Discover Top Posts Tagged with #mobocracy

Rule of Majority

It is true that the Government in power is decided by the majority of people in democracy. But we should not confuse democracy with simply rule of majority. Democracy has constitution at its base and the laws in the constitution were scrutinized heavily after long discussions and debates. If for every law, there was referendum, we would have had a very bad constitution.

Thus the justification that, if the majority agrees on something, it must be correct is not Democracy, its Mobocracy.

#democracy #mobocracy #politics

Listening to Lincoln

I am a huge fan of the writing of David S. Reynolds, historian of American ideas and professor at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. (Readers should be careful not to confuse him with Cambridge University professor David Reynolds—no middle initial—who writes books primarily about twentieth century foreign policy and international relations. And also not with the Australian racing driver of the same name, co-winner of the 2017 Supercheap Auto Bathurst 1000.) The David Reynolds I wish to write about today, the one with a middle initial who doesn’t drive racecars for a living, has written several books that I’ve admired greatly over the years, most notably his 2009 book, Waking Giant: America in the Age of Jackson, but also the truly remarkable Walt Whitman’s America: A Cultural Biography, which came out two years later in 2011. And I also enjoyed reading his impressive 2012 volume, Mightier Than the Sword: Uncle Tom’s Cabin and the Battle for America, which book I think helped me understand the cultural milieu of the years leading up to the Civil War more than any other single volume I can think of. (For those of you who haven’t read any of the above, you are in for a huge treat. The author is just five years older than I am, but seems to understand nineteenth-century America more profoundly, and more broadly and deeply, than any other author I’ve read—including authors who themselves lived in the nineteenth century. Sometimes you really do need a little distance to see clearly.) And now I’ve just finished reading his latest book, Abe: Abraham Lincoln in His Time, published last fall by Penguin Press.

There are, of course, a lot of books about Lincoln out there, including many full-length biographies. And yet Reynolds manages to carve out space for a novel contribution to the world of Lincoln research, one in which he presents the man not so much in terms of his accomplishments (although that too) but more specifically in terms of the cultural milieu in which he grew up and flourished. It is, as noted above, a remarkable accomplishment and I recommend the book beyond highly. But I write today not merely to recommend an excellent book, but to tell you something that reading Reynolds’ helped me understand about our nation now by drawing me back into the story of our nation then.

One of Lincoln’s best known early speeches is the so-called Lyceum Address, which he delivered on January 27, 1838, at the Springfield Young Men’s Lyceum in Springfield, Illinois, as a twenty-eight-year old member of the Illinois State Legislature. I noticed Bret Stephens writing about this speech in the New York Times a few weeks back (click here) and found what he had to say about Lincoln in light of the events in Washington of January 6 compelling. But that only drew me back to Reynold’s book, where that specific speech is dissected and analyzed masterfully and intelligently, and set into its larger context.

The nation was in dire straits in the late 1830s. The slavery issue was front and center, forcing people either to support abolitionism or to be pro-slavery. In many quarters, what Lincoln called a “mobocratic” spirit seized the day. An anti-slavery newspaper editor, one Elijah Lovejoy, had just been murdered by a racist mob in Alton, Illinois. In Cincinnati, pro-slavery thugs broke into the building housing an anti-slavery newspaper and hauled the printing presses to the banks of the Ohio River and threw them in. In St. Louis, a Black man named Francis McIntosh had just been chained to a tree and burnt to death after shooting a policeman who was harassing his friends. In our own New York, pro-slavery mobs demolished stores and churches deemed to stand for abolitionism. There were pro-slavery riots in Manhattan, as well as in Connecticut and New Jersey. Nor was the violence that had seized the nation rooted solely in the slavery issue: anti-Catholic rioters burnt a convent to the ground in Charleston, Massachusetts, and attempted to murder the nuns who lived inside. So that was the background for Lincoln’s address at the lyceum in Springfield: his big point was that the issue on the nation’s table was not about slavery or about religious pluralism; it was about the power of the mob and whether the nation would choose to reject “mobocracy” and be guided forward solely by elected officials sworn to uphold the Constitution. That, he submitted, was what the nation needed to decide. Is this starting to sound at all familiar?

Lincoln saw the matter clearly, too, writing that “whenever the vicious portion of the population shall be permitted to gather in bands of hundreds and thousands, and burn churches, ravage and rob provision stores, throw printing presses into rivers, shoot editors, and hang and burn obnoxious persons at pleasure, and with impunity; depend on it, this Government cannot last.”

His second big point will also be resonant with modern readers. The nation was founded in revolution; the right to rise up against a despised central government and seek autonomy through independence is the foundation stone upon which the nation came into being. But what do we who live today do with that revolutionary spirit when citizens claim it as their justification for wanting to destroy the union, for refusing to accept legitimate election results, for seeking to accomplish with armed insurrection what they have failed to achieve through the normal instruments of self-expression that guide democracies forward into their own futures? It isn’t a ridiculous question at all—and it is one that Lincoln would eventually pay with his life for answering in the specific way he did.

