Thank you for speaking clearly and objectively about where we are, the dangers to our democracy, and what is needed to preserve it. As you have pointed out, “when objective facts do not support a narrative you change the narrative not the facts.” There are no “alternative facts.”
Your column is always fair & balanced. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said countries come "unglued". That's how I feel we have been in the last few years.
Thank you for your reflections and pursuit of truth and responsibility.
I have 2 questions:
1. You mention how important it is for people to "feel listened to." Can you clarify your perspective a little? It seems to run against your earlier case. If facts exist your desire is to minimize bias and grapple with fact and observation rather than opinion, it seems to me that the goal would be to listen to people. When I hear politicians, business people, or educators (usually on the left) talk about people "feeling listened to" it suggests empathic listening as an influence strategy primarily. For example, if you were elected governor, would the purpose of your town hall meetings in deeply conservative parts of the state be to listen and learn from those constituents whose assumptions about how the world works are different from your own, or would it be to help a community "feel heard"?
2. Speaking of influence strategies, it seems to me that outrage and manipulation are effective. What specific strategies do you recommend to counter and correct this trend? (I notice that the title of this piece includes an appeal to fear.). To put a fine point on it... Is fear an appropriate influence strategy for public life? How is your appeal to fear (democracy is being endangered by a slow moving plot by conservatives to seize power and disenfranchise people) not simply a less well funded, less ubiquitously executed, (i.e. less effective) application of the same strategy. (I'm not suggesting a false equivalence here and agree with your analysis, just trying to understand how you differentiate strategically).
Thank you for your leadership. I can't vote for you (not in state) but wish you every success.
1. I saw Mr. Kristof reporting from Portland in front of the Federal Court House. He didn't say anything about those who were trying to burn it down. Were they Republicans?
2. The Dems are trying to eliminate the rules that require 60 Senators to vote in favor of a measure before it passes. Is this or is it not a Constitutional Republic.
3. The Dems want a federal voting law. The Constitution provides for the states to determine the voting laws. So if this is a good idea, lets amend the Constitution.
4. the Build Back Better proposed legislation provided for three (or was it one) year of additional child welfare. Does anyone seriously (and honestly) think that it would last only one year and that the cost of the bill would be the low figure the Dems insisted that it is?
5. The email I got from the NYT today quoted high numbers of those willing to be violent and then quoted another study showing very low numbers.
6. Mr. Kristof, are what you are suggesting about trying to force Fox off the air, a suppression of free speech?
7. While the 1/6/2020 spectacle was bad, isn't it also bad that there are people who have been in jail for a year, with no trial date set? What happened to speedy and fair trials?
My point is that while the Republicans have evil doers, so do the Dems. You raise some valid concerns but I worry that you seem very concerned about one side of the issues and appear unable to look at other sides.
You too have some valid points. I didn't see the reporting from in front of the Fed. Court house so I can't speak to that, but point #2 regarding elimiating he rules that require 60 Senators to vote in favor of a measure... no it is for many things a simple majority. If you are talking about elimination of the fillibuster, no where in the Constitution is fillibustering mentioned. It is an archaic and much changed over the years to the point it is nearly moot. One does not stand and talk about why they oppose a measure until they simply can't talk any longer, now they just say they object and it is tabled. There have also been numerous carve outs over the years. The most recent in memory is when the Republicans created a carve out to rush Federal judges through without dialogue and most famously rushing Amy Barrett through to the Supreme Court less than a month before a Federal election and yet the same Senators would not allow the replacement on the court of Alito 10 months before the election in 2016 saying it was an election year. It would be nice if the two parties played by the same rules wouldn't it.
The states can determine voting laws as long as they do not infringe upon one's ability as a citizen of this great nation to vote. Do you really feel taking away all the polling locations save one in a large metropolitan area that leans primarily toward the Democratic party is the best way to ensure all can vote? Or in rural TX have one voting location 40 miles away from outlying areas with no public transportation and no ability to vote by mail?
