Can Our Democracy Survive This?

[_moksha]

When Trump says in a speech to his supporters that "they were vicious and violent but now they are mellow" I imagine they look around and then begin murmuring about eliminating the softies in the crowd. It is like he groomed the worst in his supporters and now he wants them to chill? Good luck with that.
This message sponsored by Borderline Citizens Against the Media

[_beastie]

Radical tribalism is unfortunately on the rise. I think part of the problem is that we have so many sources for news we pick the ones we like that usually tell us what we want to hear. This means for most they only get one narrative, and usually one that is wrong and radical. One of the other big problems is fake news and Putin pushing this to inspire radical tribalism in Europe and the US to destabilize these areas for his groups benefit.

I'm not sure democracy is ready for the internet. People are mostly ignorant and easily manipulated by those who are not friends to democracy. I know people who get on the internet and then tell me all sorts of things you would think they should know is not true. The internet is wonderful for all the good information you can find in seconds, but it also means every nut job and more importantly, groups who want to manipulate the population, can get their message out. I'm not sure what the solution is, if one exists that allows democracy to survive long term.

I agree completely.

The internet has simultaneously revealed the best and the worst in human beings. Our best being our curiosity and desire to learn, and our willingness to share information with others, as well as our willingness to assist others. Our worst being our gullibility, the wiring of our brains that leaves us susceptible to believe falsehoods, engaging in malicious behavior, and demonizing other groups.

We do live in interesting times, which does feel like a curse right now.

[_beastie]

I'm not sure. I think you identify two of the major problems that are deeply troubling for our system of government. Hyperpartisanship, especially on the right, and loss of trust in any US institution other than the police and military is extremely troubling. Over recent decades, this combination tends to portend the fall of democratic governments. You also identified the most important cause: the rise of cable news media and its online equivalents. That cause isn't going away anytime soon. The tribalism you are talking about isn't an issue of wealth per se, but cultural identification that has been, among other things, successfully used as a branding tool to advance the interests of a group of politically active wealthy people.

I'm not sure how much of the Republican party that won't put power over even basic small "d" democratic principles is even left. The situation is bad. The Democratic party hasn't similarly fallen apart, but you got to believe they will be pushed to fight fire with fire at some point, and then I'm not sure where that leaves us.

When you see what's going on in places like North Carolina, you especially got to feel we are losing the republic bit by bit.

Yes, it is true that a small group of politically active wealthy people are deliberately using cultural identification as a means to manipulate large groups of people to vote against their interests. But I also think it is true that income disparity is a problem in its own right.

NC is dismaying, but not surprising. Given how few republicans seem bothered by Putin's meddling in our election, I think it's safe to assume that, in many of their minds, the goal of attaining power is justified by any means. And the leaders who place power above any and all ideology, including democracy, are probably right to assume that most of their followers will support attempts to cobble democracy and cripple our system of governance, as long as the tyrants are their tyrants.

However, I do have hope that the courts will reverse the current NC machinations.

It's pretty depressing overall.

[_beastie]

More to the point. Are there any responsible journalists reporting the news?

I actually do think there are responsible journalists reporting the news. I think NPR has quite a few. Diane Rehm has long been one of my favorites. She's retiring but still going to do a podcast.

I think we have to accept that the blame has to be shared between irresponsible media and the public. They are giving us what apparently enough of us want to make it quite profitable.

We have identified the enemy and he is us.

[_EAllusion]

Most of what is happening in North Carolina is legal, though, so I'm not sure how the courts would block it unless process was violating in passing the changes. The problem is that this sort of extreme partisanship breaks down democratic representation and our constitutional system(s) isn't cleverly written enough to prevent it. It's as though a modern variant of the Jim Crow south has become a nationalized party.

The one thing that strikes me as an equal protection issue in NC, which not coincidentally is also the most dastardly action, is creating election boards have equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats, but allowing Republicans to control the board in even years and Democrats in odd years. That, of course, means they've made the law such that Republicans always control election boards in the years of any significant election. If that's not a Constitutional issue, then that's a major blindspot.

[_beastie]

When Trump says in a speech to his supporters that "they were vicious and violent but now they are mellow" I imagine they look around and then begin murmuring about eliminating the softies in the crowd. It is like he groomed the worst in his supporters and now he wants them to chill? Good luck with that.
This message sponsored by Borderline Citizens Against the Media

It may well be the genie he can't put back in the bottle. I think there likely is a portion of his supporters who will resent and resist attempts to mellow out. The question is numbers. That group may well be the same group who actually gets angry when Trump doesn't jail Hillary, build a massive wall, or drain the swamp. But are they a small minority of his supporters? Are the rest actually just fans of Trump, no matter what he actually does in office?

