Tweet

David Roberts

Jan 15,, 8 tweets, 2 min read

@tomperriello

Great piece from @tomperriello draws on his experiences in other countries struggling in the wake of civil wars, schisms, etc. to argue that accountability is vital. Simply "moving on" is a recipe for trouble. crooked.com/articles/democ…

While I think Perriello is right, I'm somewhat fatalistic, because it's not just about Jan. 6 -- the US has been through *decades* shaped by the lies & lawbreaking of powerful white men who escaped without a hint of accountability. The horse is already out of the barn.

I guess Watergate is the last example of accountability I can think of. Iran-Contra, S&L scandal, theft of 2000 election, Iraq War, torture, financial collapse, voter suppression ... these are just the big ones. You could fill a book with GWB-era fuckery that was never punished.

In my mind, it's the flagrant lack of accountability for rich powerful white people that corrodes solidarity & leads to all the many forms of national psychosis we're currently experiencing. It makes everyone think the system is rigged, so why not just blow it up?

Right now we're living through the GOP openly lying about a virus & the vaccine for it -- lies that have directly led to tens of thousands of needless deaths among their own supporters. Will anyone be held accountable? Will anyone even lose any social or professional status? No.

I argued (to no effect) back in 2020 that some Dem candidate should make accountability -- bringing the rich & powerful (including among Dems!) to heel -- the center of their campaign. Tougher rules & enforcement at the IRS, SEC, etc. No more stock trading among legislators. Etc.

But at this point, I honestly fear it's too late. If the 1/6 crowd is punished, the public at large won't see it as the action of a dispassionate justice system. No one believes in that any more. It will be seen as the left team using the power it has to hurt the right team ...

... and when the right team takes back over, it will use its power to retaliate. There are only the teams now, tit for tat, no larger system of principles or rules to which everyone is accountable. It's going to take a long time to build back faith in anything like that.

• • •

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

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

More from @drvolts

David Roberts

@drvolts

Jan 17,

The most striking thing about the entire pandemic, to me, is the raw, spontaneous, primal anger some people felt at being asked to make personal sacrifices in the name of the public good -- a kind of gut-level anti-solidarity.

Most arguments about masks & other restrictions had that vibe to me -- people groping to reverse-engineer epidemiological arguments to justify what was, in essence, a pre-verbal feeling: "how DARE you ask me to sacrifice for the collective. I will NOT & you can't make me."

This is the only way to make sense of the endless string of often self-contradictory arguments about alternative treatments, "herd immunity," transmissibility, private vs. gov't mandates, etc. etc.

Read 5 tweets

David Roberts

@drvolts

Jan 14,

So, y'all, I have a theory about Joe Manchin. To be clear up front, this is just deduction & speculation, not any kind of inside info. But I think it explains some otherwise puzzling facts. A thread.

Recall that, early in Biden's term, the common take on Manchin was: "He'll kick up a fuss, demand a few symbolic concessions, but in the end, he'll vote w/ Dems." And that take held true through the Covid relief bill, even through early BBB negotiations, until late last year.

Around autumn of last year, the vibe shifted from "grumpy guy in the caboose begrudgingly going along for the ride" to "asshole who's determined to stop the train." People in talks w/ Manchin about the BBB's clean energy standard say he went from constructive to obstinate.

Read 14 tweets

David Roberts

@drvolts

Jan 13,

https://twitter.com/Amy_Siskind/status/1481733475057156099

[blink]

https://twitter.com/Amy_Siskind/status/1481733475057156099

This seems like an opportune moment to reiterate my view that much of the behavior of rich/famous/powerful people that we ordinary folk find mystifying is best explained by the composition of their epistemic environments: who's around them, who they listen to.

When you become a US senator, it is incredibly easy to slip into a bubble where you're only talking to other senators, lobbyists, rich people, & lifer pundits. They all flatter your ego. You feel like you're seeing into some special inner circle that knows the *real* truth.

Read 8 tweets

David Roberts

@drvolts

Jan 13,

The real problem is not the horrible things conservatives do. The real problem is other people holding them accountable. washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/…

I remember a whole series of studies & surveys around 2015-16ish finding that the most predictive factor for intensity of Trump support was hostility toward out groups, primarily women, minorities, & immigrants. Trump's cult consists of *self-selected sexists & racists*.

Some links -- and a lot of other interesting stuff I'd forgotten -- in this dazed piece that I wrote shortly after Trump was elected. vox.com/policy-and-pol…

Read 4 tweets

David Roberts

@drvolts

Jan 12,

There's a lot of confusion out there about the root of the filibuster dispute, so ... a short thread.

The key: political scientists have found that, on balance, legislation favors progressives. More often than not, those seeking legislation are seeking change/reform.

That's not always true, of course, but on average, over time, the more legislation there is, the more movement there is in a progressive reform direction. Active gov't is, on balance, a tool for change. It's really important to understand this.

The obvious upshot is, if you're on the conservative side -- the side benefiting from & protecting status quo power dynamics -- you want less legislation. Less/smaller gov't generally. You want gov't to leave things alone, because the way things are works for you/your people.

Read 9 tweets

David Roberts

@drvolts

Jan 12,

Rising right-wing domestic terrorism has driven the Justice Dept. to form a new unit to combat it. Of course that's never stated clearly in the story, which is mostly both-sides coverage highlighting Republican gaslighting & whataboutism. washingtonpost.com/national-secur…

One note on this: read the story & you'll see another example of a very, very familiar reactionary dynamic I've been pointing out repeatedly. In this instance, it goes like this:

1) RW media/elites whip the RW base up into fury at schools & educators based on CRT nonsense.

2) The base reacts as expected, forming thuggish mobs, shouting at school board meetings, & threatening the lives of educators.

3) There are so many threats that it draws FBI attention; the agency starts an investigation & speaks out.

Read 7 tweets

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

Too expensive? 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!

Share this page!

David Roberts

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @drvolts

David Roberts

David Roberts

David Roberts

David Roberts

David Roberts

David Roberts

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Like this author's thread?