Survey Responses:

Individual Responses & Key Take Aways

Here I will display a record of responses to a survey/interview that I conducted. If one is short on time, I particularly recommend reading Cameron May's responses as well as Emma Joella Tennant's. From these responses, I will draw conclusions about the concept of the language of the law and democratic backsliding after each response noted by "My Key Takeaways." Furthermore, I will go through and bold any terms that I identified as repeated or particularly relevant. You can view this page as a record of responses but also my annotations. After each person's response, I will present a key take away to relate the responses back to course concepts. 

*Note there were more survey responses, but in the interest of time and quality, I have only included 8 of the 14 responses I got. 

Aydan Reimer:

1.  When you think of the term "law," what comes to mind? 

I think of right and wrong; laws are meant to separate what is deemed good from what is deemed bad or uncivil.

2. What do you understand democracy to be?

Division of power for the betterment of a society

3. Do you think the United States is experiencing Democratic Backslide, as I defined above? Why or why not?

The US is experiencing democratic backsliding because of the extreme division of the political parties.

4. What role, if any, do you think the law has in democratic backslide?

Law has a huge role -- laws that people find unjust will enhance the backsliding.

5. How do you think language plays into democratic backslide? 

Language is everything; the way people speak about subjects or people has a great influence on what occurs around them. There is rhetoric that is spreading ideals that are contrary to democracy, which shows how language is relevant to democratic backsliding.

My Key Take Away from Aydan's Responses

When I look into Aydan's responses, though they are short and sweet, I see two themes occurring. A focus on the presence of division in the stability or instability of what is right and wrong. Her regard for the way people speak about issues just brings these two things together because it emphasizes the self-enforcing mechanism that language is and, thus, how that reflects upon the institutions it creates (such as the institution of law). The understanding that Aydan provided us with can help us to examine the frame of language which exists around the rule of law, which can be incredibly limited because of its vulnerability to division in determining what is right and wrong. In Aydan's responses, we can also see the presence of customary understandings of law which are emphasized in lingual anthropology for their limiting tendencies.

Ishana Bandyopadhyay:

 1.  When you think of the term "law," what comes to mind? 

A system of rules and regulations that society lives by and enforces penalties against if broken.

2. What do you understand democracy to be?

A system of government where the entire country is represented, usually through elected officials.

3. Do you think the United States is experiencing Democratic Backslide, as I defined above? Why or why not?

Yes, the US is experiencing democratic backsliding as democratic ideas are weakening. Also, checks and balances on our government are weakening, and legislative bodies are becoming ineffective.

4. What role, if any, do you think the law has in democratic backslide?

Law has several roles in democratic backsliding as shown in the reversal of Roe v. Wade, as freedoms of reproductive rights are in jeopardy and have been taken away in many states. The democratic ideals that led to the implementation of Roe v. Wade are now being taken away, and law plays a role in that.

5. How do you think language plays into democratic backslide? 

I feel like language could be relevant to democratic backsliding but in the way of the people’s voice. Democracy is based on the voice of the people, and language is the tool used to voice the wants and needs that people would like their elected officials to represent in government. In regards to democratic backsliding, I think language is relevant because the lack of clear language between the people and elected officials is what is causing a regression in democracy. Elected officials are failing to listen to the language of the people and their opinions, causing democratic representation to waver.

My Key Take Away from Ishana's Responses

Ishana's responses centered around democracy and law being tools that are represented and created by the voices and language of the people who interact with them. What I found interesting about this was how although Ishana definitely hit on some customary views of laws and ideologies and looked at how systems within our institutions determine those things, for example, checks and balances. Her emphasis of the lack of clarity between the language of the law as used and understood by elected officials and the people of the united states might help to identify that the law exists to people in two frames of language, which often clash with the expectations of authorities and citizens are different, as are the understandings of said language. Ishana's understanding of law and ideologies really hints at the disparities of what we view as law and its limits within our society.   

Ryan Wilson-Foley:

1.  When you think of the term "law," what comes to mind? 

Law is a guiding principle that creates a set of rules and boundaries by which a society can peacefully exist with itself.

2. What do you understand democracy to be?

Rule by the vote of the majority.

3. Do you think the United States is experiencing Democratic Backslide, as I defined above? Why or why not?

Yes, we are reverting to behaviors and choices that we thought we had evolved past.

4. What role, if any, do you think the law has in democratic backslide?

Law always plays a role, especially if the verbiage of a law contains opportunities for exploits or loopholes that people can use to evade the intent or actual purpose of the law.

5. How do you think language plays into democratic backslide? 

Language changes and evolves over time; words take on, or shed meanings that may differ from how they were used previously or may be used in the future. Letter of the law and intent of the law must be clearly spelled out.

