A lot of replies here (obviously from people not already aware of The Discourse on this point) were genuinely confused variants on “But why, they’re right, that’s a valid concern.” Let me leave a short thread for future readers explaining why that stuff is always unwelcome on here. (1/n)
It’s totally understandable if you’re dooming about any facet of the American experiment right now. So your feelings are “valid” in the sense that they represent real anxiety, and I get that. But to vent that anxiety in other people’s spaces is wrong for three reasons.
First, it’s factually wrong. There will be elections in 2026 and 2028 under Trump, just like there were elections last year under Trump and during his first term. This despite one of the two major parties now harboring a lot of anti-democratic elements and ideas.
I’m not particularly interested in convincing anyone on this point and won’t try, the future is the future. But if the left side of the political spectrum is still the domain of scholarship and expertise, take note that you don’t find scholars and experts you worrying about canceled US elections.
Second, and probably most importantly, it’s tactically wrong. “No point discussing political opposition to fascism, there won’t be elections anyway” cedes victory to your enemies. It’s defeatism and nihilism.
Finally, it’s wrong AS A MATTER OF ETIQUETTE. Entering a total stranger’s discussion and leading with your private anxiety is as off-putting in social media replies as it would be in real life. If you wouldn’t interrupt a stranger at a party to announce that America is doomed, don’t do it here.
If you are anxious and sad about the state of the world, that’s fine, and there are plenty of strategies for dealing with that. But I think you already know that drive-by online dooming isn’t a strategy. It’s selfish and adolescent. It’s a contagion that only spreads the worst of you, not the best.
Take a second and think before posting the easy Eeyore reply. You might have something substantive to say instead. Or, even better, you can say nothing at all.
https://bsky.app/profile/kenjennings.bsky.social/post/3mbuedepurs2x
Second, and probably most importantly, it’s tactically wrong. “No point discussing political opposition to fascism, there won’t be elections anyway” cedes victory to your enemies. It’s defeatism and nihilism.
That’s not what people are saying when they say that. They’re saying we need to start fighting harder NOW. If we wait until midterm elections do or don’t happen we are fucked. There’s no guarantee the outcome will be favorable anyway and Trump has already alluded to fucking with elections.
“There’s not going to be an election in 2026” is defeatism. The message to fight for it is, “We need to make sure there’s still an election in 2026”.
As things stand, defeatism is justified. If Dem leadership don’t get their shit together and start taking action that’s where we’re headed. Based off their performance so far there is no indication that they intend to do so. We are stuck with a 2 party system so it has to be them. If you want us to stop saying defeatist shit stop letting us get defeated.
“Ethical dilemma” of blocking or muting, what a weenie.
Try not caring enough about their opinion to do either, toughen up buttercup
I don’t see how it’s rude to comment on a public discussion, but yeah I guess if you want to feel like a martyr on social media go right ahead with that.
“Oh my word, another stranger commenting on my commenting about someone else commenting. I have the vapors!”
Take your own advice and say nothing at all. See? No comments about your no comment. Peace will descend upon you, gentle soul.
I agree with Ken, but disagree with his reasons (in particular I think hiis first point is wrong) Here’s mine:
- Doomerism like this is a self fulfilling prophecy, you are giving them permission to do the thing and discouraging the many people fighting to try and make the next election happen properly.
- Most autocratic nations have elections, they just aren’t fair or free. American elections have never been completely fair, but have also been declining rapidly. The original statement thus promotes a dangerous false dichotomy (“see nothing to worry about, we had an election those gosh darn fear mongers don’t know what they are talking about”)
- It’s not productive. Your belief that there will be an election in November or in 2028 should not change any of your behavior, it’s simply a demoralizing statement with no call to action, that is the opposite of what american freedom fighters need. Ultimately all it accomplishes is to make a bunch of anti-facists dislike Ken for making anti-facist statements.
What a fucking waste. You will all deny the reality of the situation until the last second and go, “who could have known?”
Dont be a pussy and block the people who are issuing you a warning. Realize this is the world you are living in right now and stand up.
“Trump said multiple times he wants to cancel elections. We know he’s literally incapable of joking and has no respect for the constitution, so we have no reason to think he’s not serious”
“Just a distraction from the Epstein files! Vote in 2028!”
I have kinda given up hope Americans know what “tyrannical government” means, let alone fighting against it
He lost me at “but to vent that anxiety in other people’s spaces…”.
It’s not “your space”, it’s a public forum.
