Today’s Op-Ed reaction comes from the article
Two Decades After 9/11, It’s Looking Like American Democracy Won’t Survive the 2024 Election
By Austin Sarat published on Verdict Justia on September 11
Sarat begins the article by stating American democracy barely survived the election of 2020 and blames the authoritarianism of the Republican Party for that. Sarat then pessimistically states that American democracy will not survive 2024.
Since this is the introductory paragraph I don’t mind assertions without evidence but the rest of the article needs to show how democracy barely survived 2020 and why it will not survive 2024. Sarat does not provide that evidence.
Sarat blames President Donald Trump for destroying Democracy. He notes “ Donald Trump is seeding the ground of skepticism and doubt about the integrity of the 2024 contest. In 2020, he spent months denouncing the use of mail-in ballots and raising questions about the procedures that would be used to determine the winner of the election.”
Sarat falls to mention anything about the Time magazine article The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election. If democracy was in danger in 2020 I would think a shadow campaign to ensure a certain result would be worth mentioning.
Sarat then goes on to outline numerous statements made by President Trump regarding his indictments as proof that President Trump is trying to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the 2024 election. Sarat notes that it is not just President Trump but also his allies like Speaker McCarthy, former Governors Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin who have questioned election integrity.
Sarat writes “ It looks like Trump is succeeding again in throwing America into an Alice-in-Wonderland world, where a person who is guilty of election interference presents himself as a defender of election integrity and a victim of election interference.”
It is sad that Sarat would presume guilt over innocence. To my knowledge President Trump has not been convicted in a court of law. One of the tenets of American democracy is the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. If Sarat’s vision of democracy relies on a guilty until proven innocent standard then perhaps it is not a democracy that should be widely embraced.
Sarat looks at what America would look like if President Trump loses including references to the Proud Boys rioting. He does not address what Antifa might do if President Trump wins. He only notes if President Trump wins there won’t ever be another free and fair election.
Sarat holds the view that his version of democracy is the only one that supports the rule of law. Therefore when 49% of respondents disagree with him and believe the charges against President Trump were politically motivated it is bad news for Americans.
Sarat is a partisan writer who did not write a compelling article. He neglected to compare the fragility of the 2024 election to other contested elections in our history such as 1800 or 1876. He didn’t even touch on the 1860 election. If the United States could survive those elections it will surely survive 2024.
Sarat can only see President Trump as a tyrant and therefore is incapable of writing an article of sufficient depth about the threats to democracy in the 2024 election.
Read the article above and let me know your thoughts.
Great literature should do more than entertain us. It should provide a roadmap to improving our lives.
In A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens introduced readers to Sydney Carton, one of literature's most compelling and deeply flawed characters. Dickens also gives him an unusual title: the Jackal.
His struggles raise questions that remain relevant today.
Are we defined by our past mistakes? Can we overcome our weaknesses? What separates the people we are from the people we could become?
Lessons From the Jackal is a 25-day character study exploring these questions through Sydney Carton’s life, decisions, relationships, and personal development.
This is not a traditional course on A Tale of Two Cities. Our reading assignments will focus specifically on Carton, with sufficient background provided to understand his story. No previous knowledge of the novel is necessary.
Each day will feature selected readings, historical comparisons, reflection questions, discussions, and practical challenges ...
Sydney Carton is intelligent, capable, compassionate, self-destructive, and deeply dissatisfied with his life.
His potential is evident, but his accomplishments are limited. His habits are troubling, but his character contains admirable qualities. His reputation is unfavorable, but Lucie recognizes something in him that others have overlooked.
Perhaps the greatest mistake we can make when judging another person is to assume that who they are today represents everything they are capable of becoming. Yet there is an equally dangerous mistake: assuming that possessing the potential for greatness is equivalent to achieving it. Potential without action remains unrealized. Character without conviction may fail when tested. Reputation without substance is little more than appearance.
The challenge is not simply to possess admirable qualities or to be regarded favorably by others. It is to develop the discipline, courage, and integrity necessary to become the person we are capable of being. When ...
