Tyranny of the Minority: How American Democracy Came to the Breaking Point

Join Steven Levitsky who will be discussing his upcoming book Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point.
Steven Levitsky is David Rockefeller Professor of Latin American Studies and Professor of Government at Harvard University. He is also Director of the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies at Harvard. His research focuses on democratization and authoritarianism, political parties, and weak and informal institutions, with a focus on in Latin America. He is co-author (with Daniel Ziblatt) of How Democracies Die, which was a New York Times Best-Seller and was published in 25 languages. He has written or edited 11 other books, including Transforming Labor-Based Parties in Latin America: Argentine Peronism in Comparative Perspective (Cambridge University Press 2003), Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War (with Lucan Way) (Cambridge University Press, 2010), Revolution and Dictatorship: The Violent Origins of Durable Authoritarianism (with Lucan Way) (Princeton University Press, 2022), and most recently, Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point (with Daniel Ziblatt) (Crown Publishers, forthcoming). He and Lucan Way are currently working on a book on democratic survival across the world.
Meet the Author

[@soundbonz]

Growing corporate power is the most obvious major threat to democracy world wide and has been since the beginning.

[@woodygilson3465]

Corporations wouldn't be the economic and environmental threats they are without the politicians they own.

[@davidpeppers551]

​@@woodygilson3465Which comes first? Are you excusing the corporations for their corruption?

[@woodygilson3465]

@@davidpeppers551 For a seed to grow, there has to be soil. See, the problem is, the gardener (which is us, the people) stopped tending the greenhouse and shit grew out of control. I'm an anarchist in spirit, so of course I'm anticapitalist. But... Capitalism is what people seem to want, without any responsibility for it, of course. That's why "representative government" exists. The fault lies squarely on the people for allowing things to be what they are on Capitol Hill and on Wall Street.

[@Boydjaco2]

Capitalism destroys everything it touches!

[@davidpeppers551]

@@woodygilson3465 People do need to take responsibility. We have a few root problems in the US. Capitalism is one it is antithetical to freedom, yet so many confuse capitalism with freedom. Our national elections disadvantage the popular vote and favor smaller states. People have been sleeping.

[@Double.S.02]

As someone living outside the USA and not knowing much about it's history in depth I have struggled to make sense of what has been happening the past 7 years. Watching events from afar has left me confused and grown my awareness of how vulnerable the USA is. This lecture has been very enlightening for me. I wish all democratically minded people of both the main parties in the USA the best as you try to work through these difficult times.

[@GRobLewis]

Things weren't great before Trump, but he openly encouraged the white racists who were panicked that their country was being "stolen" from them.

[@davidpeppers551]

All empires fail. Major powers of the past have all lost their prominence. So many thought they were unique and uniquely capable of going on forever. Hasn't been one yet able to sustain itself. Many just implode. We will likely implode. We may be seeing that now. Is it because we restrained democracy too much? Would things be sustainable if power and responsibility were more equitably shared? Financialization? Financialization of the economy has brought down great powers of the past. We have a highly financialized economy now.

[@sharontabor7718]

It all began in the 1990s and Newt Gingrich rose to power. In order to keep the GOP in control, he led the gerrymandering efforts in state districts. Mitch McConnell carried the torch with election funding reform, removing contribution limits. More corporate money has been funding campaigns with more money spent on advertising each year, and more elected officials obligated to vote in favor of their donors, And that is an entire book in a nutshell. My brother-in-law was asked to run for Judge Executive (an archaic term that has nothing to do with the legal world) in KY. He would have been excellent as a county leader. He rejected the offer because he didn't want to be obligated to campaign donors.

[@sanriosonderweg]

There are 3 replies, all invisible, this is what you are allowed to see, and this is who is allowed to speak in a fallen system, should say it all.

[@Double.S.02]

@@sanriosonderweg I am not sure what you are about sorry. If your comment is in reference to my comment, I know nothing of the comments you and I cannot see. A conspiracy?

[@donaldedward4951]

January 21, 2020 marked a decade since the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, a controversial decision that reversed century-old campaign finance restrictions and enabled corporations and other outside groups to spend unlimited funds on elections. While wealthy donors, corporations, and special interest groups have long had an outsized influence in elections, that sway has dramatically expanded since the Citizens United decision, with negative repercussions for American democracy and the fight against political corruption.

[@erinmac4750]

Truth! That is an aspect he didn't touch on here, but would hope is in the book.

[@sanriosonderweg]

And the media? Influence? NPR and entire platforms censored stories we all know are true now. Quick test of sincere concern for electoral integrity, which side supports voter ID.

[@Starfish2145]

Well said

[@cvr527]

Yet the democratic party been setting fund raising records with each successive election. Why is that?

[@danwylie-sears1134]

The US has redistributed income from non-managerial labor to management and capital, and has done so very aggressively. It's likely that some post-colonial countries have been even more aggressive about it, but we're still on the aggressive end of the spectrum, as shown by the fact that the world's richest individuals are disproportionately American.

[@direwolf6234]

yes .. the top 0.1% has 20% of wealth .. the top 9.9% has 60% .. leaving 20% for the 90% ..

[@tefky7964]

Its always quite weird when some people proudly say that the US has more and richer billionares than other developed countries. Like wtf, thats not a good thing to be proud about.

[@andywomack3414]

@@direwolf6234 It's been a bipartisan project, and Levitsky thinks it will take a bipartisan effort to correct this primary threat to out Democracy.

[@direwolf6234]

@@andywomack3414 the top 10% will never relinquish their power and privilege and that includes both sides because that's where they both agree ...

[@andywomack3414]

@@direwolf6234 It's a power dynamic that's intrinsic to civilization. Wealth is power, power corrupts. Not always a source of evil, nor the only, but it usually is.

[@leealexander3507]

Right now we don't have a democracy. We have an oligarchy. We not only need to protect what little democracy we have left but we have to take it back from the plutocracy and that's no small task but we have to do it if we want to have a democracy at all. Eliminating the electoral college won't be easy but we have to do that too in spite of the fact that it's in the constitution which lent itself to oligarchy right from the start 😊

[@whatsup9260]

i believe a study showed that by 2014 the large majority of laws, regulations, bills etc ... got written and implemented for the rich minority, the oligarchy. wonder what the percentage is at this point since they broke the 50% mark in 2014.

[@benjaminhenderson5025]

Until you eliminate the rigged primaries eliminating the electoral college wont do anything. I3eck vs |)|\|C. Look it up.

[@bouncingBrain]

Democracy is more than elections. The question should also be whether our government truly represents the interests of, and works for the well-being, of the people.

[@Driver-ur9mf]

Democracy is two coyotes and a chicken voting on what is for dinner. Disproving his argument about red states and supermajority. Chicken dies every time. Huge ghetto cities consuming billions of taxpayer's money, while contributing less tax revenue are overly represented. And yes, rich pricks like him should pay more. I vote for it, he votes against it. How do you vote? Guess it doesn't matter, he won't do it

[@sharonforkin6064]

Exactly. I haven't seen anything being done other than going after "the other side", putting personal agenda ahead of the people they represent, and childish behavior. All I see are our representatives either pushing for their lobbyists interests or being afraid to speak up and dissent for fear of losing lobbyist money. Raising minimum wage should be a no brainer for all representatives. It costs the government nothing but is strongly opposed by corporations. So you can see by that one example that money talks and we the people lose.

[@clarkwatson3217]

Lol No. Demcracy is only election. We are a republic, kid

[@aa2ll260]

Gotta love America, where they'll discuss multi-racial democracy but not multi-party democracy. As long as tweedledee and tweedledum rule, the corporate sector buys both and the US "democracy" remains a sham. Everybody knows this. It'll never change with first past the post voting as voters tend not to vote for a new, minor party that has no chance to win. How to begin to restore democracy? Preferential voting, aka "rank choice" voting.

[@Beretta249]

Overreliance on political norms is really frustrating from the late-game position. It's sloppy and sentimental and in retrospect looks like an avoidance of hard questions. And who _the hell_ would think Rich Democracies don't fail!? Wealth is a class identity, not a patriotic one! Doubly so when inequality is so not just severe but OBVIOUS. It's becomes a solvent of solidarity, not a mortar.

