E-Pluribus | Apr. 7, 2021
Here is a round up of the latest and best writing and musings on the rise of illiberalism in the public discourse:
Sheri Berman: Democracy Is (Still) Worth Defending
At Persuasion, Sherri Berman warns that democracy cannot be taken for granted and that even advocates of democracy can fall prey to the temptation of authoritarianism ostensibly in defense of democracy.
Returning to the contemporary period, even those who have expressed outrage at the behavior of Trump and his Republican enablers have not been immune to the temptation of prioritizing other goals over safeguarding democracy.
Western European elites, for example, who could barely contain their disdain for Trump and their shock at the decay of American democracy, have stood by over the past decade while autocrats undermined democracy in Eastern European countries, most notably Hungary and Poland, both members of the European Union. Indeed, the EU has contributed to the power of autocratic leaders by handing over vast sums of money that those two governments used to punish opponents and reward supporters. The EU’s origins in the need to stabilize democracy in post-World War II Europe make such behavior particularly disheartening.
[…]
Examples include calls by some Democrats to stop playing by the rules and to pack the courts in response to Trump’s successful stocking of the judiciary with conservatives. Not only would such moves be of dubious effectiveness — court-packing, for example, is unpopular with voters, and would likely set off tit-for-tat court expansions — they would diminish the legitimacy of the courts, thereby furthering democratic decay.
The Republicans have already shown that accepting “small” infractions creates a tolerance for larger ones. The GOP is no longer a defender of American democracy; the Democratic Party has that role. As such, Democrats must distinguish between policies that strengthen American democracy and those that may weaken it while serving primarily partisan goals.
Read it all here.
Matt Taibbi: Meet the Censored: The U.S. Right to Know Foundation
In the latest installment of Matt Taibbi’s Meet the Censored, he presents the interesting and difficult cases of various websites and outlets that find themselves on the wrong side of a search engine algorithm. Clear reasons and answers can be hard to come by, but the impact on a site’s ability to project its voice is at times devastating.
In other words, when an individual or outlet sees a significant drop or a ban, they’re rarely told what’s happening. An overnight, ongoing, 60% drop in traffic is not likely an organic phenomenon, but what is it? Ruskin only had a few data points to work with.
“On December 2nd, things were good,” he says. “On December 4th, the bottom fell out.”
Did anything happen in that time frame? As it turns out, yes. On December 3rd, Google announced a “core algorithm update.” Google changes its search algorithm daily, but makes what it calls “significant, broad changes” several times a year. The company has obviously dealt with the problem of people negatively impacted by these changes, having posted notices offering public advice to those affected.
“Some sites may note drops,” the company wrote, in 2019. “We know those with sites that experience drops will be looking for a fix, and we want to ensure they don’t try to fix the wrong things. Moreover, there might not be anything to fix at all.”
Read it all here.
Samantha Kemp-Jackson: Cancel Culture Isn’t New
While the term is relatively young, Samantha Kemp-Jackson says that the impulse to cancel, to silence others we disagree with, is as old as society itself. And as it is likely to never go away, Kemp-Jackson posits that, while some deserve the consequences for their transgressions, the more common and compassionate response should be forgiveness and second chances.
So where do we go from here? Do we maintain the status quo and continue our arbitrary cancellations, our decisions to do so based on the slightest hint of wrongdoing?
Or do we take the high road, give people (and businesses) a pass, and continue on our merry way?
[…]
Don’t get me wrong. Some people absolutely deserve to be canceled. Their behaviour is abhorrent and their words are often poisonous. For these folks, cancel away.
For those who deserve a second chance, perhaps we can dig deep, and find it on our hearts to give them a pass. After all, aren’t we supposed to be a kind and compassionate society?
Read the whole thing here.
Around Twitter
Wesley Yang and David French weigh in on another case of a student who dared to push back against a micro aggressions seminar:
The age at which some advocate for explicit teaching on racial issues continues to fall:
On “diversity”:
Hong Kong’s loss of rights continues:
