https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel en-us 2018-11-19 10:36:39 UTC 2018-11-19 13:45:48 UTC hello@padlet.com https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305881904 Considering Donald Trump anything but a fascist is unproductive to our understanding and current development of theory concerning populism.

Would the rise of Donald Trump be considered the rise of fascism?]]> 2018-11-19 12:43:23 UTC https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305881904 https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305884454 Toleration is hurtful to democracy and poses a serious democratic challenge. ]]> 2018-11-19 12:50:26 UTC https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305884454 https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305884469 We cannot understand democracy today without taking into account neoliberalism.]]> 2018-11-19 12:50:29 UTC https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305884469 https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305884548 Modern ways of thinking about democracy are inherently connected with capitalism and that produces a problem for rethinking democracy.]]> 2018-11-19 12:50:44 UTC https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305884548 https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305887507 1. We need to rethink democracy.

2. Modern ways of thinking about democracy are connected with capitalism.

3. Democracy is exclusively thought about by political, intellectual and economic elites. 

4. Rethinking democracy must be a popular collective enterprise. 

5. Normal people need time, civic education and supportive institutions in order to undertake this enterprise. 

6. Capitalism, with its exploitative structures, prevents people from having the time, civic education and publicly supported institutions needed. 

7. The thinking of democracy needs to be separated from capitalism in order to solve the problem.   



]]> 2018-11-19 12:58:58 UTC https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305887507 https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305888609 1. We need to reconceptualize toleration because current conceptions no longer help us understand how we can accommodate a great range of identities and combinations of identities. 

2. If society itself is not tolerant towards its minorities, those minorities are not likely to participate in the democratic process and this could lead to unrest, which is a challenge for democracy.

3. Therefore, the current conception of toleration poses a threat to the functioning of democracies so the conception should be revisited.]]> 2018-11-19 13:02:01 UTC https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305888609 https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305889745 1. We live in a time of neoliberalism 
2. Democracy is a historical contingent term - so in order to understand democracy, we must understand the time we are living in (neoliberalism) 
3. Therefore we must understand neoliberalism to understand democracy

The two premises (1+2) must be true in order for the claim (3) to be true. The essay would therefore had to elaborate on why the premises are true. 

]]> 2018-11-19 13:05:24 UTC https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305889745 https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305892365 1. Donald Trumps precidency has features of fascism.
2. By excluding fascism in the debate on populism as a threat for democracy, we overlook a set of serious contemporary challenges for democracy.

]]> 2018-11-19 13:11:22 UTC https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305892365 https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305899321 1. Counter-argument: If A has features of B, A isn't necessarily B. So Trump's presidency having features of fascism does not make him a fascist. 
2. Response: Calling Trump a fascist rather than a populist allows us to conceptualize populism as having positive effects for democracy, while fascism is reserved for people who are a threat to democracy.
2.1. Calling Trump a fascist is legitimate because he is on the path to fascism. 


]]> 2018-11-19 13:26:25 UTC https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305899321 https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305899384 Possible counter-argument: The above could end in populism; how do we avoid defending populism?
- Our answer to rethinking democracy is not to simply give the people the power - but to qualify them to be active democratic citizens. That is not populism. 

Possible counter-argument: 

]]> 2018-11-19 13:26:34 UTC https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305899384 https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305899948 1. Democracy existed long before neoliberalism existed, so in order to understand democracy you don't necessarily need to understand neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is not necessarily going to be the dominant concept forever, so democracy can evolve past neoliberalism.

2. Democracy can evolve separately from dominant institutions, as historically they have, since democracy is run by the people, not just those in power. In focusing on only understanding dominant institutions, we do not understand ways in which the electorate wants to question and or fight power.]]> 2018-11-19 13:27:52 UTC https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305899948 https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305900175  If society itself is not tolerant towards its minorities, those minorities are not likely to participate in the democratic process and this could lead to unrest, which is a challenge for democracy."

Response: If tolerance is too extensive in society, democracy will get a hollow phenomenon. Overstreched democratic inclusiveness will kill the constructive democratic debate.

Response: The focus only on tolerance distracts us from the actual problems in society.

]]> 2018-11-19 13:28:24 UTC https://padlet.com/malteibsen/carousel/wish/305900175