[@noahsark2009]

If the Democrats weren't so compromised by Wall Street and other Big Money Donors, then there would be a chance for working and middle class needs to be addressed. But instead, many see the Democrats as part of a duopoly, hence the appeal of an "Outsider" like Trump or Bernie. The outsider can mobilize the disaffected through con games, fears, and hatreds to confuse and split people further apart or through a clear analysis, courage, and solidarity. The Democrat's betrayal and abandonment of the working class and the people between the coasts is what set this up. Thankfully, people are trying to repair that by energizing the multicultural working class coalitions that will change things

[@ivandafoe5451]

You are completely correct.

[@noheroespublishing1907]

Michael Parenti is so right about Liberals and their analysis, they follow the ABCs (Anything But Class), and their refusal to acknowledge Class makes their analysis stunted and ineffectual.

[@andywomack3414]

@@noheroespublishing1907 He has KZbin, all look interesting.

[@noheroespublishing1907]

@@andywomack3414 I've seen quite a few of his presentations, and gone through some of his KZbin audio books; he's now dealing with dementia, so whatever we have of his is probably all we'll ever have. 😔 (Michael Parenti that is)

[@ivantuma7969]

one advantage not mentioned - there are 1,500 conservative radio stations across the country, yet only a handful of progressive/left-leaning ones. Most of these "talk radio" stations are syndicated throughout the rural areas. Owners, who represent corporate interests, ensure that only those policies that benefit them are featured in the content - and thus encourage citizens in these areas (who often only have access to information via local media (little broadband internet access)), to vote against their self interests, and solely vote based along ideological lines whipped up by the media they're consuming.

[@nancychandler3673]

Yes, we can see in the comments those who have difficulty understanding this discussion and will twist themselves into a pseudo intellectual word salad. We've got all the AM radio Conspiracy Theories in the comments.

[@OurNewestMember]

How different is this situation from alternatives like TV or online news? How do total listeners compare to TV viewership?

[@dspondike]

Ever since I was a teenager back in the 70s, I would say that what makes the difference between a democracy and mob rule is that it is the obligation and responsibility of the majority to uphold the rights of the minority. I did not think that we would create “minority rule”.

[@kimberlycarrigan8824]

You can't force people to protect your rights by saying it's their obligation

[@Bloo_DMT]

America cast off monarchy tyranny for mercantile tyranny. In both cases mob rule is the greatest threat to those who benefit from such tyrannies.

[@imperialmotoring3789]

LGBTQUIA is minority rule.

[@dspondike]

@@kimberlycarrigan8824 : Some people are comfortable with their immorality. That is why we have to have laws.

[@kimberlycarrigan8824]

@@dspondike laws aren't magic. They are written by people.

[@conors4430]

Also, people economic conditions have gotten worse over the last 40 years, and when that happens, people start looking for scapegoats, and they find them in the people that they already won’t overly comfortable with, and that discomfort turns into a pure hatred. Look at Nazi Germany, one of the major reasons why the Nazi party got so big was because the economic conditions in Germany broke down to such an extent where people fled to the extremes, and started looking for the reasons why they were suffering, and they just had a group that was willing to tell them who the imaginary boogie man was. The Democrats, the Republicans, the establishment and Wall Street, and all the major American businesses have absolutely no interest in making the economic situation of the majority of Americans better, because they are so corrupt and have so much power and influence within the system. So the inevitable outcome of this is, people who have harder lives who are scared who are angry and who are looking for a place to take that anger out.

[@rogersmith7396]

Conditions have gotten worse by design. They have gotten much better for a bare few. I wonder who designed this?

[@DSAK55]

This is an old phenomenon, when people looks for scapegoats, they look that the next rung, not the top of the ladder

[@mtn1793]

The temptation and easy way out is to make a war and create new economic stimulus. It’s temporary and it’s fake but that’s as high as human motivation rises for the most part. Today we should have the one percent clamoring to attack global warming but they can’t see the challenge. Start a war though…

[@MelissaR784]

​@@rogersmith7396 The same people who benefit, of course.

[@milesblue638]

America has a unique racial history that cannot be explained away by economic arguments alone. During good times and bad, a racial caste system has prevailed. White backlash against democratic institutions began as racial minorities began to achieve equal status under the law and political influence. Simplistic comparisons to Nazi Germany centered on economic deprivation completely miss the point.

[@johnlaudenslager706]

Among the tyrannical minorities, the most tyrannical one is the big-political-donor minority of rich individuals and corporations.

[@carlosross4547]

I am please to hear that an American scholar says that American democracy must learn from other countries to maintain and improve its democracy. And his proposals are simple and straight-forward. Professor Levitsky is spot-on with the main hindrance of American democracy - the difficulty of changing the Constitution. Most other countries have extensively modified their constitutions and have even replaced them with new ones.

[@dare2dreamd2d23]

Where there's a will there's a way.

[@nancychandler3673]

We need to amend the Constitution with amendments. It's due time. Never change our original Constitution, amend it.

[@kennethferland5579]

@@nancychandler3673 Amendments are changes that is literally the meaning of the word.

[@nikiphotography9861]

Your pleasure means nothing. The Scholars only talk. The white corrupt politicians are decision maker. So do not expect any amendment that will change the American System. Abolish gerrymandering and change the electoral college system. Use Popular vote as the system in Presidential election.

[@peterhall6656]

For someone from Australia this is the best explanation I have seen of how the US system works in its historical context. I also am deeply depressed at the prospects of normalcy.

[@benjaminhenderson5025]

Its really one sided. Democrats really are just as bad, they are just more subtle about it, letting republicans do their dirty work while they keep their hands clean. Pay attention to the votes they dont make when you think they should. You will quickly find there are ALWAYS just enough democrats to turn any progress into oligarchy.

[@lexismore]

American politics as usual is deeply depressing as well.

[@kennethferland5579]

Austrialia is the best example of how Partilemtary government would be superior for the US. Austrialia has all if not more of Americas cultural flaws but parlimentary systems prevent gridlock and minority rule.

[@stephm.3407]

So are most of us, especially the farther left of center we are. I think in the not-too-distant future, many of us will be doing our best to leave this every increasing dystopian hellscape, but will any country be willing to take us?

[@subcitizen2012]

It's time to start shopping for the best countries to submit your asylum claims.

[@Beretta249]

Meanwhile if you're in the 99% who can't flee with their money overseas, you'd better give a damn and mobilize. Your country needs you and you aren't getting a new homeland for cheap.

[@rate8818]

Nobody can escape the americans, especially not the americans. That's the distressing reality.

[@Beretta249]

@@rate8818 But it's also a flaw in our great doom. Win democracy back for America and a lot becomes very possible.

[@rogersmith7396]

Theres room in El Salvador.

[@melanienolley]

@@rate8818 Absolutely true.

[@Blonde111]

This lecture highlights how vulnerable we are… I won’t befriend or continue my friendships with anyone who thinks this criminal should hold ANY public office .

[@HereInPA_Hagen]

This is an excellent explanation of where our “democracy“ is today. It is distressing. Rational minds must prevail, but I’m not sure they will in today’s climate.

[@paulr3002]

What this guy is saying is absolutely nothing new, but it does need to be said and he says it effectively. He and his co-author said in their 2020 book that Republicans were not authoritarians! But now he's changed his mind! Sorry but Republicans have been clearly racist authoritarians since the Reagan presidency, which he stole by the way. And Bush stole it in 2000, and Trump in 2016.

[@eksbocks9438]

Irrational people are more impulsive. Therefore, more likely to take the initiative. A lot of the American populous is in denial of the situation. Heck, we don't have the motivation to protect and mentor each other. We should be protecting each other from anti-Democratic aggression. But we don't. -If the Ukrainians did the same thing we're doing: They would be under Putin's regime right now.

[@sanriosonderweg]

Its not, 1965 and the civil rights legislation replaced the constitution with something unworkable, he cannot acknowledge it, and so has no solutions.

[@sanriosonderweg]

@@eksbocks9438 If the Ukranians didn't fall under irrational and impulsive influence of neocons, hundreds of thousands would be alive now.

[@lyndonbarsten393]

It's a little strange that he never mentions the power of the GOP mega-donors.

[@benjaminhenderson5025]

Sssshhhhh. You cant talk about the corruption or his points all fall apart, especially the one where republicans and democrats arent exactly the same.

[@eckz8659]

😂😂😂

[@alexiswallace2656]

What about the democrat mega donors?

[@eckz8659]

@@alexiswallace2656 They never have an answer for this that's why I just laughed at the stupidity.

[@GhettoGirlTravels]

I have two words for why it wasn’t mentioned … Mehmet Oz! The biggest losers, in the US midterm election, were the Republican mega-donors!

