democracy emanating from the Right:
By dissolving everything into a tale of “partisanship” and “polarization” that always implicates #BothSides, thus upholding a “neutrality” dogma that provides cover for extremism and leads to severe distortions…
Don’t frame this as “oh, the pandemic is so politicized…”
What’s on display here is the radicalization of the Republican Party. There is no equivalent on the “Left” to an official GOP account propagating vaccine misinformation, endangering the lives of hundreds of thousands.
The tweet has since been deleted - but there’s not going to be an apology or any kind of substantive retraction, of course, because Republicans either actually believe this nonsense or consider this type of bad-faith propaganda a legitimate tactic in the war against the Left.
Is there a line? Anything that’s *not* permitted? Anything that’s so extreme, so dangerous that it’s not justified in defense against what they see as the radically Un-American leftist threat? Republicans are giving us their answer every day - and that should terrify us.
I get the impulse to just ignore Marjorie Taylor Greene. And if what’s on display here were just the extremist nonsense of a fringe figure, it’d be best to do exactly that. This, however, isn’t just Greene’s extremism - it is increasingly that of the Republican Party itself.
The fact that the Republican Party embraces and elevates Greene and other extremists like her constitutes an acute danger to democracy. We can’t allow ourselves to become numb to how bizarre, how radical, how dangerous these developments are.
And let’s not be lulled into a false sense of security by the clownishness, the ridiculousness of it all. Some of history’s most successful authoritarians were considered goons and buffoons by their contemporaries - until they became goons and buffoons in power.
“Parents,” “working class,” “Christians” - in the American political discourse, whenever such categories are used without any qualifier, they basically just mean “white.” Because “white” is still widely seen as normal, as the norm: as what really counts and defines the nation.
People are not necessarily doing it deliberately. When called out, Todd immediately concedes the point. But that only reinforces how pervasive this idea of “normal” America as *white America* still is in the collective imaginary: It just comes naturally to Chuck Todd.
This is important because it fundamentally structures the conversation. Just like @nhannahjones says, Todd’s framing privileges the interests and sensibilities of *white* parents by elevating them to the status of “regular” (read: justified, legitimate) parental concerns.