There's a really dumb and counterproductive tic in American politics that treats polarization and partisan division as a bad thing that must be overcome. Would we bemoan such division between Putinists and non Putinists in Russia? What about between supporters and opponents of Jim Crow in the 50s?

I am advocating for you to be killed but I am using my inside voice you must debate me this is called democracy

The full write up is here:

Was It Something The Democrats Said?
A Response to Third Way’s Political Language Memo

open.substack.com/pub/dcinboxi...

**Please repost** If you're enjoying Paper Skygest -- our personalized feed of academic content on Bluesky -- we'd appreciate you reposting this! We’ve found that the most effective way for us to reach new users and communities is through users sharing it with their network

imo, if someone believes some races or ethnicities are genetically inferior to others, that person has revealed a weakness of mind and character that casts extreme if not irrefutable doubt on their other ideas. why would i expect them to use more rigor on, eg, housing than they do on human nature?

Unlike Reform, we’re doing things differently with democracy & inclusivity at the core.

From the launch to the party, conference, structures & yes - even the name! - we’re building it together.

It might feel unfamiliar to you. It’s called democracy.

🔗 yourparty.uk

My mom and stepdad are from the same diaspora group as Zohran Mamdani’s dad (same like “my stepdad was kicked out of the same town and knows some of his classmates”) and apparently the New York Times doesn’t understand how diaspora works, so I am going to tell you a little about my mom’s people!

In Florida, “free speech” and “institutional neutrality” mean that a Nazi arguing that nonwhites have no rights wins a prize while a course with “race” in the title is censored for violated the law.

Congratulations to all the credulous centrists who helped this along.

63% of American adults had unfavorable views of Martin Luther King Jr in August 1966, per Gallup surveys

46% of Mississippi GOP voters said interracial marriage should be illegal in a 2011 PPP poll

to push w/e is popular instead of trying to popularize justice is to admit you lack moral leadership

Required reading for my friends out there also studying immigration right now.

Also highly recommend the recent @theintercept.com podcast episode with @sophiagoodfriend.bsky.social and @chrisgelardi.bsky.social talking about this and more

When I was still going back-and-forth about mastering out, I came across Rachel Cargle’s Harper's Bazaar interview. One line in particular stayed with me: “Who would we be if we weren't just trying to survive?” I very much look forward to finding out. (9/9)

I’m immensely grateful to my mentors at WashU, Harvard, and in MIT's DEI spaces for helping me stay on track. Without them, I wouldn’t be (re)starting my PhD at Stanford Sociology this fall! I know a new coast and new discipline won’t resolve every issue, but I’m hopeful for this fresh start. (8/9)

My productivity and confidence took a hit, but I never stopped loving research. I never stopped wanting to become a professor. Instead of being a bridge to get to that dream, MIT Political Science proved to be a barrier. (7/9)

I know the "professional" thing to do is keep quiet but toxicity thrives in silence, and I want no part in perpetuating it. I don’t believe I was provided with a safe, collegial environment in which I could do the work that I so happily came to MIT to do. (6/9)

I was told I was the problem. Not the department that regularly kicks out students without a transparent dismissal policy (incl. 3 in one year), removed their DEI statement the moment it was politically convenient, and invited male candidates for 8/10 of last year’s job talks… I could go on. (5/9)

In response, I was told: "you’re lucky to be here," "at least you’re not in a war zone," "you don’t need to feel like you belong," and "is this a policy problem or a personality problem?" (4/9)

I came to @mitpolisci.bsky.social to do research, collaborate, and learn. Instead, I had to spend a frustrating amount of my time pleading with the department’s faculty to address the harmful fear-based pedagogy, hostility, and sexism that I, and several of my female peers, were experiencing. (3/9)

It’s not the outcome I wanted and my experience was sadly not one that I, or anyone else, deserved. I didn’t want to just say "I’m going to Stanford" (but I am 😊) without sharing part of the journey that got me there. (2/9)

Yesterday, I walked across the graduation stage to finally close an immensely difficult chapter in my academic career. After 2 years in MIT Political Science’s Ph.D. programme, I decided to leave with an S.M. in Political Science. (1/9)

🧵 text source: tinyurl.com/5n7mzbe6

The story is ostensibly about the use of facial recognition without oversight but the real story is how law enforcement and cities often escape any scrutiny by relying on third party organizations. NOPD didn’t even have a contract with Project NOLA, so nothing to see.

I’m reading a bunch of work on autocracy and democratic backsliding. I’m struck that scholars in this tradition don’t get called “political” or “biased” despite their clear normative stance. Yet, race and gender scholars—who were the canaries in the coal mine for backsliding—do.

Rep. Laurel Libby, R-Auburn, recently used my second-place finish in the 1,600-meter run, and that of my teammate in the 800-meter run, to malign Soren Stark-Chessa, the trans-identified athlete who finished first. One of the reasons I chose to run cross-country and track is the community: Teammates cheering each other on, athletes from different schools coming together, and the fact that personal improvement is valued as much as, if not more than, the place we finish. Last Friday, I ran the fastest 1,600-meter race I have ever run in middle school or high school track and earned varsity status by my school’s standards. I am extremely proud of the effort I put into the race and the time that I achieved. The fact that someone else finished in front of me didn’t diminish the happiness I felt after finishing that race. I don’t feel like first place was taken from me. Instead, I feel like a happy day was turned ugly by a bully who is using children to make political points. We are all just kids trying to make our way through high school. Participating in sports is the highlight of high school for some kids. No one was harmed by Soren’s participation in the girls’ track meet, but we are all harmed by the hateful rhetoric of bullies, like Rep. Libby, who want to take sports away from some kids just because of who they are. Anelise Feldman Freshman, Yarmouth High School Yarmouth

this is a letter to the editor from a high school track runner who came in second to a trans girl in a race. her state house rep in maine started talking about it. so she wrote this: www.pressherald.com/2025/05/14/r...

The key to so many of these dudes' reactionary politics is that they can never stop believing that the sorting mechanisms of meritocracy put them on top because they deserved it

Might be Stephanie Schmitt’s “Say Yes to Section 203” presented at JAWS?

Genuine q: why should we expect #polisky depts like MIT to do more to improve retention and recruitment of marginalised groups when there’s fewer accountability mechanisms? 6/6

And, I find it hard to believe that public statements are just being removed to avoid drawing fire but DEI efforts will still continue. In my experience, the dept was doing the bare minimum (and unabashedly used policies that undermined their DEI goals) even with a visible "commitment.” 5/6

Interesting that most other #MIT units have kept their diversity statements up for now (but some look pared down). Maybe MIT PoliSci will publish some vague “values” statement. But, I think removing the diversity statement, not telling students, and not replacing it for a month says a lot. 4/6