[@armantookmanian1938]

Why assert that "... the U.S. was not truely a democracy until 1965 ..." but have no comment on the SCOTUS defanging the laws that enforce of these rights?

[@davidwright7193]

There is a real need to at least change the senate voting rules to a qualified majority voting system where to pass legislation you need to have the majority of votes on the floor and the support of senators representing a majority of the US electorate. That way at least the minority cannot do things like impose Supreme Court justices on the majority.

[@londontatehudson1794]

Amazes me that people STILL think any of this is even real.

[@rogersmith7396]

Get rid of the Senate. Its purpose is to prevent majority rule.

[@coasterblocks3420]

Your entire electoral system needs to be scrapped and rebuilt from the ground up.

[@synthstatic9889]

The senate should be downgraded to an advisory body. It should not have any real power. The USA gives its upper house more power than any other western democracy and that more than anything else explains why we are so dysfunctional.

[@benjaminhenderson5025]

@@londontatehudson1794 right on the money

[@mariadorazio7001]

The way minorities have been treated in the USA is a significant part of this problem. Why is the white majority so frightened of becoming the minority? They assume that they will be on the receiving end of the racist policies that have seriously limited minorities in this country from achieving the 'American Dream'. Will highways be built through their neighborhoods? Will banks start denying their loans? Will the police forces focus more on their neighborhoods?

[@JAnonymousChick]

Such a great discussion on the Electoral College. Always knew it wasn't right but learning so much more. Thank you.

[@corinnapetry65]

This is a fabulous explainer. Well done.

[@regisnyder]

This was an excellent lecture; and I generally don’t continue watching during the Q/A portion! But the questions were thought provoking and the answers!

[@michaelodonnell824]

It seemed to me that, at least some of the questioners, were Maga Republican aligned. The lecturer certainly attempted to correct the tendency but...

[@danielsykes7558]

​@@michaelodonnell824 I also definitely agree. He seems like he may be Modi/Trump allied.

[@fmcg5364]

I liked the lecture and some questions were OK but off topic, especially that female professor bringing up gender, and then asked did not ask any gender specific questions and then how the democrats didn't go after the non-college graduate voters. But how trump did, are we supposed to think that trump is OK because he wanted non-college educated voters? Then how the democrats have done nothing for the working class but who is truly responsible for that but the republicans. She was an unnecessary downer who just wanted to attack the democrats.

[@mistletoe4961]

She must be incredibly proud of her father. May she grow, learn and continue the path her father worked to expand. We live in critical times. His words must be heard.

[@sanriosonderweg]

He is the system, why are you acting like he has no voice when he is the chosen platformed by the regime.

[@SkepticalZack]

The people asking questions. “I know democracy is about to end and all but democrats are bad too right? I mean we have to be fair. This is my totally novel thought” Reminds me of the man who has the right of way in the street against a car. He is right, dead right.

[@synthstatic9889]

South Park has ruined so many young minds.

[@SkepticalZack]

@@synthstatic9889 non sequitur?

[@synthstatic9889]

@@SkepticalZack South Park regularly plays the "both sides bad m'kay" card.

[@SkepticalZack]

@@synthstatic9889 so right, hello ManBearPig

[@RidingWithBiden]

A vote for a Republican in today's world is a vote for fascism.

[@DougGrinbergs]

2:52 Skip intro, smalltalk 3:32 Freedom House democracy score down from 94 to 83 since a decade ago, tied with Panama, Romania, below Argentina. 8:15 in last book, five years ago, did not consider Republican party authoritarian

[@cathy9276]

I think both parties become authoritians, and it seems to me democrats accept left-violence. Elections will be questioned from the left and from the right.

[@alaskavaper2490]

Great analysis of the American political dilemma.

[@direwolf6234]

a dilemma is having to choose between 2 outcomes each of which has negative consequences .. this is not a dilemma ... it is a critical decision point ...

[@smallpeople172]

@@direwolf6234 false logic. Both don’t have negative outcomes

[@benjaminhenderson5025]

Maybe if you dont pay any attention to the democrats, and only criticize the republicans. In reality, their both horrible, and they WANT things to stay as they are. Its what makes them all rich.

[@eckz8659]

​​@@smallpeople172 yes they do lol.

[@megwenger8756]

Thank you for your work and making sure that it’s heard.

[@gladysg7773]

Who is the gentlemen at 56:59 ? A professor? He seems pretty interesting and I’d like to find out/listen to more of his views.

[@DrunkenUFOPilot]

If there were a Nobel Prize in Asking Great Questions, I'd nominate him!

[@earthjustice01]

Excellent analysis. "..This is a uniquely American problem. In no other established democracy can partisan minorities thwart electoral majorities as consistently or as consequentially as in the United States." "...Other democracies across the world have become more democratic over the last century, they have eliminated eighteenth and nineteenth century institutions that allowed minorities to systematically thwart majorities....The U. S. is an outlier, it is a uniquely counter-majoritarian system. This explains, at least in part why U.S. democracy seems to be uniquely threatened among the world's rich democracies."

[@caesar848]

It's here in India too.

[@JimJamTheAdmin]

​​@@caesar848 aren't India's castes/classes far more promiment in politics, still too? That can't be easy. Not like America isn't still mired in racial castes.

[@rogersmith7396]

Its more the norm. Fascists will always seek to take power. They could care less about the vote. Hitler took over with about 30% of the vote in Germany.

[@jamesmedina2062]

"threatens" does not cut it. More like "cripples" or "harms people". The lack of progress is borne by all the 3rd world countries subjected to our invasive CIA, all countries exposed to chemicals in our food exports, the ecosystem destruction caused by the rich and powerful oil companies above the law...and the list goes on of domestic and foreign harm caused regularly

[@synthstatic9889]

You can’t run a 21st century country on 18th century software.

[@kaceykelly7222]

This presentation is incredible and so urgently needed! I will be looking for this speaker from now on...

[@CarlMosk]

Excellent analysis.

[@planck39]

A great lecture!!!! I must admit that my books concerning the history of the US constitution are "Dust Catchers" at the moment. This lecture is a good intro!!!!

[@nancychandler3673]

Spot on lecture. It would help those less educated to learn how Political Parties have changed ideologies throughout the beginning and up to this date.

[@alanrobertson9790]

An aspect I disagree with is that at 42 mins the speaker states that no other democracy suffers this problem but I think similar occurs with any first past the post system which tends to lead to two possible parties. If these parties agree then no alternative solutions are possible whether a majority rejects them or not. (Speaking from UK I know this problem well). If the speaker really believes in simple majority rule then I suggest a change to a proportional system so we dont get the dictatorship of the democrat party. Mind you as this speaker is highly partisan I doubt if this idea would be welcomed.

[@jfverboom7973]

Contents Holding presidents accountable Restoring checks on executive power Limiting secret money in politics Reforming executive branch ethics Restoring executive branch transparency Reforming congressional ethics Reforming judicial ethics Improving our democracy www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/What-Democracy-Looks-Like.pdf

[@earthjustice01]

"Semi-loyalists play an important role in enabling authoritarianism.".... Lindsey Graham, Kevin McCarthy' Mitch McConnell...

[@tgylfason]

Brilliant lecture.

[@musictomyears8]

Yes, he doesn't mention powerful business interests, he doesn't mention poverty and the precarious middle class. A brilliant job at apologia for the status quo.

[@matjul2008]

That less question was amazing ! Well said.

[@ElaineMLove]

Excellent lecture! One of the best I have sat in 2yrs.! So Thank you Professor Lenvitsy and Brown University for such an engaging speaker with the content being easily digestively. Also enjoyed the students (audience) great questions with a little pushback from an opposition point of view! I believe they used to call that type of engaging "somewhat spirited, intellectual curious discussion "😊

[@ChannelMath]

Freedom House doesn't seem to rate the US on democracy. We have a "freedom" score of 83. Uruguay is 96

[@nancychandler3673]

Yes, the Trump Presidency and all that was enabled such has Christian Nationalist Theocracy really damaged 💔 our Country.

[@dvoravithanovsky6902]

Clearest and best lecture i have ever heard on the dangers facing our democracy. we must indeed act now before it is too late because it will be too late if we do not act now. Let us start with limiting tenure for SCOTUS, the organ that is currently undermining our democracy. Let us hold judges to the standards that they expect us to hold.

[@JoaoSantos-lv4rc]

really nice Q&A

[@royalmason1539]

Ultimately, the problem is the way states are empowered under the Constitution. The founding fathers were more concerned with state's rights than citizen rights. The states are the real governing entities in the United States. It's not the Univted Citizens of America, it's the United States. That's why The Dakotas have 4 senators, instead of sharing one. A California doesn't have a dozen senators. Almost every institutional problem with democracy in this country goes back to the power of states. To make America a democracy , you will have to disempower, or abolish states.

[@ruthcassidy6052]

As a California voter, I say hear hear!! It's obscene that a state with fewer people than my city (San Diego) has so much power, relatively speaking. I'm really tired of "states' rights" considering what so many states are doing to their citizens' rights.

[@BirthingBetterSkills]

I looked up the difference between Democracy and Republic. Both are very good at preventing the Majority from oppressing the Minority. NEITHER have a way, at all, to prevent the Minority from oppressing the Majority. We are in a heaps of trouble. Norms have zero weight!

[@corinnapetry65]

Minority rule was oppressive in South Africa and is currently extremely oppressive in Israel. These are just two examples from the 20th and 21st centuries.

[@benjaminhenderson5025]

We were founded as a slave state. Oligarchy is by design.

[@maryanncrody4867]

Live in a city like seattle. I may be the only cajun living in seattle. If i were young i would start a restarant. But i love the smorgasbord of ethnicities here with a high percentage of college devrees

[@tsnell10]

I would like to read it but at this point I'm living through it right now.

[@ryuuguu01]

"Friends don't let friends vote alone" Most gerrymandering is only a couple % points. So even in Republican states (there are Democrat gerrymandered states) getting 5 or 10% extra dem votes out, can make a big difference.

[@benjaminhenderson5025]

Get the dems to stop rigging their primaries and you will see it happen.

[@RidingWithBiden]

We need those Democratic votes now more than ever!

[@woodygilson3465]

Every societal problem comes down to politicians, not just in the US, but everywhere in the world. The end of the world itself is probably more likely to be brought on by a politician, or a group of politicians, than a natural phenomenon.

[@JO_______]

The problem is far more than just the politicians as the people continue voting for said politicians. We can't simply look at the problem of american society or democracies in general as a problem of politicians, but rather the conditions, media ecosystem, and voters who choose said politicians at the ballot box. The turkish people re-elected Erdogan relatively recently, so they clearly want more of him. This is to some degree a failure of economic education in Turkey as Erdogan's economic policies have been an obvious failure. It's also an identity politics problem of Erdogan closely identifying himself with religious institutions in Turkey, meaning that those that vote against him are not considered devout. Likewise in the United Kingdom, conservatives have been re-elected and continue to hold power despite the factually verifiable failures of Brexit. This is due to a media landscape which for several successive conservative administrations, have run the same playbook of support messaging and pandering to racism and outright economic falsehoods that many of the voters electing them believe. In the US, we have all those same problems as Turkey and the UK and yet over 45% of the people in the US continue supporting Republican candidates, including strategically important supermajorities in several state legislatures. So I'd argue once again that the problem is far deeper and more systemic than simply pointing the blame at the politicians. It may feel easy to do so, but the problems in our society are not easy. It's quite the suppressive statement really, as there's no real action plan other than despondency and flippancy. 'it all comes down to the politicians'. Isn't an answer or even a real identification of the problem, but an identification of the most obvious symptom. If we're going to address our problems seriously, we must reject such simplistic, nihilistic sentiments in favor of clear-eyed confrontation of the underlying problems. Solutions need to start with engaging with the voters who make up these politicians' power bases.

[@woodygilson3465]

@@JO_______ Of course it's simplistic, this is social media. 😆 Wherever there is human suffering, there are politicians who not only allow it, but actively facilitate it. And the threat they pose to humanity's continued existence is not an over-exaggeration. Everyone is wondering how many more bruises Putin's ego can handle before he brings nukes to bear, and how long China will tolerate being held back by foreign powers from it's Taiwan agenda and being told who they can and can't do business with. We haven't even addressed the deliberate under-education of the masses and the socioeconomic circumstances necessary to facilitate the building of armies, and more. Of course the problem is complex, but before people can begin to address the broader issues, they have to first admit that there's a problem. At the end of the day, the unavoidable truth at the bottom line of it all is that nobody wants wars, poverty, food scarcity, etc. Only politicians.

[@JAnonymousChick]

You don't want politicians. That seems to be a new popular viewpoint. But which would you rather have? Elected officials (aka politicians), a king, communism, or a dictator? I will stick with voting for elected officials thank you very much. It would be better if every person's vote counted equally tho...

[@woodygilson3465]

@@JAnonymousChick Anarcho-communism.

[@woodygilson3465]

@@JAnonymousChick As it is today, you get to "vote" on two candidates hand-picked and pre-approved by the parties. The government literally selects its members on behalf of itself.

[@hellwolf7]

Excellent conference.

[@4everyoung24]

Looks like a beautiful place to stay. I never knew there was a powder bath was there! The scratches on the door ❤❤❤❤❤

[@jellekastelein7316]

Maybe I missed it, but it seems to me that this analysis completely overlooks the driving force behind many of the problems with US politics, and that is the excessive amount of influence of money in politics. Both the mainstream democratic party politicians and the less insane republicans are largely beholden to corporate power, and so is the mainstream media (which are themselves large corporations). The corporate republicans and corporate democrats both receive corporate and media support based on how pliable and compliant they are with corporate interests and this helps them get re-elected. This has been driving a cycle of privatization, deregulation and austerity that has driven large segments of the population into poverty and desperation. It also demoralizes people who have been voting for democrats because not much seems to ever really improve even when the democrats are in charge. The fascists then capitalize on this by scapegoating immigrants and people of color (and increasingly their political opposition), all the while distracting from the real cause of the problems, which is decades of neoliberal ideology and trickle down economics as advocated for largely by the party they identify with. And they happily fill their coffers while doing so, which gives them a lot of resources to draw from. By contrast, there is very little money to be made on the progressive side of the isle, so the media drifts ever more to the right. Meanwhile, progressive elements in the democratic party represent views that are held by bipartisan majorities, but either get painted as unreasonable extremists or just get completely ignored by the same media. And while there are a few members of congress now who run on small dollar donations, it is hard to even campaign without corporate support. And then when they do win they are told they must compromise on every electoral promise they ran on, regardless of how much popular support it has. It seems to me that any analysis that misses all of this almost entirely is fundamentally incomplete, not to mention outright misleading, because it just talks about the symptoms rather than the underlying illness.

[@spiritofgoldfish]

Austrian Economics, a Libertarian kind of thinking, is becoming more popular because it is an ideology of feudalism dressed up as liberty, and that is where we are headed. Free market is a term the classical economists such as Adam Smith invented, coming out of feudalism, meaning to be free from the landlord rentier class. Today, the rentier class is monopolies and the banks (FIRE, finance, insurance and real estate). The classical role of government is to tax away economic rents (unearned income) and use it to lower the cost of production. This is done through subsidies for such things as public infrastructure, education, and health care, not raising the cost of living and therefore the cost of labor, as with monopolistic privatization. The neoliberal Austrians and Libertarians deny any role for the government in the economy. Because the economy does not stay out of government, the result is rule by the rentier oligarchy, otherwise called feudalism. As it is today, "the government" is a synonym for "the corporations". Mussolini spoke of the national Corporate State of Fascism, but ours is an inverted totalitarianism where economics bests politics. Corporations spend more lobbying than the combined payroll and other costs of running both houses of congress, and this doesn't include money in political campaigns. Congress only votes on laws written by corporate lawyers. Public opinion has no effect on legislation.

[@joanstepleton1637]

Only 10 min in, but no mention of Citizens United? Shame on him. Corporate legal bribery, I believe, is 1/3 of the reason why we are here. Politicians make too much money campaigning so solving problems becomes moot. There is no incentive, esp when you can do nothing and turn around and scapegoat others for your politican gain.

[@michaelbrooks742]

Yep you nailed it. I don't trust these men what so ever.

[@erinmac4750]

​@@spiritofgoldfish I had not heard of this as a named concept, but it hits the nail on its head. It also makes me understand a little better why I'm generally leery of libertarians.

[@spiritofgoldfish]

@@erinmac4750 I suggest looking into Michael Hudson. Ours is a rentier economy, where wealth is extracted rather than manufactured.

[@macrosense]

The United States has always been dysfunctional. In spite of this there is occasional progress. In terms of exceptionalism, America’s primary advantage in the past was Dumb Luck, followed by good timing and more resources to blow through than any other nation in history.

