Expanding the SC aka The end of democracy

[Dill]

(06-22-2022, 09:18 PM)hollodero Wrote: And saying racism is one of the not so great heritages of former times, well, I think that is in large parts just true; and addresing that, even if one thinks it isn't that much true or that the proposed fixes are wrong, is not attacking the fabric of the country. Notwithstanding that many of these "old white men" tropes are overdoing it and at times are flat-out racist as well, and that I also agree that racism gets mentioned too often, and that I can see the conviction terror by parts of the media and parts of the left spectrum. But that is zero excuse to go with the man that does not support a democratic system to begin with, the most fundamental fabric of the country. You can not defend a system you feel is under attack by overthrowing it completely. Not to mention that this of course further fuels all opposite extremes, and imho understandably so. All tired clichés are thoroughly fed if the other side indeed goes with someone like Trump. They don't look so tired on a Trump rallye really.

 I doubt that "racism gets mentioned too often," in the U.S., given "the not so great heritage" that you recognize "is in large parts just true."

But aside from that, I want to agree with and praise this post, and previous ones, for keeping the real threat to democracy in sight. People who want to get rid of filibuster are not "dismantling democracy" or some such. States passing "voter integrity" laws while defending Trump's attempted coup are striving to do exactly that. So I just can't endorse systematic/automatic suspicion of Dem motives every time the issue of Constitutional change to preserve democracy arises.

People who don't want the "true parts" of U.S. history taught frequently accuse "the Left" (i.e., people who think the true parts should be taught) of "hating America" and wanting to destroy it. Of course, "the left" is trying to destroy a certain version of U.S. history--one which buries the "true parts"--just as the right is trying to preserve that version.  Teaching the "true parts" threatens the kind of power which grew upon  the refusal to acknowledge them. Hence hostility to things like a "Juneteenth" a national holiday and federal oversight of voting laws. Making "too much" of black people and inequality.

This history debate is a social division much like the science-based ones over evolution and global warming. It's in part about people coming down on different sides of the standards/values which underpin modern science and scholarship, which doesn't exclude "true parts," however uncomfortable they might make us. I think that a lot of Americans (not a majority, but a significant plurality), do not really understand those standards/values, or certainly don't support them where they conflict with received beliefs.