This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis. It was originally published at The Conversation.
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1456887
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1456887
Perhaps we have a political party no longer interested in a “healthy democracy?” Just asking the question.
“Good manners” can be a weapon and a barrier – look at any caste system and it is clear – so the motives of those invoking such does matter quite a bit. But motives can be masked so, as usual, what requires close attention is the outcome, the result; POSIWID
15 Likes
There comes a point where a tyrannical majority can use “decorum” and “civility” to extirpate a minority. “Won’t you please step into this delousing chamber. If you don’t, I’m afraid we’ll have to shoot you.”
And then somehow they make it the minority’s problem for being loud.
10 Likes
Although the Judge may think he cant tell the Legislature how to conduct it self, internally, he is WELL within his right to enjoin the Executive branch from enforcing the Legislature’s will.
The Judge should forbid the State Police form interfering, in any way, with Zooey Zepher in her legislative duties. Let the Montanna Leg kick her out but forbid the cops form actually doing it.
If you cant tell the Legislature how to do its business, then force the executive to abide by the same principle and stay out.
4 Likes
- The majority silences the minority representative
- Supporters of the minority rep object
- The minority rep supports the objectors (duh!)
- Kick the minority rep out for “breaching decorum”
- Indignantly huff that it’s all the minority’s fault for not knowing their place errr I mean for being disruptive
The main thing that’s different these days is that there are (usually) no snarling police dogs.
10 Likes
IOW disfunction follows form?
3 Likes
The question I have is are these rules being applied consistently or is enforcement arbitrary?
I would think if it can be shown, as the article indicates, that in the past this conduct was not punished or the punishment was less harsh, then you have point of view discrimination.
If in fact there is evidence that Zooey Zephyr is being punished for her point of view then I would think there would be a remedy within the courts power impose on the legislature.
5 Likes
“This is an anti-democratic effort by House leadership to censor one of their own colleagues for using her voice and platform to represent her constituents,” said Keegan Medrano, Policy Director of the ACLU of Montana . “Rep. Zephyr is a duly-elected member of the legislature and entitled to represent the people of their district.
Maybe this is tomato/tomahto, but wouldn’t it be more important to note that the people who elected her have a right to be represented?
4 Likes
It can I suppose – form provides permissions as well as constraints – but social systems aren’t machines so always possible to play those off against each other; e.g., British insults are legendary for their overt courtesy and even the simple act of ‘politely’ seating a lady at table might be converted into an act of contempt by abruptly shoving it back in.
1 Like
Yet.
1 Like
Thanks for introducing that concept to me, @tindalos; I wasn’t aware of it before and it strikes me as an excellent antidote to those who’d conjure (majority/mainstream-protecting) distinctions between discrimination in intent v. impact!
I also wanted to reinforce your point about insistence on (majority/mainstream-defined) “good manners” being another powerful tool of oppression.
3 Likes
Its not like she was using the wrong bathroom or competing in the mens sports event, I mean,really, it coulda been worse gopper losers!
Hiding behind process is just a way of avoiding responsibility for being a assclown.
The GOP ruins every single thing it touches. It’s like the Midas Touch except it’s the Fucking Shit Touch.
2 Likes