[@paulmakinson1965]

Also, the United States has the advantage of a being young country and starting as a blank slate with an egalitarian society just as democratic ideals were becoming fashionable in European intellectual circles (US founders of democracy were inspired by European ideas of the time). European nations had to contend with the legacy of feudalism and the entrenched power of nobility. As an example, even though France overthrew it's feudal system quite violently during the French Revolution, the descendants of nobility still hold plenty of generational wealth and still wield influence in modern day France.

[@randallanthony1794]

you are completely wrong.there was exceptionalism in ideas for first 150 years and the puritan work ethic.americans were honest compared to allmother area of world not anymore.i mean the middle classes and poor not the upper elites.we have been invaded br non westerners that destroyed are social political and economic values.this was done by elites for a globalist order.

[@landonbarretto4933]

@@paulmakinson1965 Egalitarian?

[@fromeveryting29]

@@paulmakinson1965 I don't think you could call a country largely built on the trade and slavery of entire ehtnicities of people "egalitarian". Yes, the US was inspired by ideas from John Locke and the like, but in practice the US has always been horrifically exploitative, with antisocial values and money-rule.

[@andywomack3414]

@@paulmakinson1965 I recently attended a class on colonial American, and the founding of our nation was not egalitarian. By the middle of the 17th century class divisions were straining the social fabric, and by the end of that century those divisions led to a a period of horrific violence.

[@donmc1950]

Canada's 1982 Constitution is also very difficult to amend. In fact the province of Quebec has still not ratified it. Canada has made progress on some democratic non constitutional changes such as :campaign financing which reduces large corporate influence. So far efforts to introduce proportional voting systems have not been successful

[@ingeborgpadgett7079]

Thank you 🙌🙌

[@jakecarlo9950]

Should be required listening for all Americans who can still stomach engagement in political life.

[@benjaminhenderson5025]

Maybe if he wants to actually acknowledge the very serious breaches in our voting systems integrity. He COMPLETELY ignores the corrosive nature of oligarchy.

[@howielisnoff]

A few observations: This is not a sophisticated observation, but I think that democracy is already shot in the US. Why? In 2000, the will of the people was thwarted by the political machinations of public officials in Florida with the help of the US Supreme Court. In 2011, a US citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki was killed in a drone strike ordered by Barack Obama. The latter was a complete abrogation of due process and cast the president as judge, jury, and executioner. This exercise in illegitimate authority was later repeated with al-Awlaki’s teenage son. Whether or not al-Awlaki preached for radical and violent action, there are mechanisms in US jurisprudence that dictate how to go about apprehending and trying such an individual. As a writer and journalist on the political left, these actions alarm me. If the government moves to a far-right authoritarian footing, how many will be silenced by such a regime? Finally, the many wars of the US, either direct war or proxy wars, since the attacks of 2001, have distorted the economic, political, and social systems in the US. Trillions of dollars spent with full support of the political duopoly can only hasten the arrival of an authoritarian government.

[@janemiettinen5176]

Im a Finn, and I dont see America as being democratic country. Here, if youre 18, you have a vote, no restrictions. To me, thats democracy. I was amazed when I learned American prisoners cant vote! Here they vote amongst the first ones. How it can be a democracy, if everybody doesnt count? Equality is true freedom, just not in the “land of the free”..

[@howielisnoff]

@@janemiettinen5176 The power elite here make money in politics not only talk but scream.

[@erinmac4750]

​@@howielisnoff I'm pretty sure that's why we've started having so many republican candidates, as well. Running for office is one of the biggest money making schemes, big money with limited accountability. Just think about it, while you're running, everything is a campaign expense: food, transportation, lodging, clothing, electronics, staff to help,...... That's some gravy train.

[@paulcastillo953]

Hearing and understanding the excellent explanation of the United States politics is devastating to the survival survivability of the nation.

[@luismiguel69able]

So, what's the solution from our end as civilian individuals?

[@robertmckay5839]

Nice way to get your blood boiling and your mind despairing in the morning

[@earthjustice01]

"For much of the Republican base the rise of multi-racial democracy felt like an existential threat." This pretty much explains Fox News and Tucker Carlson, unfortunately.

[@lawrenceralph7481]

Completely wrong. Productive people of all walks are welcome in the tent of individual liberty. The lazy? Only after they've bathed.

[@pratikgore6536]

​@@lawrenceralph7481 Who decides Productivity? Stop Licking boots 👢

[@JimJamTheAdmin]

​@@lawrenceralph7481 are you a billionare?

[@scottpell3747]

Why do progressives feel the need to scapegoat Tucker and his viewers? His show mainly focuses on exposing asymmetries in the application of the law, such as when parents who protest racial sensitivity training in public schools, or those who attempt to expose government corruption (See Matt Taibi) are threatened by national intelligence agencies, but those who violate the law in the name of “social justice” are generally given a free pass (see Antifa, BLM, or those who protested outside the homes of Supreme Court justices). Not to mention the outright moratorium on prosecuting so called “petty crime” in progressive cities. Affluent progressives will go on and on about violations of democratic norms from their ivory towers in the universities and corporate media, but ignore altogether that deliberately choosing to not prosecute criminals is a most basic violation of the social contract between government and citizen.

[@craigwillms61]

@@lawrenceralph7481 I agree with you. This lecture was complete rubbish and I'm sorry I wasted my time.

[@lindascanlan6317]

Build a broad coalition among the faithful to democracy or we lose it all......

[@dfuher968]

As a non-American, who is constantly baffled at the undemocratic workings of the US "democracy" and the mostly blind acceptance of it from Americans, this was a really great discussion. Tho I was very sad to hear, that even at an academic lecture there were a couple of questioners, who were unable to see it as an objective scientific analysis and instead seemed very defensive and party political, blindly so, as they apparently could not take off their colored party political glasses long enough to view their party objectively.

[@dare2dreamd2d23]

This is a great lecture but once again the coalition of mainly white folks (but also those of colour) i.e. the audience dodge the core subject of what we call "race." If you're not a racist or an apologist for being of colour and don't want to accept that today people are making political decisions largely based on race, how can change be accomplished? Thank Steven Levitsky for being so clear on such an irrational emotive subject. Peace & Love, keep up the good fight.

[@cbbcbb6803]

It, of course, started with the pilgrims, the tiniest presumptive minority to ever set foot in America.

[@rogersmith7396]

Actually at first they had very limited goals. British Lords saw the Americas as a money making proposition and started the expansion. Things were much worse in South America.

[@cbbcbb6803]

@@rogersmith7396 Yes. But they still presumed to just walk (ok, sail) into someone else's country without first getting permission from those people. Before going to Holland, they had to get permission from the king of Holland to enter. And they had to get permission from the king of England in order to leave England. May the culprit, then, is the king of England, thinking he could give his people permission to go just anywhere at any time to live in other people's countries, without asking first. As far as South America is concerned, I thought we were considering what happened in what eventually became the United States. And later on, slavery apologists in New England used to excuse their behavior on the grounds that they did not treat "their" slaves as badly as the Spanish treated "their" slaves.

[@rogersmith7396]

@@cbbcbb6803 There was no country. It was occupied by dozens of small tribes often waring with each other. They even became mercenaries for the British and French. The Pilgrims almost starved to death. The Indians could have thrown them into the Atlantic without breaking a sweat. Thanksgiving supposedly commemorates the peaceful relationship the Pilgrims shared with the Indians. The Pilgrims had no slaves. They were however entirely religiously intollerant. Some left to start Rhode Island.

[@cbbcbb6803]

​@@rogersmith7396A country is dirt, rocks, rivers, streams, lakes, etc. There is country and there are people that occupy said country. Two different things.

[@rogersmith7396]

@@cbbcbb6803 I like some dirt better than I like some people.

[@waggishsagacity7947]

The analysis Prof. Steven Levitsky put fotth here was excellent. The solutions, albeit on paper, were cogent and compelling too. The trouble, of course, is in getting the two rival, indeed antagonistic, factions to see that the fate of the entire country is in the balance. One wishes that, when Democrats controlled the House, the Senate, and the presidency they would have had the prescience to see the looming dangers of a minority rule, such as we witness now. Suggesting a "sit down" these days is the last thing the antagonists could manage, let alone produce any desired changes. It reminds me of one of the Baron von Munchausen's tales about how he ended a flight in an air balloon. He says that it was too dangerous to continue the flight, so he jumped off the "gondola." Naturally, the velocity & force of the jump landed him almost up to his armpits in muddy hole in the ground. Thus he started to dig himself with his bare hands, until he freed his body enough to get out. He then ran to closest farm house, borrowed a shovel, got back to the hole and dug himself out. Sadly, that seems to be the only solution available to us as well. Thanks for the clarity and richness of the lecture, though.