Don’t want people commenting on your opinion? Don’t air it in public, or just block and move on.
No need to write a book about how they’re wrong to express their opinion in the same way you just did. It just comes off as sanctimonious.
Fell free to point out my own hypocrisy and we can go in circles.
It’s not “your space”, it’s a public forum.
I’d argue there’s a spectrum from a totally public forum to a totally private forum, and replies to social media posts on platforms where users are followed are somewhere in the middle.
It’s kinda like comments on a blog post. The blog owner still controls the space, including the power to block users and delete their comments from that page, and enjoys a privileged position with respect to what is essentially publishing and moderation powers in that particular space.
It’s within that particular accountholder’s powers to block, ignore, or mute other commenters’ ability to interact with the content posted (including simply turning off replies for certain users or all users). So in that sense, the platform itself is public while that particular user’s profile page and the feed of that user’s posts is curated by that user.
And perhaps most importantly, these commenters are leveraging Ken Jennings’ account popularity to magnify their own comments’ visibility. They could post something on their own, but they also know that their replies to Ken Jennings have a much higher reach than their own original posts would.
In other words, there’s a fundamental difference between capturing a screenshot and posting a reply somewhere else, versus replying on platform.
It’s a quote post, not really a reply. That is very normal for popular accounts on bluesky/twitter. One is sharing something with one’s own, likely smaller audience while adding context, not necessarily really replying to the famous OP (viz. Jennings), as one can’t expect an answer. It’s an easy way to interact with and share posts from larger accounts on micro-blogging sites.
Jennings is on a micro-blogging platform, he should know to expect this (ironically, know the etiquette). Idk, him then going to such an extreme extent of publicly humiliating the other user (though the username is not visible; at least he does that), especially given his large fan-base, feels unnecessarily harsh.
It’s a quote post, not really a reply.
That’s true. Definitely more public facing, and more on the “fair game to discuss” side of the spectrum, probably between normal replies and full blown screenshot: probably triggers an inbox item in the original poster’s place, invites commenters to follow the link to the poster’s page, possible for original poster to delete and break the quote tweet, but not an actual reply that can be seen on the default view of the poster’s page.
him then going to such an extreme extent of publicly humiliating the other user (though the username is not visible; at least he does that)
In a sense, that’s even further down the “fair game to discuss” end of the spectrum. Replies to the substance without identifying that particular source or providing a link to that profile (but not actually hard for someone to find). Even further down would be a simple paraphrase “I’m getting a lot of people saying something to the effect of X and I want to respond to that point” without a screenshot.
But my broader point is that these interactions do exist on a spectrum, and on-platform interactions on Twitter-like platforms is less than a full blown public forum.
Touche, I see your point. Ultimately, I think his claim about etiquette is still nonsense, though, especially given your latter point. But I won’t hold this against him, you’ve convinced me that his may be an authentic perspective.
You’ve got a point. I’ll copy and paste my reply (editing pronouns) directly to his bluesky.
Entering a total strangers discussion
Yeah, you lost me here. You posted it ON THE FUCKING INTERNET FOR EVERYONE TO SEE. Heaven forbid someone comment and interact. Oh no! Woe is you!
What a load of entitled bullshit.
Suck an egg.
But if the left side of the political spectrum is still the domain of scholarship and expertise, take note that you don’t find scholars and experts you worrying about canceled US elections.
Sure Ken, that’s because all the scholars and experts on fascism have already fled the country.
I don’t see these “scholars and experts” offering much of anything besides telling us to roll over and take it while Trump admin crashes this country into the ground and ruins millions of people’s lives. If they think we can wait until midterms to put a stop to this they are part of the problem.
Wow all of them? Not a single scholar left in the entire country?
‘Scholar and expert on fascism’ is a subset of all scholars. Not that its not a bad claim, or that them leaving the country wouls stop them from commenting… it would free them to do so
I’ve been saying that all along. These people who say we can’t run on punishing Trump, we have to have something to vote FOR, need to understand that until we crush MAGA, and purge it from our government and society, we can NEVER move forward. MAGA is a SERIOUS National Security Threat, and if they aren’t dealt with decisively, they’ll keep destroying any good in this country, until they are.
I’ve got a list of improvements America can make, including Medicare 4 All and Campaign Finance Reform, but right now, crushing MAGA is absolute top priority. The time for diplomacy is far past. We need Warriors to be candidates, not appeasers. It’s time for LEGAL retribution for their CRIMES, not their politics.
