Loyal Opposition: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 16:28, 6 October 2025

Eric Weinstein views “Loyal Opposition” as a normative ideal in which dissent occurs within the boundaries of shared legitimacy and democratic commitment, rather than rejecting or delegitimizing institutions outright. He argues that in contemporary U.S. politics, no party currently functions as a true loyal opposition because both sides tolerate radical or revolutionary elements that undermine mutual constraints. He places himself in the role of a loyal opposition to his own “side,” criticizing its excesses when they stray from foundational values like meritocracy, decency, free speech, and institutional integrity. He insists that “loyal opposition” involves resisting extremes within one’s own faction, preserving institutional norms even while contesting power, and cultivating epistemic humility so that disagreement doesn’t collapse into delegitimization.

Quotes[edit]

I think that the answer to this question is really disturbing. It has to do with the fact that, in a weird way, traditional media is now playing the role of a professional wrestling promotion. And in some sense, if you wanted to make an analogy, I would say that podcasting is sort of playing the role of MMA, where it's much more real, and it's not pre determined. And so the real question that we have to face is, did something very strange happen to traditional media? Because that wasn't the case that traditional media wouldn't talk to me 10 years ago.
I would say about eight years ago, the line just went dead. And it wasn't anything that I was doing. It was a shift in the industry. And I think we're still wrestling with what that shift was, but it seemed to have to do a lot with the fact that media became much more nakedly partisan. The mask of objectivity, or, let's say, the promise, or the contract of objectivity, which was always honored somewhat in the breach, really fell apart. And it came to be seen as a virtue that one would crusade from a position in news media. And in that world, I think the idea is that whether you're affiliated left or affiliated right, you no longer view the other side as the loyal opposition, but you view them as an immoral force that cannot be talked to lest one be sullied. And because I was not going along with this move, I mean, it wasn't that I wasn't invited along to become part of this partisan media. But I think that what happened was that I very much valued the concept of a functional left and a functional right that meant something, being able to work together and to effectively express two different essential qualities of the American political dream.
I've talked about this as greatness and goodness, that, in some ways, Republicans tended to focus often a little bit more on greatness, even down to the "Make America Great" slogan. And I believe, you know, if you were going to come up with an analogous slogan for the left, it would be, "make America good for everyone for the first time".
So I think that there's a weird way in which what we've done is we've substituted the ability to talk and to commune and to break bread, and even to fall in love with each other, for a sort of weird set piece battle, where we're all battling our mortal enemies. And in that world, as a guy who comes from a progressive family who works for a very famous conservative, and who refused to play this game, I think that the idea was we moved to really nakedly political media. And I think that that has a lot to do with it. And I think the fact is, is that the narratives in traditional media are threadbare, which is part of why we're seeing a cratering of public trust in our traditional institutions that used to do sense making.
- Eric Weinstein, Jan 26, 2021, in answer to Why won't traditional media have you on? on Beyond The Interview with Nicole Benham

Latest revision as of 16:28, 6 October 2025

Quotes[edit]

On X[edit]

2018[edit]

2020[edit]

2021[edit]

2024[edit]

2025[edit]

Related Pages[edit]