[@erinmac4750]

I believe he said the reason the Democrats had not accomplished this was because of the filibuster, hence the need for a super majority.

[@clarkwatson3217]

Only an unintelligent person like this democrat clown could be afraid of a political party that has no power. In a democracy, which we are not, the most dangerous condition is the tyranny of the majority which seeks to erase any opposition like nazis or fascists. Today democrats is the party of hitler

[@michaelwoehl8822]

This is very depressing but true, the few rule the many in the USA and eventually the price will be high, our freedom. Several states are already failed democracies and the republican party is responsible, we are in trouble.

[@TehMorbidAtheist]

Spot on. Thoroughly enjoyed this analysis.

[@charlottemains8014]

This is an excellent video. Explains the situation of the current US.

[@benjaminhenderson5025]

It doesnt cover the legitimate vote rigging going on. I3eck vs |)|\|C. The DNC lawyers argued and won the right to pick candidates in smoke filled back rooms, and have no legal responsibility to deliver legitimate results. Thats precident in US court.

[@seanpalmer8472]

I disagree with the speaker on a number of points, and I won't address them here, but I will say that one of the problems that is closely tied to the issues discussed stems from the fact that The US only has 2 parties with any real amount of clout. Elected officials usually go through a primary election as well as the general election. Unfortunately, those that vote in primaries are often the constituents of the party with the most extreme views, so those candidates with the extreme views are often the ones that go on to the general election. One of the keys to getting candidates that appeal to a broader range of people would be to reform the primary system and eliminate First-Past-The-Post voting. (CGP Grey has several videos on the subject, but if you only watch one, "The Alternative Vote Explained" is pretty succinct) The speaker brought up the fact that the US Constitution is hard to change. My response would be that we have this thing called federalism...If you can't make a change at the national level, try the state level. For example, in the not-too-distant future, marijuana is going to have to be addressed at the federal level because of the growing number of states that have legalized it to some extent. Alaska and Maine have moved to Ranked-Choice-Voting (RCV) in the last 5 years. Nevada will have RCV for the '26 election if the amendment to the Nevada constitutional passes in '24. More states moving to RCV would quell a lot of the extremism in our society. For example, Lisa Murkowski was re-elected last year in no small part thanks to RCV. She might not have made it past a traditional republican primary due to her voting to convict Trump during his second impeachment.

[@ashleyking3865]

FTA were negotiated in the 80s between conservative leadership on both sides of Canada US border.

[@thefisherking78]

1:04:30 it's a good question for sure, and worth consideration by strategists and voters alike. Just to be clear though, motivations don't change the outcome when someone votes for anti-democratic authoritarians. The people she's talking about are the ones he described in the beginning (sorry, I already forgot the term he used) as going along with authoritarians for the sake of political power, and I wish they'd own it instead of pretending to be committed supporters of democracy.

[@soerenbode]

Thank you for uploading this very interesting lecture! So much food for thought. In Germany I perceive a troubling shift in the rethoric of the Conservative Party (CDU/CSU) after Merkel. Might be a similar symptom as described here: Loosing the sure majority in a multicultural society? Same goes for rural/urban divide and income inequalitiy. In mostly poorer Eastern Germany 20-30% of votes go to the right wing party AFD. In the best of worlds Parties should not be rivals - but rather colleagues. Argue and find the "best" way to move things forward. Whoever disregards this, harms Democracy. I am worried, but still hopeful and - yes - somewhat confident we all gonna work this out. Thx.

[@catsaresocute650]

Das mit den Parteien stimmt. Allerdings heißt das nicht, dass Sie alle die selben Ideen vertreten müssen. Sie müssten nur einen Wettkampf haben in dem Sie Ähnlichkeiten begrüßen und zugeben das andere Meinungen nicht unberechtigt sind, aber eben nicht was sie vertreten. Wiederstand gegen die eigene Meinung ist nicht unbedingt ein Problem, er festigt das Streben durch die Notwendigkeit die eigne Position zu prüfen und den Drang sich ungerechtfertigten Anfeindungen zu Widersetzen

[@catsaresocute650]

Was Sie nicht wirklich meinen können, denn die AfD oder CDU sind für Sie ein Problem.

[@jantonisito]

The problem is that both parties fight over social and cultural issues but neither one is championing the economic well-being of the middle class majority.

[@RidingWithBiden]

Take a look at Biden's 2024 budget. I think you'll revise your statement.

[@lawrencebishton9071]

tell me the mans name in this country uk gb that owns netflix or bbc or itv x shares or any benefit that is cash + creating to or for them ???? the names of please ? beeing like saatchi and saatchi in the 80s

[@MonkeyWhoWouldBeKing]

It's interesting that he recommends making the US Senate less disproportionate, rather than limiting its powers. The Labour party here in the UK is proposing replacing the Lords with a senate of the regions and nations in order to improve the state of our democracy, but rather than backsliding into disproportionality (i mean, we already have fptp but lets put that to one side), this is widely considered a reasonable democratising move. This is probably because the suggestion is not to increase the powers of this newly democratic chamber, but to keep them as is. I wonder why it doesn't occur to him, or really to any other Americans I head discussing the Senate, to limit its power rather than give up the regionalist balance that it offers.

[@andywomack3414]

Thanks. Any suggestions as to how? I'd start at the bottom and fully democratize the lower chamber by choosing representatives by lottery.

[@MonkeyWhoWouldBeKing]

​@@andywomack3414 If the Lords is the model, then it works as a consulting chamber. It can add amendments and delay legislation to force the lower chamber to think again (though without preventing them sending the same bill again to be put through on the nod, if the lower chamber are certain). That is the procedural 'how'. If what you mean is how is this politically achieved, yes I think that is the much greater challenge. Creating new senators feels less like 'taking something away' (whether it is or not) so is probably more achievable.

[@rogersmith7396]

There is no reason on earth why Wyoming should have more power than California. Its a bare faced rip off.

[@synthstatic9889]

I 100% agree that this should be done. No other western democracy gives its upper house as much power as the USA gives its senate and this accounts for 90% of our dysfunction. Unfortunately, the senate would have to vote to make itself less powerful and then the states -including the ones that benefit from disproportionate representation - would have to ratify such changes. We’re screwed.

[@thehealthychefri]

The senates job is to protect the opulent. Repeal the 17th amendment, so state legislatures select the senate. Madison wanted to reduce democracy and did that.

[@petekwando]

Regarding the comment on the economic anxieties of working class voters: I grew up in a firmly blue-collar region of the country, son to working class parents. It's certainly true that the perception of these voters regarding the Democratic party began to shift, really starting in the 1970s but accelerating in the 90s. Many grew suspicious of labor unions and Democratic politicians at roughly the same time, increasingly regarding their leaders as corrupt and/or ineffectual (I am speaking here of the perception, not making any assertions about the reality). During this same period, we saw the rise of talk radio and right wing media, tapping and redirecting frustrations toward their own ends. Having said all that, anyone who has grown up in the aforementioned blue collar communities can tell you that white, high-school educated voters are often suspicious of people outside their own cultural background at best, blatantly racist at worst. Instead of directing their anger at the corporations and policies that gut their livelihoods in favor of globalization, it is all too easy to blame the foreigner, the other, the cheap labor of immigrants.

[@ryanjacobson2508]

Working class people of all races are actually economically worse off now than they were in the 1960's. That's something that neither the Left nor the Right establishment want to address. Children raised by single mothers are worse off in every measure than those raised in intact families. But that's not something either side meaningfully attempts to correct.

[@bigbadborders]

Being a working-class guy from the midwest I can tell you in 2016 no one was going to vote for a Clinton. Not after free trade turned us into the rust belt. As long as our economic problems continue in the Midwest our politics will be at minimum, volatile.

[@rogersmith7396]

Clinton should have never been nominated but they owned the broke DNC. Point well made. But you can't carry on a grudge against the Clintons by voting for fascists which will destroy you. The people who most want to "take your guns" are the right wing fascists. As you have probably said, the libs don't have the balls to do it. And the libs don't own guns. Your enemy is the other right wing gun owners.

[@greatedges]

Sadly, you stand to lose even more under a fascist government as envisioned by Trump and the likes of Steve Miller. Individuals always do, as history shows.