These were always in the voting right's bills overwhelming supported by BOTH parties-----until the last administration. Reagan was for expanding voting rights, so were the two Bushes, but suddenly without evidence there is voting fraud, now there must be further restrictions in "some" states.
You appear to be pretty knowledgeable so you have probably heard of the Fairness Doctrine. It was originally passed in 1939 to make sure that media must present both sides of an issue. It was renewed by huge margins by both sides of the isle until 1987. Congress allowed it to expire. The Democrats asked for its renewal so that information would give listeners and viewers of news a balanced view to make up their own minds. Regan vetoed the bill signed by both Democrats and Republicans. It gave rise to shock radio and later to cable networks that are not even licensed as news outlets to. forego being fair or present facts. Just opinions which don't hold much water because we all know that opinions are like..... A holes, everyone has one. FACTS do matter. No one is saying Fox which is licensed as an entertainment channel should go off the air, but it sure would be nice to see reporting like Walter Cronkite--facts, just the facts. And that goes for some of the personalities on CNN and MSNBC. Some make my head spin.
If you are refering to people being in jail for a year are you speaking about those from the insurection on 01/06/2021 or are you talking about the many people who due to COVID have been in jail for a couple of years awaiting trial? If it is the latter that is definitely not good, most of those who have been arrested in the attack on our nation's capital to try to stop a legal function of the government, most have received fairly light sentences and most are not waiting in jail unless they were arrested for bodily harm, threats of harm, or destruction of our capital. Most were not even arrested until this past spring so the one year in jail doesn't really apply. Considering over 750 have been arrested and many have pleaded guilty and served small sentences or paid fines, I would say the justice dept is moving fairly quickly..... unlike some of the states who have people sitting in jail awaiting trials for several years.
Finally Nick is a man of principles. I think he will always do what is in the best interest of ALL Oregonians, not just Democrats. He invites the dialogue with all. I am not a registered Democrat. I'm registered as an independent because I've found good people on both sides of the isle in the past. Lets hope we can come together and listen to each other because division doesn't help anyone of us.
This is a good conversation. I only want to speak to Mr Fausett’s question in #4. You asked if anyone thinks the “child welfare” provided in the Build Back Better bill will really only last a year. I wouldn’t call it child welfare first of all. The Child Tax Credit is actually money parents have paid already in taxes that they are getting back early. They would normally get it back after filing taxes in the form of a refund. This confused me at first. I’m a mom, and I’ll admit I was excited to get my first check (we needed it as my husband is fighting cancer and I changed jobs and took a pay cut before covid hit). Then I read that many parents were opting out of the Child Tax Credit. I had to do some research to find out that if we accept the checks, we might have to owe taxes in April rather than getting our usual small refund. You can’t get the credit if you make over a certain amount. Because it’s designed to help people get out of poverty. The check we got was our money already—we just got it back earlier. We can use it now instead of the government making interest in it and then sending it to us next spring in a refund.
I think of it not as welfare but as an investment in our children. Children who grow up in poverty are more likely to get ill, be exposed to drugs and crime, develop mental illness from the chronic stress of poverty, etc. by investing in our own fellow Americans, we help ourselves. We have healthier, stronger neighbors. Does that make sense? I hope the investment in our American children DOES last forever. Or for as long as we need it.
I was not referring to whether or not we should make the investment in children. I was referring to the hypocrisy of the House Democrats in only providing for one year and establishing the cost of the bill based on that one year when they know darn good and well that it will last for many years and cost much more than they estimate. I think that there are many things in that bill that are less important than providing for our children. I know because my father died of cancer when I was 11 and without my mother's sacrifices I don't know what would have happened to me.
Excellent points, Mr. Kristof however has not shown himself willing to answer questions just pontificate, he is a writer, not answerable to questions apparently.
An uncomfortable truth is that misinformation cannot be combated through public pressure...it's a 'demand' issue, not a 'supply' problem. Trump taught the GOP leadership that principles are irrelevant to the GOP base and he promised the base that the ends justify the means. It's a self-contained universe that cannot be penetrated. The only hope is that never-Trumpers, Independent, infrequent voters, and Democrats form a loose but durable coalition, with common agreement around the type of country we want to inhabit. This requires massive compromise and rock-solid messaging, neither of which Democratic leadership has shown to date. I hope that changes in 2022. As to the media, unless they recognize the threats to democracy are also threats to their lives and livelihoods, I don't anticipate changes from the beltway press, but I do see signs that local media are stepping up to the challenge. Nick, I think one of your great strengths is your personal experiences with autocratic regimes. People clearly do not see the dangers of fascism. The effects on their daily lives and futures need to be starkly and eloquently portrayed.
I always value your work! I am also very worried about cutting edge cyber crimes and gross abuses of technology and telecommunications that I can’t manage to report or get a dedicated officer, agent, representative or advocate to help me communicate and investigate.
Thomas Homer Dixon, a canadian scholar, just posted a similar analysis. A frightening time for our Republic! And for all the nations of the world that will be worse off if we cannot preserve our democratic institutions, starting with voting rights. You make important suggestions about listening. Tough to listen when you don't agree, but I think you have the skill and compassion to do that. Van Jones has been doggedly doing that for years. Every voice for sanity in our country is a gift. I wonder if you'd be interested in being my guest on @whatcouldpossiblygorightpodcast? You are bravely wading into a sizzlingly polarized nation.
I greatly appreciate this analysis of what January 6 means for the future. The future is here now. For years, Republican officials in my state, SC, have made it clear that they don't feel any responsibility for Democratic constituents. Keep in mind that Republicans greatly added to public debt with their tax cuts for the wealthy in 2017.
The following, copied and pasted from an email I received yesterday from Senator Graham, is typical. He's not even running for office in 2022, having been reelected in 2020.
"Thank you for contacting me regarding the Democrats’ reckless tax and spending spree. I am adamantly opposed to this legislation, which paves the way for more taxes and government spending.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently scored this bill without gimmicks, which raised the total cost from $1.75 trillion to almost $5.0 trillion. This radical legislation is not paid for and will add $3.0 trillion to the national debt. At a time when this country needs fiscal sanity the Democrats continue to bury our future generations in insurmountable debt.
The so–called Build Back Better bill is an inflation time bomb and socialist wish list that will harm our country’s energy independence, stunt the competitiveness of American companies in the world market, and dramatically increase the cost of doing business in the United States. This bill is a frightening prospect for working Americans and families across the nation and I will continue to do everything in my power to work against it."
Your revisionist history skills would be better served writing fiction. The Witmer plot was an FBI job from the start. 1/6 will likely be found to be a similar deep state operation. The use of the "Big Lie" would be more accurate when describing Russian collusion or Russian misinformation about Hunter Biden's laptop. Oregonians are acutely aware of the violence and destruction perpetuated by left wing groups like Antifa and BLM in Portland. While you were living in New York Portland burned. It is clear each time you post how out of touch you are with reality. Finally I have some faith in our system when even our more progressive secretary of state realizes that you can't have it both ways by Voting in New York then trying to run for Oregon Governor. Stick to writing, your good at it, even if it's not news but fantasies.
To Nick and all fellow readers: I heard an interview (on NPR, On Point, 12-29-21) with Amanda Ripley about her new book, "High Conflict: Why we get trapped and how we get out." I'm reading it now. I think we need to spread the word about this book and apply it's principles quickly. I also would like to suggest to teachers that, after their own review, they consider incorporating this book into their own curriculums. We will always have conflict, but there is a significant difference in the ways we can deal with it--and the ultimate results.
Hi Nick, Outstanding piece!!!! I hope this gets out far and wide! I REALLY MISS your presence at the NYT!!! It's not the same without you! All the best, sam
I know you will listen to ALL Oregonians and can foster healing in your corner of our country. Your letter helps us all think about how to listen and help disseminate truth.
Thank you, Nick. One of the best, most heartfelt analyses. We really need your voice.
Thank you for speaking clearly and objectively about where we are, the dangers to our democracy, and what is needed to preserve it. As you have pointed out, “when objective facts do not support a narrative you change the narrative not the facts.” There are no “alternative facts.”
Your column is always fair & balanced. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said countries come "unglued". That's how I feel we have been in the last few years.
Thank you for your reflections and pursuit of truth and responsibility.
I have 2 questions:
1. You mention how important it is for people to "feel listened to." Can you clarify your perspective a little? It seems to run against your earlier case. If facts exist your desire is to minimize bias and grapple with fact and observation rather than opinion, it seems to me that the goal would be to listen to people. When I hear politicians, business people, or educators (usually on the left) talk about people "feeling listened to" it suggests empathic listening as an influence strategy primarily. For example, if you were elected governor, would the purpose of your town hall meetings in deeply conservative parts of the state be to listen and learn from those constituents whose assumptions about how the world works are different from your own, or would it be to help a community "feel heard"?
2. Speaking of influence strategies, it seems to me that outrage and manipulation are effective. What specific strategies do you recommend to counter and correct this trend? (I notice that the title of this piece includes an appeal to fear.). To put a fine point on it... Is fear an appropriate influence strategy for public life? How is your appeal to fear (democracy is being endangered by a slow moving plot by conservatives to seize power and disenfranchise people) not simply a less well funded, less ubiquitously executed, (i.e. less effective) application of the same strategy. (I'm not suggesting a false equivalence here and agree with your analysis, just trying to understand how you differentiate strategically).
Thank you for your leadership. I can't vote for you (not in state) but wish you every success.
A few questions:
1. I saw Mr. Kristof reporting from Portland in front of the Federal Court House. He didn't say anything about those who were trying to burn it down. Were they Republicans?
2. The Dems are trying to eliminate the rules that require 60 Senators to vote in favor of a measure before it passes. Is this or is it not a Constitutional Republic.
3. The Dems want a federal voting law. The Constitution provides for the states to determine the voting laws. So if this is a good idea, lets amend the Constitution.
4. the Build Back Better proposed legislation provided for three (or was it one) year of additional child welfare. Does anyone seriously (and honestly) think that it would last only one year and that the cost of the bill would be the low figure the Dems insisted that it is?
5. The email I got from the NYT today quoted high numbers of those willing to be violent and then quoted another study showing very low numbers.
6. Mr. Kristof, are what you are suggesting about trying to force Fox off the air, a suppression of free speech?
7. While the 1/6/2020 spectacle was bad, isn't it also bad that there are people who have been in jail for a year, with no trial date set? What happened to speedy and fair trials?
My point is that while the Republicans have evil doers, so do the Dems. You raise some valid concerns but I worry that you seem very concerned about one side of the issues and appear unable to look at other sides.
Richard Fausett
You too have some valid points. I didn't see the reporting from in front of the Fed. Court house so I can't speak to that, but point #2 regarding elimiating he rules that require 60 Senators to vote in favor of a measure... no it is for many things a simple majority. If you are talking about elimination of the fillibuster, no where in the Constitution is fillibustering mentioned. It is an archaic and much changed over the years to the point it is nearly moot. One does not stand and talk about why they oppose a measure until they simply can't talk any longer, now they just say they object and it is tabled. There have also been numerous carve outs over the years. The most recent in memory is when the Republicans created a carve out to rush Federal judges through without dialogue and most famously rushing Amy Barrett through to the Supreme Court less than a month before a Federal election and yet the same Senators would not allow the replacement on the court of Alito 10 months before the election in 2016 saying it was an election year. It would be nice if the two parties played by the same rules wouldn't it.
The states can determine voting laws as long as they do not infringe upon one's ability as a citizen of this great nation to vote. Do you really feel taking away all the polling locations save one in a large metropolitan area that leans primarily toward the Democratic party is the best way to ensure all can vote? Or in rural TX have one voting location 40 miles away from outlying areas with no public transportation and no ability to vote by mail?
These were always in the voting right's bills overwhelming supported by BOTH parties-----until the last administration. Reagan was for expanding voting rights, so were the two Bushes, but suddenly without evidence there is voting fraud, now there must be further restrictions in "some" states.
You appear to be pretty knowledgeable so you have probably heard of the Fairness Doctrine. It was originally passed in 1939 to make sure that media must present both sides of an issue. It was renewed by huge margins by both sides of the isle until 1987. Congress allowed it to expire. The Democrats asked for its renewal so that information would give listeners and viewers of news a balanced view to make up their own minds. Regan vetoed the bill signed by both Democrats and Republicans. It gave rise to shock radio and later to cable networks that are not even licensed as news outlets to. forego being fair or present facts. Just opinions which don't hold much water because we all know that opinions are like..... A holes, everyone has one. FACTS do matter. No one is saying Fox which is licensed as an entertainment channel should go off the air, but it sure would be nice to see reporting like Walter Cronkite--facts, just the facts. And that goes for some of the personalities on CNN and MSNBC. Some make my head spin.
If you are refering to people being in jail for a year are you speaking about those from the insurection on 01/06/2021 or are you talking about the many people who due to COVID have been in jail for a couple of years awaiting trial? If it is the latter that is definitely not good, most of those who have been arrested in the attack on our nation's capital to try to stop a legal function of the government, most have received fairly light sentences and most are not waiting in jail unless they were arrested for bodily harm, threats of harm, or destruction of our capital. Most were not even arrested until this past spring so the one year in jail doesn't really apply. Considering over 750 have been arrested and many have pleaded guilty and served small sentences or paid fines, I would say the justice dept is moving fairly quickly..... unlike some of the states who have people sitting in jail awaiting trials for several years.
Finally Nick is a man of principles. I think he will always do what is in the best interest of ALL Oregonians, not just Democrats. He invites the dialogue with all. I am not a registered Democrat. I'm registered as an independent because I've found good people on both sides of the isle in the past. Lets hope we can come together and listen to each other because division doesn't help anyone of us.
This is a good conversation. I only want to speak to Mr Fausett’s question in #4. You asked if anyone thinks the “child welfare” provided in the Build Back Better bill will really only last a year. I wouldn’t call it child welfare first of all. The Child Tax Credit is actually money parents have paid already in taxes that they are getting back early. They would normally get it back after filing taxes in the form of a refund. This confused me at first. I’m a mom, and I’ll admit I was excited to get my first check (we needed it as my husband is fighting cancer and I changed jobs and took a pay cut before covid hit). Then I read that many parents were opting out of the Child Tax Credit. I had to do some research to find out that if we accept the checks, we might have to owe taxes in April rather than getting our usual small refund. You can’t get the credit if you make over a certain amount. Because it’s designed to help people get out of poverty. The check we got was our money already—we just got it back earlier. We can use it now instead of the government making interest in it and then sending it to us next spring in a refund.
I think of it not as welfare but as an investment in our children. Children who grow up in poverty are more likely to get ill, be exposed to drugs and crime, develop mental illness from the chronic stress of poverty, etc. by investing in our own fellow Americans, we help ourselves. We have healthier, stronger neighbors. Does that make sense? I hope the investment in our American children DOES last forever. Or for as long as we need it.
I was not referring to whether or not we should make the investment in children. I was referring to the hypocrisy of the House Democrats in only providing for one year and establishing the cost of the bill based on that one year when they know darn good and well that it will last for many years and cost much more than they estimate. I think that there are many things in that bill that are less important than providing for our children. I know because my father died of cancer when I was 11 and without my mother's sacrifices I don't know what would have happened to me.
Excellent points, Mr. Kristof however has not shown himself willing to answer questions just pontificate, he is a writer, not answerable to questions apparently.
Good point Mr. Roche. I certainly hope that Mr. Kristof seriously considers this issue.
