paultlevin.bsky.social
Director of the Stockholm University Institute for Turkish Studies. Managing Director Consortium for European Symposia on Turkey. Docent (Assoc. Prof.) of and pontificator on international relations. Opinionated. Painter.
1,561 posts
2,531 followers
603 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
đ
comment in response to
post
đ€ą
comment in response to
post
No, I donât want to give both pro- and anti-democracy views equal time. But I think that this place would be better off if there were more (pro democracy) conservatives, libertarians, & moderates, not to mention non-Americans, on here.
comment in response to
post
I think itâs both TBH: a bubble of leftism and American-centrism. There were some Turks who joined after X closed down a bunch of opposition accounts, but this is still a very Anglo place.
comment in response to
post
Back on Twitter/X, I would get attacked from the Right and Left, by Turkish and Greek and Kurdish nationalists. Here, I only ever get invectives hurled at me from the Left, and then often quite radical Left. (I still prefer BlueSky to X tho.)
comment in response to
post
And they can make similar kinds of slippery slope arguments about progressivism & socialism: They lead to collectivism & totalitarian systems in which individuals are crushed for the Greater Good. If you take these arguments too far, youâll end up wanting to ban all but your own POV.
comment in response to
post
I donât think you actually read my comment.
comment in response to
post
Not everything to the Right of Liberalism (in the American sense) is racist though. Iâd be happier if there was a place without the racists & anti democrats, but where libertarians & conservatives could argue with Left liberals & progressives (with centrists asking them all to get along).
comment in response to
post
Youâre right about your second point: Not a lot of racism & nationalism here, and thatâs great. Lots of that crap over on X. Youâre wrong on the first point: There is NOT plenty of (politically) diverse thought on here. Itâs a liberal-to-far-Left bubble. Preferable to X, but still a bubble.
comment in response to
post
đŻ this!
comment in response to
post
Polarization is deep but I still think thatâs a very remote possibility for now, though I wouldnât claim to be an expert on this. I REALLY hope it doesnât come to that.
comment in response to
post
Here they come. Just about the entire Cabinet now issuing statements to raise the temperature and sow disorder & chaos. Itâs what they want.
The only administration in our lifetimes that seeks to escalate tensions.
National Guard now deployed to California.
comment in response to
post
I mean, the scenario youâre describing is very close to what I wrote last fall, with angry protests turning into riots.
comment in response to
post
In the American case you have to add a strong penchant for violence on top of that. Thatâs why Iâm worried.
comment in response to
post
Very true. But if the protests are peaceful in the main, you make it more difficult for the regime to use them as a pretext. You guys do have a penchant for violence, though, whether in the form of riots or otherwise. I am very worried.
comment in response to
post
The reality is a lot more complex than âthere is no law anymoreâ. The administration has gotten their asses handed to them in lots of cases, like the recent verdict below. As for elections, unlike Hungary or Turkey, you donât have a federal election system. How does Trump rig midterms in CA?
comment in response to
post
You have the law and legitimacy on your side. If you resort to violence, you lose both. GOP is about to lose the midterms, are suffering a veritable civil war in the party, & may be on the cusp of failing to pass their budget. This is not the time to change the subject to âleft wing riotsââŠ
comment in response to
post
And is your plan to defeat the armed forces of the United States in urban warfare? I study autocracies for a living, focusing on Turkey. Autocrats aiming to dismantle democracy like nothing more than riots that allow them to declare martial law & use what they have more of: force.
comment in response to
post
đ„ș
comment in response to
post
bsky.app/profile/paul...
comment in response to
post
Sorry Bruce, but you are dangerously wrong.
1) Non-violent resistance outperform violent movements by a 2-1 ratio & succeed faster.
2) With violence, you give the regime an excuse to increase repression. Itâs perhaps the only way Trump can avoid the 2-term limit. Fight, but not violently.
comment in response to
post
Hereâs an excerpt from Amnesty Internationalâs guide for how to use tear gas (and how NOT to use it):
www.amnesty.nl/media/police...
comment in response to
post
Exactly what I was going to say.
comment in response to
post
Intimidation is probably part of it, and people shouldnât fall for it. But it is equally important to make sure protests do not become violent. If they do, it could allow Trump to invoke the insurrection act, ratchet up repression & consolidate power.
comment in response to
post
This is is what came up in my notifications so I first thought you were commenting on my art! đ
comment in response to
post
đ
comment in response to
post
Your humble servant.
comment in response to
post
I donât know, Iâd kinda like to hear them do a Best ofâs countdown from âŸïž. It would only be a slightly longer recording session than the one they do now.
comment in response to
post
PS: Om det var nÄgon som sÄg en pekpinne i inlÀgget ovan och irriterade sig kan jag bara infoga att jag för tillfÀllet har USEL kondition.