[@bigbadborders]

@@greatedges It will get much worse before it gets better. The racial component is very true, but the reason Trump won in 2016 was economic. Biden talks to working people/unions so he'll most likely win again. But that does not fix the problem.

[@milycome]

Huh. What ?? Hillary Clinton for free trade, causing jobs to go overseas. Where's this idea coming from - the bleachers ? Both the Democrats and the Republicans are both for free trade causing the loss of American jobs. If anything, the Republicans are slightly more for free trade because the Republicans are soooo pro business. The pro business element of the Oligarchy (the Real people that are in control) are always searching for cheap labor (usually cheap labor is located abroad). Hasn't anyone ever told you the Republicans are the party of big business (cheap labor).

[@jsrodman]

While I think Tm.I is correct that a maga government will further ruin former industrial us, Chad B is also entire correct that free trade fetishizing is very damaging to large chunks of the population. When the perceived choice is between culture warring idiots and neoliberals, and your town is rotting, its not shocking whe people vote for whatever looks disruptive. What most people innthe rust belt dont realize is that the Biden administration period has done more to revive american manufacturing than any administration during my 45 year life. And to be fair thats definitely partly because the Democrats havebt done nearly enough to support labor, even turning down free wins like witb the railroad strike.

[@samsina]

The women asking question at 1 hour mark is my heroes

[@grilablitznet3574]

Good talk

[@earthjustice01]

Jim Crow - so authoritarianism was not unfamiliar to America.

[@rogersmith7396]

Its always been the rich crack the whip the poor make the trip.

[@spartacusforlife1508]

The tyranny comes from both right and left but also from corporations and political elites. Hence manufactured divisions which perpetuate the inability of the public to recognise the real threat which is the oligarchy

[@MelissaR784]

And have you notice the huge monopolies the billionaires now control? Our government and politicians use to break up monopolies. Now I think they own part of the monopolies.

[@tupacalypse88]

​@@MelissaR784 and give a sweetheart illegal deal to jp Morgan to buy more

[@MelissaR784]

@@tupacalypse88 Yep.

[@texasclimatealarmist4801]

Both sidesing is lazy and apathetic. 'The left' isn't threatening institutions

[@spartacusforlife1508]

@@texasclimatealarmist4801 it isn't? Try the education system. I'm from the left but working class schools suffer from to much political nonsense taught there. School is for learning and the freedom to debate. It is not there for indoctrination to occur. Not religious indoctrination, not political ,not sexual. The left, looney left, have closed down debate in universities. We are seeing the creation of an idiocracy in schools and universities were feelings have taken over from science

[@wilhouts6173]

Did not the framers/founding fathers suggest a fresh look/re-write of the Constitution every 20 years or so….as well as public servants/non-professional politicians ‘serve’ a short time then go back to their trade/career.?

[@wilhouts6173]

Is there a draw-back to globalization? What have we lost, what have we gained.?

[@nancychandler3673]

There is no drawback to Globalization . Commerce and Trade along with our partnerships in the USA is a win/win.

[@fromeveryting29]

Democracy is and will always be dangerously vulnerable to derange into tyranny and demagogoues. It's a constand ideal we have to work HARD to make work. Good education in critical thinking, pro-social values and social diversity. I sometimes resent democracy, because it is so very vulnerable to unjust rule through misinformation and emotional mass appeal. I miss more rational discussions of empirics and stuff, but that is the issue that must be adressed then. When it comes to right-wing rhetoric in America today it is very interesting that their rhetoric says "personal freedom", but then are ruthlessly authoritarian. Wanting to ban non-standard sexual identities and the like. And what do we call right-wing authoritarianism? Well, that is where fascism lies. A lot of american conservatives have A LOT of overlap with fascism.

[@mikerodgers7620]

And liberals? What about totalitarianism. Democrats seem to back left-wing extremists when they looooose. Riots occur a lot.

[@Charles-hq7ce]

Agreed, and while i know hes a controversial figure on the left, vaush has a great analogy for this. Democracy is like a set of fortifications to protect the people from tyranny, but fortifications only work for as long as people defend them. The moment nobody is guarding the walls of democracy, any authoritatian can eventually scale them with time, no matter how well designed those walls are. You cannot build a government system thats immune to an authoritarian party taking over and changing the law to favor them, but you can teach the people when to spot an authoritarian party and vote them out.

[@richarddietzen3137]

@@Charles-hq7ce The Gopocracy is feverishly working to make that kind of education illegal.

[@KatanamasterV]

I'll bite. Can you name a jurisdiction in the United States where non-standard sexual identities are banned?

[@alistairmackintosh9412]

​@@KatanamasterV Florida. Texas.

[@kevinwilliams3694]

If I was trying to make every moderate or mildly disengaged Republican extremely angry, this speech would be the way to do it.

[@Beretta249]

If they're not angry they're not paying attention, and are probably passively collaborating. "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke, ironically.

[@paulpeterson4216]

Really, all six of the "moderate" Republicans? And let's face it, no matter how many "disengaged" Republicans there may be, zero of them are watching a political lecture from Brown University.

[@bobhookstratten9567]

Cause Republicans hate facts and the truth.

[@paulmakinson1965]

@@Beretta249 not angry, very worried about their cushy well paid government jobs.

[@9000ck]

they've heard the speech. they are passively for the authoritarianism and the breakdown of democracy.

[@vwatts8738]

The gentleman at the 58:50 mark asked the question I keep asking!!! What is that these people want who are willing to burn it down ? What do they want this country to look like?

[@MelissaR784]

Communism. Which is what Progressism is all about. So the US will look like China, Russia, Cuba or North Korea. "Advancing the right of every American to retire with security and dignity. Ending poverty and income inequality and securing a living wage for all people. Protecting the fundamental right to organize. Ending mass incarceration and advancing equal justice under the law." progressives.house.gov/the-progressive-promise#:~:text=Advancing%20the%20right%20of%20every,equal%20justice%20under%20the%20law.

[@Silverhawk100]

By purely looking at what they favor, it feels like they want a majority white, male country. Trump restricting all immigration to as close to zero as possible plays to that (except from European countries), fighting wokeism wherever it crops up is another. Woke is a term historically used by black leftists to describe people on their side. Now, the Right use it as a pejorative for anything from the Left, especially LGBTQ rights. LGBTQ rights ascendant plays against the idea male-centered power. Instituting Evangelical Christian values is a side project to that. It's not Black Evangelicalism they want to promote (not least of which because it trends to Leftist ideas). This desire also plays out in their extremism. Incels railing against feminism or killing women, shooters going into minority community areas and opening fire, antisemitism alive and well dog-whistled. If they were opposed to Leftism in any form, they'd be going after what they perceive as the liberal indoctrination centers; universities and media centers. Largely, they're not. It's gay nightclubs, black churches, minority supermarkets, and yes, minority schools. Uvalde's Robb Elementary was 90% Hispanic. But Racial anxiety is usually a substitute for something else, isn't it? Certainly, there's some subthemes that are direct and 1:1. Gender parity in the workplace has blurred longstanding roles for men as the breadwinner, the provider. That certainly contributes to anxiety about feminism and a desire to dismantle it. But the racial angle seems a little murkier. At least outwardly, Rightists don't seem to have a problem with their leaders having dark skin. The Proud Boys was led for awhile by Enrique Tarrio, not a white name. Tim Scott is running for the Republican Presidential nomination, albeit as a Dark Horse candidate, pardon the pun. The ultimate answer is I don't know yet. I sort of feel like it lies in the direction of economic weakening, of wage stagnation, of power and money concentrating into the investor class. And certainly some of that figures into it. Bernie Sanders was many Far-Right voter's second choice in 2016. But you'd think if class were the root of their racial anxiety their anti-corporate rhetoric would include redistribution in some way. It doesn't, it tends more towards the anti-woke, towards "they no longer appeal to me so I'll no longer appeal to them." In other words, race.

[@earthjustice01]

1:04:05 - Yoohoo! Mr Cameraman, back to the lecturer please!

