Read on Twitter
Now that people have calmed down enough to acknowledge that there was no real insurrectionary movement--the main point I've been making--I'll repeat the second point I get yelled at for.
1/
1/
Claims the rioters were "against Democracy" are misleading.
Truer to say they were convinced by false claims from authorities they trusted (and, yeah, by their own lack of discernment) that the election was stolen.
They sought to restore Democracy, in an idiotic way.
2/
Truer to say they were convinced by false claims from authorities they trusted (and, yeah, by their own lack of discernment) that the election was stolen.
They sought to restore Democracy, in an idiotic way.
2/
Why does this distinction matter? Two reasons.
First: large movements on the Right historically *have* opposed Democracy in the conscious, deliberate sense. When two movements are different, it's good intellectual hygiene to not pretend they are the same!
Second...
3/
First: large movements on the Right historically *have* opposed Democracy in the conscious, deliberate sense. When two movements are different, it's good intellectual hygiene to not pretend they are the same!
Second...
3/
...claiming the rioters were "against Democracy" buries the difficulty of our real battle, over how "true facts" are established in a democratic public sphere.
This is our real predicament, and it's a tough one.
You make no progress against falsehoods by adding your own.
4/4
This is our real predicament, and it's a tough one.
You make no progress against falsehoods by adding your own.
4/4