An uncomfortable truth is that misinformation cannot be combated through public pressure...it's a 'demand' issue, not a 'supply' problem. Trump taught the GOP leadership that principles are irrelevant to the GOP base and he promised the base that the ends justify the means. It's a self-contained universe that cannot be penetrated. The only hope is that never-Trumpers, Independent, infrequent voters, and Democrats form a loose but durable coalition, with common agreement around the type of country we want to inhabit. This requires massive compromise and rock-solid messaging, neither of which Democratic leadership has shown to date. I hope that changes in 2022. As to the media, unless they recognize the threats to democracy are also threats to their lives and livelihoods, I don't anticipate changes from the beltway press, but I do see signs that local media are stepping up to the challenge. Nick, I think one of your great strengths is your personal experiences with autocratic regimes. People clearly do not see the dangers of fascism. The effects on their daily lives and futures need to be starkly and eloquently portrayed.
I always value your work! I am also very worried about cutting edge cyber crimes and gross abuses of technology and telecommunications that I can’t manage to report or get a dedicated officer, agent, representative or advocate to help me communicate and investigate.
Thomas Homer Dixon, a canadian scholar, just posted a similar analysis. A frightening time for our Republic! And for all the nations of the world that will be worse off if we cannot preserve our democratic institutions, starting with voting rights. You make important suggestions about listening. Tough to listen when you don't agree, but I think you have the skill and compassion to do that. Van Jones has been doggedly doing that for years. Every voice for sanity in our country is a gift. I wonder if you'd be interested in being my guest on @whatcouldpossiblygorightpodcast? You are bravely wading into a sizzlingly polarized nation.
I greatly appreciate this analysis of what January 6 means for the future. The future is here now. For years, Republican officials in my state, SC, have made it clear that they don't feel any responsibility for Democratic constituents. Keep in mind that Republicans greatly added to public debt with their tax cuts for the wealthy in 2017.
The following, copied and pasted from an email I received yesterday from Senator Graham, is typical. He's not even running for office in 2022, having been reelected in 2020.
"Thank you for contacting me regarding the Democrats’ reckless tax and spending spree. I am adamantly opposed to this legislation, which paves the way for more taxes and government spending.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently scored this bill without gimmicks, which raised the total cost from $1.75 trillion to almost $5.0 trillion. This radical legislation is not paid for and will add $3.0 trillion to the national debt. At a time when this country needs fiscal sanity the Democrats continue to bury our future generations in insurmountable debt.
The so–called Build Back Better bill is an inflation time bomb and socialist wish list that will harm our country’s energy independence, stunt the competitiveness of American companies in the world market, and dramatically increase the cost of doing business in the United States. This bill is a frightening prospect for working Americans and families across the nation and I will continue to do everything in my power to work against it."
That was well written and researched, thank you.
AND Ben R - Don't look up
Your revisionist history skills would be better served writing fiction. The Witmer plot was an FBI job from the start. 1/6 will likely be found to be a similar deep state operation. The use of the "Big Lie" would be more accurate when describing Russian collusion or Russian misinformation about Hunter Biden's laptop. Oregonians are acutely aware of the violence and destruction perpetuated by left wing groups like Antifa and BLM in Portland. While you were living in New York Portland burned. It is clear each time you post how out of touch you are with reality. Finally I have some faith in our system when even our more progressive secretary of state realizes that you can't have it both ways by Voting in New York then trying to run for Oregon Governor. Stick to writing, your good at it, even if it's not news but fantasies.
To Nick and all fellow readers: I heard an interview (on NPR, On Point, 12-29-21) with Amanda Ripley about her new book, "High Conflict: Why we get trapped and how we get out." I'm reading it now. I think we need to spread the word about this book and apply it's principles quickly. I also would like to suggest to teachers that, after their own review, they consider incorporating this book into their own curriculums. We will always have conflict, but there is a significant difference in the ways we can deal with it--and the ultimate results.
Than you, Nick. You are spot on. We must keep sounding this alarm. Jeff in Hillsboro
Hi Nick, Outstanding piece!!!! I hope this gets out far and wide! I REALLY MISS your presence at the NYT!!! It's not the same without you! All the best, sam
I know you will listen to ALL Oregonians and can foster healing in your corner of our country. Your letter helps us all think about how to listen and help disseminate truth.