[_EAllusion]

So I'm sure you've seen the recent polling indicating that Republican polling of favorability towards Putin has drastically increased, right Beastie? I'm sure the first thing that strikes anyone about seeing that is that merely having the head of the party appear pro-Putin is sufficient to cause a radical change in opinion among the average Republican which in turn means that can be made to support nearly anything if the leader does.

But once you get passed that observation (which is also true in a less extreme form on the Democratic side), there's a more troubling one lurking underneath the surface. Read Republican approval ratings of any Democratic figure. It's rare to see it go above 10%. In other words, Republicans have a much, much more favorable view of Vladimir Putin than they do Democrats. That's, um, not good.

[_beastie]

Most of what is happening in North Carolina is legal, though, so I'm not sure how the courts would block it unless process was violating in passing the changes. The problem is that this sort of extreme partisanship breaks down democratic representation and our constitutional system(s) isn't cleverly written enough to prevent it. It's as though a modern variant of the Jim Crow south has become a nationalized party.

The one thing that strikes me as an equal protection issue in North Carolina, which not coincidentally is also the most dastardly action, is creating election boards have equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats, but allowing Republicans to control the board in even years and Democrats in odd years. That, of course, means they've made the law such that Republicans always control election boards in the years of any significant election. If that's not a Constitutional issue, then that's a major blindspot.

I was feeling hopeful based on how the NC courts struck down the voter ID law, which was obviously designed to suppress black voting. Cooper did say he'd go to court if the laws are unconstitutional or hurting working people.

[_EAllusion]

When Trump says in a speech to his supporters that "they were vicious and violent but now they are mellow" I imagine they look around and then begin murmuring about eliminating the softies in the crowd. It is like he groomed the worst in his supporters and now he wants them to chill? Good luck with that.
This message sponsored by Borderline Citizens Against the Media

It may well be the genie he can't put back in the bottle. I think there likely is a portion of his supporters who will resent and resist attempts to mellow out. The question is numbers. That group may well be the same group who actually gets angry when Trump doesn't jail Hillary, build a massive wall, or drain the swamp. But are they a small minority of his supporters? Are the rest actually just fans of Trump, no matter what he actually does in office?

The thing is Trump is still quite unpopular. Incoming presidents usually have a halo effect around them that leaves them starting out relatively popular. Trump's halo effect has put him in the range of a fairly unpopular president rather than the most disliked candidate ever he was during the campaign.

Trump isn't doing this on the back of a ton of support. The thing you have to adjust to is the fact that this doesn't matter. Public support is nice, but it isn't required. Institutional power matters more, and Republicans have strategistized and lucked into dominating that. It doesn't matter all that much if Trump is unpopular which means that Trump can do unpopular things and not worry about consequences. This is especially true if Republicans go ahead with the federal voter suppression policies that basically everyone paying attention is anticipating.

[_EAllusion]

Most of what is happening in North Carolina is legal, though, so I'm not sure how the courts would block it unless process was violating in passing the changes. The problem is that this sort of extreme partisanship breaks down democratic representation and our constitutional system(s) isn't cleverly written enough to prevent it. It's as though a modern variant of the Jim Crow south has become a nationalized party.

The one thing that strikes me as an equal protection issue in North Carolina, which not coincidentally is also the most dastardly action, is creating election boards have equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats, but allowing Republicans to control the board in even years and Democrats in odd years. That, of course, means they've made the law such that Republicans always control election boards in the years of any significant election. If that's not a Constitutional issue, then that's a major blindspot.

I was feeling hopeful based on how the NC courts struck down the voter ID law, which was obviously designed to suppress black voting. Cooper did say he'd go to court if the laws are unconstitutional or hurting working people.

North Carolina's voter ID violated the law though. That's why it was struck down. Weakening governor powers and redirecting the system of government through the parts still controlled by Republicans is not against the law in of itself. It's just that this doesn't normally happen because of some combination of civic principle and fear of eventual payback.

The one exception I can see in what I've read is the election board issue. That's just so blatantly meant to deny equal access to representation to Democrats.