I’ve been saying that all along. These people who say we can’t run on punishing Trump, we have to have something to vote FOR, need to understand that until we crush MAGA, and purge it from our government and society, we can NEVER move forward. MAGA is a SERIOUS National Security Threat, and if they aren’t dealt with decisively, they’ll keep destroying any good in this country, until they are.
Democrats ran on that once already but were unwilling to actually do it. They have no credibility now.
I’ve got a list of improvements America can make, including Medicare 4 All and Campaign Finance Reform, but right now, crushing MAGA is absolute top priority
Centrist democrats won’t crush MAGA. They’re ALLIES. Schumer and Jeffries just fucking proved it.
Oh, yeah, if the Dems can get the majority in the House, the first rule of business needs to be to fire the MAGA comedy act of Schmuck & Jeffries. We need to meet toughness with toughness, and we need leaders who are willing to do that.
You act as if anyone is actually running on punish Trump. They aren’t. They’re running on “ignore all the bad things about me or we’ll force Trump on you again.”
Simple: We need to punish MAGA, but it can’t be what we run on.
Remember: Trump did not mention annexing Canada or Greenland once on the campaign trail. It was literally the day after the election he first mentioned it.
I can’t take a chance on a candidate, only to find out after he’s elected that he wants to follow an appeasement strategy, like Obama. At the time, I said that if we didn’t slap down the Bush administration for their crimes, things would only get worse, and here we are.
Nope, they can talk about all the other things they want to do, but their priority has to be dealing the the serious National Security Threat that is MAGA. Anybody that doesn’t take a strong line on that issue is t going to have my attention for anything else they want to do.
Wow that’s a lot of projection from someone terrified that erudite and well reasoned civility politics might not actually be a good assumption to just carry forward.
But if the left side of the political spectrum is still the domain of scholarship and expertise, take note that you don’t find scholars and experts you worrying about canceled US elections.
Oh, really Ken?
Its that simple huh?
https://theweek.com/politics/america-competitive-authoritarianism-trump
Yeah try maybe actually catching up with the experts on how fucked the situation actually is.
Yeah yeah there are likely to technically be elections, but they’re likely to not really be legitimate or actually serve truly democratic (small d) purposes.
This is a cope turned into a scold about Ken’s little fantasy hugbox reality not being respected by actual reality.
Grow the fuck up.
Hugbox is the right term. The line about invading someone’s personal discussion, that you posted yourself in the fucking internet, reeks of so much entitlement. This wasn’t a good take by Ken at all. Very out of touch.
This is gonna age like milk lol
Maybe, but saying that there wont be elections helps ensure that there wont be elections.
Its the climate doomerism side of climate action. The doomers and the deniers are part of the same coin that gets us no closer to a solution.
Paul Revere telling people the redcoats were coming actually was what brought the redcoats?
If you are anxious and sad about the state of the world, that’s fine, and there are plenty of strategies for dealing with that. But think you already know that drive-by online dooming isn’t a strategy. It’s selfish and adolescent. It’s a contagion that only spreads the worst of you, not the best.
This is the juice for me. Worried about the next election? Me too! What are you going to do about it? Dooming in the comments isn’t action, and if you’re trying to get me to act, then insisting that there’s no point in any of this is a weird way to do it.
If you believe that and don’t think there are any action steps, fine. But don’t slather that despair everywhere. We don’t need it; we’ve already got enough despair. Some of us are trying to do something about it.
Have a plan, try to get people on board with it. But just insisting that everything is doomed is just as useless an online activity as insisting that everything is great.
If you think you’ve already lost you’re guaranteed to lose. Hope is NECESSARY to make a successful attempt.
I’m not a doomer about having elections. We repeat the same dismal spiral and the shitshow that is election season is an important part of making me hate living with all of you even more every year.
its hardly pointless dooming when trump has literally expressed vivid interest in getting rid of elections because he is terrified of losing and facing accountability.
If you actually think the current American regime is ever gonna get prosecuted then I have a bridge to sell you.
“Just vote out Hitler next election”
Good luck with that, we will see how that goes for you. I am preparing my thoughts and prayers.praying RN for u <33
Lily white rich cishet celebrity throwing toxic positivity at everyone nearer to the business end of the “then they came for” list than he is. Surprised he’s not singing “Imagine.”
I don’t think it is toxic positivity to identify a problem, wants a course of action to fix it, and pushes back on people saying don’t do it because it is too hard.
I think it’s toxic positivity to tell people to just not be scared of fascism because it won’t be a problem for Ken Jennings personally.
