Read on Twitter
"Reconciliation" is the new buzz word in US political discourse right now.
We do need to reconcile. But reconciliation requires meaningful accountability for wrongdoing. It is not achieved by simply 'moving on.'
A thread on why 1/
We do need to reconcile. But reconciliation requires meaningful accountability for wrongdoing. It is not achieved by simply 'moving on.'
A thread on why 1/
Reconciliation is repairing damaged relationships (among citizens and between citizens and officials)
To pursue reconciliation you need to understand:
a)The ways relationships are damaged
b)What repaired relationships look like
c)How to address damage to facilitate repair 2/
To pursue reconciliation you need to understand:
a)The ways relationships are damaged
b)What repaired relationships look like
c)How to address damage to facilitate repair 2/
Political reconciliation is not forgiveness. A brief summary of why.
There is lots of anger in the present moment. Anger can be reasonable or unreasonable. It can be a response to actually be wronged or incorrectly believing one was wronged. 3/
There is lots of anger in the present moment. Anger can be reasonable or unreasonable. It can be a response to actually be wronged or incorrectly believing one was wronged. 3/
Forgiveness is overcoming negative emotions (e.g., anger) in response to being wronged. But:
1) you cannot forgive if you have not been wronged; those angry at Trump's loss have not been wronged by the system. To talk about forgiveness in their cases is a category mistake. 4/
1) you cannot forgive if you have not been wronged; those angry at Trump's loss have not been wronged by the system. To talk about forgiveness in their cases is a category mistake. 4/
2) Justified anger (e.g, at police abuse) does not damage political relationships, the sources of that anger do (e.g., police abuse).
3) Overcoming justified anger doesn't address the sources of damage
4) It places burden of repairing relationships on victims. 5/
3) Overcoming justified anger doesn't address the sources of damage
4) It places burden of repairing relationships on victims. 5/
Think about damage to relationships instead in terms of:
a) Erosion or absence of the rule of law
b) Deep and pervasive distrust
c) Absence of opportunities to be respected, recognized as equal member of a political community, participate in pol processes, avoid poverty 6/
a) Erosion or absence of the rule of law
b) Deep and pervasive distrust
c) Absence of opportunities to be respected, recognized as equal member of a political community, participate in pol processes, avoid poverty 6/
The rule of law has systematically eroded under Trump (though not simply under him). See 7/ https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/why-we-need-protect-rule-law-federal-government
Trust among citizens & between citizens and officials is low. Default presumption of ill-will and lack of competence are pervasive 8/ https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2019/07/22/trust-and-distrust-in-america/
Obstacles to meaningful participation, especially for Black voters and voters of color, continue to be fundamental problems in the US. Many worry that the false claims of voter fraud will be used to justify further suppression. 9/ https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/timeline-voter-suppression-us-civil-war-today/story?id=72248473
Repairing our relationships requires:
1) rebuilding the rule of law
2) establishing conditions for trust to be reasonable (and for the reasonable of trust to be recognized)
3) enhancing opportunities for respect, recognition of all citizens as equal members, pol participation 10/
1) rebuilding the rule of law
2) establishing conditions for trust to be reasonable (and for the reasonable of trust to be recognized)
3) enhancing opportunities for respect, recognition of all citizens as equal members, pol participation 10/
Why accountability as route to repair?
Note: in most relationships when an egregious violation occurs the advice is not 'move on'. The wrong doesn't go away nor is damage undo. To address damage, the wrong must be acknowledged and addressed. Same thought should apply here 11/
Note: in most relationships when an egregious violation occurs the advice is not 'move on'. The wrong doesn't go away nor is damage undo. To address damage, the wrong must be acknowledged and addressed. Same thought should apply here 11/
More specifically in the US context:
The reasonablenes of trust depends on shared baselines of acceptable behavior. Those don't exist if a) a mob can violently enforce its will if it dislikes an outcome of elections or b) if officials refuse to concede & incite violence. 12/
The reasonablenes of trust depends on shared baselines of acceptable behavior. Those don't exist if a) a mob can violently enforce its will if it dislikes an outcome of elections or b) if officials refuse to concede & incite violence. 12/
Rule of law is damaged if challenges to the basic framework for allocating political power go unaddressed.
Rioters and Trump will demonstrate they are above the law if they can violently challenge the legal framework for our structure of gov't without consequence. 13/
Rioters and Trump will demonstrate they are above the law if they can violently challenge the legal framework for our structure of gov't without consequence. 13/
So much of rhetoric of 'illegal votes' is focused on the central role played by Black voters and voters of color in this election. To undermine the electoral outcome is to signal that those votes don’t count if white militias or mobs say they don't 14/ https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/11/trump-wants-to-steal-the-election-by-disenfranchising-thousands-of-black-voters
The debate should not be: do we move on or not?
The debate should be: how do we address an armed challenge to our democratic elections incited by the President who lost and underpinned by demonstrably false conspiracy narratives? 15/
The debate should be: how do we address an armed challenge to our democratic elections incited by the President who lost and underpinned by demonstrably false conspiracy narratives? 15/
The debate about accountability for wrongdoing should be broadened, too, to address systemic racial injustice. On this see my piece with @kelly_zvobgo 16/ https://msmagazine.com/2020/12/16/movement-transitional-justice-united-states/
The above thread draws on my two books:
A Moral Theory of Political Reconciliation:
https://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/philosophy/political-philosophy/moral-theory-political-reconciliation?format=PB
The Conceptual Foundations of Transitional Justice: https://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/philosophy/legal-philosophy/conceptual-foundations-transitional-justice?format=PB#bsJFMo7skroMk6wF.97
A Moral Theory of Political Reconciliation:
https://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/philosophy/political-philosophy/moral-theory-political-reconciliation?format=PB
The Conceptual Foundations of Transitional Justice: https://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/philosophy/legal-philosophy/conceptual-foundations-transitional-justice?format=PB#bsJFMo7skroMk6wF.97
