Loyal Opposition: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
Eric Weinstein refers to “'''Loyal Opposition'''” as essential to democracy: opposing power while remaining committed to shared principles and institutional legitimacy. He argues that the U.S. currently lacks such opposition because both major parties have tolerated extremist factions. Weinstein positions himself as a member of the loyal opposition within his own political sphere—criticizing excesses and revolutionary impulses while maintaining allegiance to democratic norms like merit, fairness, and free speech. He calls for political actors to resist their own side’s extremism, defend institutional legitimacy, and restore mutual respect necessary for a functioning democratic order.
[[File:Loyal-Opposition.png|thumb]]
 
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.


== On X ==
== On X ==
Line 391: Line 393:
== Related Pages ==
== Related Pages ==
* [[Can’t vs Mustn’t]]
* [[Can’t vs Mustn’t]]
* [[Free Speech]]


[[Category:Concepts]]
[[Category:Concepts]]
[[Category:Sensemaking]]
[[Category:Sensemaking]]