1. Look, I'm passionate about the need to keep treating each other with decency & respect regardless of politics. Politics is a deadly serious business. Even the best leaders get innocent people killed & make mistakes that ruin lives. It's the nature of government.
-
-
6. If you're burning bridges with people in your life or business over politics, you're part of the problem. American history is full of political disputes where one side - or both! - was pushing divisive or dangerous things.
Show this thread -
7. We always had to tolerate disagreement over the Big Things, because if we don't, we lose the ability to tolerate any sort of dissent or learn anything from each other. That's not the path to any kind of progress.
Show this thread -
8. Reality check: political coalitions in America have always changed, & always will. There are people today in agreement for or against Trump who were in bitter disagreement for or against W. If you permanently write people off, you lose the allies you might need later.
Show this thread -
9. Ceaseless war against bad ideas? Fighting those ideas in the political trenches, which are not beanbag? Yes & yes. But I will keep standing for what's left of the norm against replacing reasoned discourse with personal anathema as our means of resolving political arguments.
Show this thread -
It was Sherman's job to end armed resistance & restore the peaceful settlement of political disagreements. He chose the means best suited to those objectives. https://twitter.com/AskAKorean/status/1159179629447524353 …
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread -
The Thirty Years' War is exactly where the "you can't break bread with people with terrible, dangerous ideas" sentiment ends. That war was in its second year when the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock.https://twitter.com/JYuter/status/1159182421637705731 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What norm-preserving mechanism is there for combating a political movement that, if left unchecked, could evolve into real fascism? Related Q: would it have been permissible for German citizens in the early 30s to use "direct action" in order to combat the rising Nazi party?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Lincoln got 750,000 Americans killed, and not over slavery.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.