The key for Americans in his day, Lincoln declares, lies in understanding that the sole way to honor the revolutionary spirit is to embrace the republican ideals upon which the founders founded the nation. “As the patriots of seventy-six did to the support of the Declaration of Independence,” Lincoln says clearly, “so to the support of the Constitution and Laws let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor.” To this single point, he returns again and again in his remarks in Springfield. “Let reverence for the laws be breathed by every American,” he said, “[and] let it become the political religion of the nation.” And as far as the notion that armed insurrection is somehow the birthright of true patriots schooled in the founders’ ideals, Lincoln has this to say: “Passion has helped us, but can do so no more. It will in future be our enemy. Reason, cold, calculating, unimpassioned reason, must furnish all the materials for our future support and defense.”

Lincoln’s Lyceum speech was delivered just two years after one of the greatest of all American essays, Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “Nature,” was published. Did Lincoln read it? My guess is that he did. For one thing, Lincoln was extremely well-read, a point to which Reynolds returns again and again. And I can hear Emerson clearly in some passages of the Lyceum address as well. Emerson’s point was that God speaks to the world through nature itself, making point after divine point to humankind through the intricacy and beauty of the natural world. And so does Lincoln turn to nature to make his point even more grandly by seeing the insurrectionists and rioters of his day as enemies not only of the republic but of nature itself: he describes the Founders as “a forest of giant oaks,” but then notes that an “all-resistless hurricane has swept over them, and left only, there and there, a lonely trunk despoiled of its verdure, shorn of its foliage.” America itself is identified with Eden: the United States occupies, Lincoln wrote, “the fairest portion of the earth as regards extent of territory, fertility of soil, and salubrity of climate.” But now the enemies of democracy have despoiled paradise: instead of the trees of Eden dripping with luscious fruit, in Mississippi both white people and Blacks “were seen literally dangling from the boughs of trees upon every roadside,” a horrific sight almost as omnipresent as the “native Spanish moss of the country, as a drapery of the forest.

Reynolds himself draws the obvious conclusion, writing that “the natural world—oceans, trees, a quarry, birds, snow, sun, and so on—here solidifies Lincoln’s ideas. The earth yields a political message: rebuild the edifice of liberty on solid ground by obeying the law, or else the hurricane of revolutionary passions will tear it down.”

So these are the thoughts I bring to my contemplation these days of our American present. Each day brings new arrests of those who entered the Capitol on January 6. The Senate is gearing up to try ex-President Trump on charges of inciting insurrection. The political landscape President Biden will have now to negotiate is changed, and fundamentally so, from what it would or could have been even just two or three months ago. To compare the riot at the Capitol with the burning of the Reichstag sounds exaggerated, but even making that comment is unsettling: even just a month ago, who would even have understood it? Or been able to imagine it?

As we move forward into uncharted waters against a background of the pandemic politics, I suggest we look forward by looking back. And I suggest we start by reading and rereading Lincoln. David S. Reynold’s book is an excellent place to start and I recommend it highly. But even more important is encountering Lincoln through his own words, through the story of his own life. (You can buy a used copy of Maureen Harrison and Steven Gilbert’s Lincoln in His Own Words for less than $2 online.) Lincoln was president more than a century and a half ago, but he casts his shadow still across the land. And that, I think, is a very good thing indeed.

#Abraham Lincoln #Lyceum Address #mobocracy

Are We or Are We not a Democracy.

September 15th is an interesting day, with Free Money day, and the International day of democracy. Despite it being a Sunday, I am parked at 91 springboard of course with my friends, mulling over brewed coffee. What on earth is actually democracy. Of course my friends Merriam-Webster do refer to it as the govt. Of the people.

It is supposed to be a political unit that has a democratic…

View On WordPress

#abraham lincoln #democra #mobocracy

Whatsapp: How To Avoid The Deathly Repercussions Of Fake News

‘Fake News’ has been prevalent in our society perhaps since humans first learnt how to form a functioning society. Everyone gossips about something, whether it is celebrities, neighbors, court cases, or high school drama. Gossiping, as a social behavior, is not a bad thing, in fact, research finds that it is actually a good thing! But, as the saying goes, too much of anything is bad, so how do you know when gossiping or fake news has gone too far? When the Gossip takes malicious turns, wen people get hurt, when their reputations get severely damaged

The recent fake news forwards on Whatsapp and the resulting lynchings and deaths stand proof of how low fake news can take humanity if not stop or, at the very least, regulated.

The introduction of social media has taken gossiping and fake news to a new level, while also accelerating and intensifying its aftereffects. The recent fake news forwards on Whatsapp and the resulting lynchings and deaths stand proof of how low fake news can take humanity if not stop or, at the very least, regulated.

Why Does Fake News Circulate So Quickly And Easily On Whatsapp?

Unlike most social networks, Whatsapp is a personal network; it’s like messaging on a more social level and the groups you are a part of are almost always made up of people you know. So the conversations you have in those groups are much like the conversations you will have at a family get together or when hanging out with friends.