[@spiritofgoldfish]

The central planners aren't in the government. The rentier oligarchy at the top of wall street (the deep state) does central planning for their private benefit, and they are the employers of politicians. The job of the politician is to deliver voters to the oligarchy by campaigning on whatever gets them elected with oligarchy funding, then do whatever the oligarchy wants, and they are taken care of whether they are reelected or not. "Reagan’s election marked the ascension of deep political forces to a position of sovereignty. Practically speaking, what emerged was an exceptionist tripartite state comprised of (1) a feckless public state, (2) a sprawling security state, and (3) the anti-democratic deep state to which they are subordinated. This consolidation and institutionalization of top-down power was such that US governance could thereafter be described as a deep state system." Good, Aaron. American Exception: Empire and the Deep State (p. 260). If the US had majority rule, i.e., a democratic form of government, we would have a decent minimum wage, Medicare for all, free education, parental and sick leave, legal marijuana, workers on corporate boards, lower credit card interest, not allowing politicians to own stock or immediately graduate to becoming lobbyists, public funding of drug research for public drug patents, and some kind of green new deal, just at first glance at the polls. We have institutionalized opposition at best, not representation at all. The refugees at the southern border are fleeing rule by the same rentier oligarchy at the top of wall street that employs both political parties and is cannibalizing the homeland into debt peonage.

[@spiritofgoldfish]

United States share of Global GDP in 2021 was 13.6% once allowances were made for base year and informal economy size. (search engine) Today, the statistics are good. They reveal that 50 percent of the world’s wealth is in the hands of US-based corporations, even though the national account, GDP, is not anywhere near that. Chomsky, Noam; Waterstone, Marv. Consequences of Capitalism (p. 138)

[@spiritofgoldfish]

Look for "Princeton public opinion study"....... The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence.

[@spiritofgoldfish]

Giants: Who Really Rules The World? kzbin.info/www/bejne/kIaqmWSJqpxgpc0

[@spiritofgoldfish]

Like medieval baronies, House of Koch made peace with House of Trump. The price was controlling the Court appointments and the climate agenda. Whitehouse, Sheldon . The Scheme (p. 83)

[@spiritofgoldfish]

So the banking industry perpetrates a huge fraud on the American public and its court system, stealing people’s homes in the process, and the first reaction of the Obama administration is to announce that it has no intention of criminally investigating the practice, while the first response of Congress is to draft legislation to retroactively legalize what was done and prevent any lawsuits against the bankers. There, in a nutshell, is proof of how completely unraveled the rule of law in America has become. Greenwald, Glenn. With Liberty and Justice for Some (p. 143) The reason Obama chose Biden for VP in the first place is that he voted like a Republican, and no one ever mentions that the current Chairman of the Federal Reserve is a Republican.

[@pictureworksdenver]

Almost no mention of the 40 year upward transfer of wealth and the dissolution of the American middle class, now relegated to precarity. Without a prosperous middle class liberal democracy cannot functionally exist. The outcome of the neoliberal project is, ultimately, authoritarianism. To ignore this economic reality is to largely miss the point entirely.

[@robynmitchell9563]

Without a functioning, representative democracy, the ruling minority will ensure, with dedication & determination, that wealth is funnelled upwards to them, on the back of underpaid, progressively undereducated majority - the working & underclasses - the workhorses of the economy. Gerrymandering, numerical filibustering, electoral colleges & a relentless focus on individual rights at the expense of civic responsibility - the 'greatest democracy in the world' is now so low down the global tables on education, health, quality of life, child death, maternal birthing death, voter restriction, gun deaths, prison populations, corruption and on and on - American Exceptionalism indeed.

[@silverskid]

start at 14:00

[@helencats1]

So interesting

[@waltdill927]

This sort of thesis isn't beside the point so much as a case in point: popular calls to a realization one has been "mostly right all along" come to a bit of venting on the scale of what are intrinsically massive, perpetual, and unsolvable institutional failures in American politics from the first stirrings of Revolution. What is obvious, now as then, are matters of calculation, and entrenched privilege, not academic or "experiential" insight. It is Nationhood that is absent from an American history, recorded or otherwise. Our "debates", the very solutions voiced by a "vote of the people", no longer have even the embarrassingly contrived interpretive status that once prevailed. We suffer from a "crisis" of extraordinary passivity and laziness as a textbook nation, in spite of demographic shifts or minority-majority fabrications in the service of "improvements" or more enlightened perspectives. The incredible genocide of indigenous peoples has forever decided the case against the sentimental hash of We The People. Certainly, no one lately sees the truth as a result of a decent education, much less a serious course of Civics in the curriculum. In order to hold power, for the best or worst reasons, one must pay respect, and pay some more, at the court of the king. It takes more than a congenital idiot or a polished pseudo-intellectual capitalist, even a fat, stupid ogre, to tarnish an office already suspect for its undue influence, according with and quite beyond the prescriptions of a Constitution. Yet change is all of which the cosmos is made, acorns to mighty oaks. Revolution, conversely, is an historical variety of fiction. In reality, it works out to a desperate gamble precipitated by those who have the most to lose, and desire something remain, when the blood of the common man stops flowing in rivers. And if Americans walk about in a drug-induced fog, or are satisfied by the plush-toy coziness of a "good summer read", the rest of the world, to its credit, is waking up. If one party wants the peasants and slaves to just stagger off and die, the other party is satisfied to make a show of throwing out a crust of bread or a chicken bone. Sixty or seventy short human years are never equal to justice -- much less national healthcare or security for Social Security -- but two-hundred and fifty years of praise for an absurd, absent God, and vicious nonsense from the political priesthood, are a farce. The moral concept of an "act of omission" makes comparison easy: only those in power eat, and freely, at the banquet table.

[@polyglot8]

Although "semi-loyal democrats" is not particularly catchy, it's good that there's finally a term for the autocracy-enabling, a group that includes Alan Dershowitz, Jimmy Dore, Tulsi Gabbard, Matt Taibbi, Glen Greenwald, Kim Iversen, etc.

[@daydays12]

Very good but disturbing lecture. Thank you.

[@danielsykes7558]

1:20:00 this man asking misses just how many times we've changed the constitution. The author is correct that it is difficult in the US to change our constitution, but we have remodeled our republic in several large waves of constitutional amendments. For example, it could've been said that in response to FDR we enacted term limits.

[@danielsykes7558]

Also, Trump's entire career was in crushing Democratic norms, culminating in him refusing to peacefully accept electoral defeat. Edit: this dude reminds me of my dad

[@Silverhawk100]

Comparatively, we've changed our constitution very little. Brazil, the extreme example, has amended its constitution 105 times in 30 years. France's 5th Republic has modified theirs 24 times in 65 years, roughly clumped into 6 eras of reform. Compare to the US' 27 in 250-ish years, roughly clumped into 5 eras of reform.

[@haveaseatplease]

Less than 50% of the eligible voters in the age bracket of 18 to 32 have cast their vote in the midterm elections of 2018. More than 40%of this age group has not voted in the 2020 presidential elections.That is somewhere between 3 to 4 million votes which are not brought out by this age group. Solving this problem is the only way the progressive wing of the Dems can focus on short AND long term issues that need to be addressed urgently so that the country can finally take on the challenges of this century.

[@londontatehudson1794]

There are no numbers in any voting. You still think it is real? Really?

[@JimJamTheAdmin]

some of that is obvious voter suppression from the Republkcan party. Gerrymandering also means for local elections are often a null vote. I lived in such an area in Texas. I was living in an area where my vote meant nothing, why should I vote? The local government parties in many areas across this country intentionally cool and suppress non-party voters to maintain control. It isn't just "voting more" the more we vote, the more ww get involved, the more the minority in power tightens the noose.

[@rogersmith7396]

They won't do it with Biden.

[@haveaseatplease]

@@rogersmith7396 That was unfortunately already decided by the loss of Bernie Sanders in the 2018 primaries. Voting in the primaries defines the choice between corporate Dems or progressive Dems. Marianne Williamson will get no chance in the primaries.

[@emptyspace3715]

I cry every time I think of the future we would have had if Bernie Sanders had won the democratic nomination in 2016. And where we are now. The democratic party has failed the American people, as has the republican party. I'm tired of being told that voting for a third party is a "wasted vote". That's what they want you to think, because God forbid real change is enacted in this country that shifts the power from the oligarchy back to the people.

[@eckz8659]

Lol. Love him or hate him, many of us stood behind Trump because we were smart enough to know he was as close to a 3rd party as we're ever gonna get and they won that round... They'll now spend their time making sure it never happens again Good game I guess.

[@ruthcassidy6052]

Bernie never would have won. Not the nomination and not the election. His Berniebros & Berniegirls utterly ruined him in the eyes of most of us "regular Dems" with their constant attacks on us during the primaries - I think I blocked almost as many of them on Twitter as I did magats.

[@georgeflitzer7160]

What about the Article V movement? Ty

[@tymelogix]

Even with open eyes people continue to be blind