THREAD. The Democratic Party platform presents such a profound crisis if we have any hope of avoiding fascism.
Kamala Harris and other Democrats would essentially only need to say that they will condition aid to Israel on compliance with international law (i.e. follow existing U.S. law on weapons). The refusal to say something so simple presents a point of no return, for a few reasons.
Here is an image of everywhere bombed in Gaza, mostly with U.S. bombs. 100,000s have been killed by conservative estimates in medical journals. The entire infrastructure (schools, hospitals, water, history, etc) destroyed, and many thousands kidnapped, raped, tortured, maimed.
People can see the images for themselves, and they can listen to what Israeli settlers, soldiers, and far-right government are saying. And yet, leading U.S. politicians deny it, change the subject, ignore it, and even justify it with grotesque lies.
Every day there are pundits on Israeli TV calling for genocide that spares no one, soldiers/settlers smiling and dancing while poisoning wells, lynching, raping prisoners on video, blocking aid trucks, arresting people for social media posts, sniping children in the head, etc.
Instead of stopping this--by simply stopping to fund and arm it--the U.S. has done a series of depraved public relations stunts to redefine the term "ceasefire," and shift the goalposts, all in a cynical ploy to keep the killing going but deceive liberals. thenation.com/article/world/…
In this process of relentless, depraved lies about things that anyone can see, many of the key institutions in the West are brazenly careening toward the fascist dystopia that Orwell so beautifully described: totalitarian domination so complete that it can insist 2+2=5.
It is difficult to walk back from that cliff, because the subtle, pervasive message to everyone swimming in this water all around us is: nothing matters. There is nothing except who is stronger, except who is willing to use that strength to dominate.
This is fascism: brazenly violating the law, but unfurling messages to the masses like this:
Orwell saw something vital: there's a difference btw being part of terrible things but not fully realizing it. Yes, there is enormous culpability in that ignorance, much of which is willful. But the fascist mentality is: knowing a truth and insisting on a lie with brute force.
People are taught that genocide is singular. It is a unique horror that trumps all. And so, once it is embraced, all else follows--for what else is there? What more can be said or done with those who do genocide? This is one reason the current moment is such a profound crisis.
And so, anyone who tells you that this is just about a single issue doesn't know history, doesn't understand how fascism works, and doesn't understand the awe-inspiring architecture of violence, control, and power it takes to insist on a lie this big, and what that portends.
Thanks to @adamjohnsonCHI @akela_lacy and @provisionalidea whose images and work I cited above.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Not a single word in unanimous Supreme Court opinion mentioned the primary reason TikTok ban passed. The real reason was content-based, triggering a legal standard that would have struck it down. Very interesting dynamics on why TikTok decided not to press its strongest argument.
Leaders in both parties were extremely clear that it was motivated by the view that TikTok was making young people too pro-Palestine and genocide-aware. Now, of course, both parties are sounding very different after Gaza was destroyed and the news is talking about a ceasefire.
For many reasons, TikTok does not want to be seen as a place that spreads left ideas. Would be really interesting to learn more about who made the decision not to press the strongest legal arguments and how much the lawyers explained to the decision makers.
THREAD. It's important for all people of good will to understand the Laken Riley Act before the Senate votes on it tomorrow. It’s unconstitutional. It’s horrific in every word and clause. But there is a deeper, more imminent violence lurking beneath its hate-filled text.
First the background. The Laken Riley Act is unprecedented in modern U.S. history. It requires federal DHS bureaucracy to build billions in new infrastructure to cage any undocumented person *even accused* of petty theft, shoplifting, or several other property crimes.
A key aspect of the law is people are rounded up and put into mass caging facilities (built and usually run for profit) for a mere *accusation.* A person (even a child) need not be convicted, and they are taken from their families and jobs and churches and schools immediately.
THREAD. On Monday the New York Times let a reporter do something dishonest and unethical. It's important to unpack what happened.
First, background: NYT published an article about 2024 NYC crime rates, which went down significantly, including most important/reliable crime stat: murder. But NYT did something I call "the old switcheroo" in my Copaganda book.
In the above headline and in the very first paragraph, the paper emphasized assaults and rape as having increased, even though the crimes it most fearmongered about for years (murder, robbery, shootings, burglary, theft, etc.) went down a lot. But that's when things get weird.
Thread. The Atlantic reporter below reveals a particular kind of ignorance that is common among liberal people but important to see clearly.
His post is ludicrous in other ways many have pointed out: (1) role of U.S. media, gov, and corporate institutions is such that **this** genocide could have been/could be ended asap. (2) It's weird during genocide to criticize someone for not calling out other genocides.
Can you imagine choosing that your role as a journalist in an ongoing genocide funded and armed by the U.S. and repeatedly supported by your own magazine is to try to increase the social costs on those who are trying to get the attention of the world to stop it? It's depraved.
THREAD. There is a group of reporters at the New York Times who are intent on peddling copaganda whatever the consequences. The paper's Christmas Day crime article was one for the ages. It's a smorgasbord of propaganda tactics that I've covered, with some amusing new flourishes.
The premise is that New Mexico has a maverick Democratic governor who is fighting against all odds to expand policing, prosecution, and prisons. She's doing this, we are told, out of a genuine, laudable commitment to being "tough on crime" because she cares about our safety.
The villains in the article? Other Democrats in New Mexico who have dared to question (based on mountains of evidence) whether more police, prosecutors, and prisons will help address problems of housing, medical care, inequality, precarity, and safety. Enter the New York Times.
Thread. The New York Times coverage of the police search for the killer of the health insurance CEO is getting weird. One aspect of it is pretty dark.
A key feature of copaganda is that police and the news media attempt to use crises to increase the size, power, and profit of the punishment and surveillance bureaucracies. This has long been one of the creepiest things about it. They don’t let a good crisis go to waste.
In today’s fawning tribute to the NYPD’s surveillance system, the paper celebrates surveillance and even laments that New York does not have enough. That’s the thrust of the entire article.