Now in this, if someone suddenly introduces a serious, news topic, discussion is bound to ensue. And since it’s coming from someone you know, you don’t even stop to think whether the news is real or it’s been forwarded by someone from another group. To make things worse, we forward these messages to other groups with the intention of informing or warning our loved ones, without realizing that we’re adding to the vicious cycle of fake news.

On most Social Media platforms like Facebook and Twitter, you know who the original poster is; the name comes with every share. In Whatsapp however, this feature is absent, in fact, up until early 2018, you couldn’t even tell if a message was a forward. This means that people can blatantly spread fake news without fear of repercussion as they know it cannot be traced back to them.

Why Does Fake News Turn To Violence Mostly In India?

Suddenly people from rural areas in particular are inundated with information and are unable to distinguish what is real from what is not.

Whatsapp confirmed in their blog that in India “people forward more messages, photos, and videos than any other country in the world” so, for many Indians (especially in the rural areas), their first point of contact with the internet is through Whatsapp.

Pratik Sinha, the founder of Altnews.in told the BBC: “Suddenly people from rural areas in particular are inundated with information and are unable to distinguish what is real from what is not. They tend to believe whatever is sent to them.“

According to Durga Raghunath, an Indian digital expert, another reason why fake news is so rampant in rural India is because “The mental approach is different. Many of the issues people see on these platforms have an emotional connect, and because the information comes to us via family and friends, the inclination to double check is very low.“

Add political extremists into the mix, and you have a cruel, hate-driven, vicious cycle that takes advantage of villagers that are quick to treat anything they get via social media as gospel and are spurred on by the strong, confident language of the message.

How Do You Keep Fake News In Check?

In April of 2018, Malaysia passed the Anti-Fake News bill that would punish offenders with a 500,000 ringgit (approx. ₹ 8,484,000) fine and/or a possible a prison sentence of up to six years. Although this bill was met with heavy criticism for various reasons like possible obstruction of free speech and vague definition of “fake news”, it is a step closer to hindering the spread of fake news through social media.

Whatsapp has recently introduced features that they hope will help deal with fake news. Now, if a message is a forward, you will see a ‘forwarded’ tag with the message along with the number of forwards you can send at once limited to 5. The admins of groups also have more control over the activities of the group. The messaging app has also taken to newspapers (an information medium used widely in rural India — where violence related to fake news is more likely to take place) to educate people through full page ads about the steps they can take to curb the spread of fake news and it’s resulting violence.

While the macro-level solutions might take longer to carry out, there is one thing you can and should do on an individual level to help fight fake news: Fact Check. No matter how urgent the news seems to be or how relevant it is to you or your loved ones, always fact check every piece of news or information before forwarding it or talking about it. Here’s an excerpt from a Time of India article that’ll explain why fact checking is so important:

“The WhatsApp forward was dramatic, with images of cash-filled boxes and an underground tunnel, all allegedly discovered by a raid on politician V K Sasikala. When Sadhna C’s father received it, he called her for a fact-check. The Hyderabad-based IT professional found that “they were pictures from two completely unrelated news stories. The hoax had already been debunked online by then. I forwarded a clarification to my father, who then sent it back on the group. There was no response,” the 25-year -old told TOI.”

Watch Social Media Expert @ https://youtu.be/2hOdgQlerhw

It is not only important to fact check before forwarding such messages, but it is also your duty to inform the people you got the message from if you find the news to be fake so they can inform the people they heard from and hopefully reverse the cycle that one text message started.

Following the horrific fake news propagated deaths, many fact checking companies have come up. The main purpose of these companies it to fact check any viral news going about the internet, especially through social media.

In the end, it is not enough to blame the Government or the police system or the app or even the news itself for the deaths of innocent; it is in the hands of each individual to react to things like this: will you ignore it, believe it and decide to try your hand at vigilantism? Or will you do something about it?

Now you may think “what can one person do?” to that I ask “what can one person not do?” was it not one person who formulated the fake news and set off the cycle? Was it not one person [5] who made a simple phone call that lead to the death of two completely innocent people? Does this not show the power one person has?

So instead of misusing this power or worse, not using it at all, wield this power for good and help people who are already in this fight against fake news.

My Upcoming Workshop on Social Selling http://bit.ly/GOLDWorkshop

#Facebook #Mobocracy #Whatsapp #Fake News #Whatsapp Fake News #Gossip #Social Networks #Social Media Marketing

The introduction of social media has taken gossiping and fake news to a new level, so much so that fake news forwards on Whatsapp have resulted in lynchings and deaths in India.

#Social Media Marketing #Mobocracy #Whatsapp #Fake News #Whatsapp Fake News #Gossip #Social Networks #Facebook #Twitter #Social Media #Amit jadhav #Amit Jadhav Social

#Love is not crime #Shame on #Muslims of #Badhmer #LynchRaj #Lynching #MobLynching #MobViolence #MobJustice #Mobocracy #StopTheMob #StopMobViolence #EndMobLynching Condemned every act of #Hate and #Violence irrespective of #Religion , #Caste , #Region .