My Key Take Away from Ryan's Responses

Ryan's responses represent some similar themes that existed in the overall responses collected from this survey, particularly in the emphasis on a set of rules and boundaries. Where I find variation in Ryan's responses actually lies with his identity, which he asked to include with his responses; Ryan is a veteran, about 55 years old, and is a gay man who has largely been excluded from his family because of his sexual orientation. His identity and experience in the world have given him an incredibly unique view of what democracy means and how it impacts people as he made what many views as the ultimate sacrifice by serving his country--certainly, this is something his conservative family might revere. Despite his sacrifice, he has been isolated from his own family for his identity; to Ryan, this means that he understands how divisive language can completely change how people view to action, regardless of its objective truth. In his responses, he emphasizes the concepts of peace, which have been achieved by evolution, and how a regression of said evolution is also leading to a regression in said Peace. Ryan's understanding of the law's role in this phenomenon perhaps lies outside of the traditional frame of reference people understand law from because he looks at its exploitative values rather than its traditional supposed egalitarian properties. In Ryan's responses, we can see the importance of Speech Acts by making the distinction that law can have exploitative action potential that must be noted.

Arianna Gusella:

1.  When you think of the term "law," what comes to mind? 

A written rule or social code that outlines what behaviors in a society should be. I think of mandates and social norms, which have two parts: the people who are affected by the law and the authorities who uphold it.

2. What do you understand democracy to be?

Democracy is a system in which the majority opinion or voice of the population is represented in governmental/political decision-making. For example, electing leaders.

3. Do you think the United States is experiencing Democratic Backslide, as I defined above? Why or why not?

Yes, I think so. I think the fact that we have people who are insurrectionists running for office (or even being elected) shows that democracy is currently unstable. Those that actively make it, so that election results are not legitimately accepted are praised, and this is a sign that we are backsliding. Also, we mostly rely on plurality rather than majority rule, so that isn’t truly democratic.

4. What role, if any, do you think the law has in democratic backslide?

I think the law should be enforced against people who are actively causing democratic backslide, as insurrection and the denial of an election is illegal. However, it seems that a lot of the authorities responsible for this backslide are not being properly punished, and the law isn’t being applied.

5. How do you think language plays into democratic backslide? 

I think the fact that we say “the majority” voted for this or that candidate is a linguistic fallacy that doesn’t allow us to see how our elections aren’t very democratic. We overgeneralize with that term when we really mean the plurality or the electoral college or whatever else other than the majority. If the majority really ruled, it would be the popular vote with more than 50%, but that’s not really the case.

My Key Take Away from Arianna's Responses

Arianna's responses really emphasize the importance of the actors involved and valued within the system of democracy and how language can change those things. What sticks with me most from her responses is the usage of the term--Linguistic Fallacy. The term linguistic fallacy in the context of this response, on a basic level, asserts that there are lies embedded within the language that builds our systems as we customarily understand them; on a higher level, this term perfectly encapsulates how inequalities have come to exist within our system. Buzzwords such as "majority" and "enforcement" are continually used to create a solid understanding of the law, which falls within the "customary" frame, which has been notoriously used throughout history to justify outcomes that are not entirely representative or truthful to the interests of the nation.

Another thing that Arianna does, which we have seen in many other survey responses, is to make the discrepancy between the people & the authorities. This distinction implies that there must also be a distinction between how language is understood between these groups and how it is used. In her response, the concept of Speech acts becomes particularly useful because identifying how language is being used to stimulate the division and stimulate power amongst people, such as insurrectionists, is entirely relevant to how and why our democracy is backsliding.

Ari Patinkin:

1.  When you think of the term "law," what comes to mind? 

Agreed upon decrees in which prohibit the full extent of human nature in order to provide a leveled space for mankind to exist together

2. What do you understand democracy to be?

Democracy is the ideological political thought of choice for leadership.

3. Do you think the United States is experiencing Democratic Backslide, as I defined above? Why or why not?

I mean yes and no. It's strange cause we are just now beginning to understand the repercussions of big tech and how it affects the process of elections. With so much information available, there is greater access to disinformation and misinformation on all sides, swaying the biter one way or another. This includes big tech censoring in the attempt to manipulate outcomes, which has now been proven to be the case.

4. What role, if any, do you think the law has in democratic backslide?

The politicization of law encroaches on authoritarian behavior. For instance, gerrymandering is the politicization of mapping districts. The politicization of the DOJ is also a form of democratic backsliding.

5. How do you think language plays into democratic backslide? 

Language plays a significant role... relying upon too many buzzwords, and phrases too much turns people off, and constantly attempting to paint the other side as idiots or nazis further invokes a divide that breeds toxicity.

My Key Take Away from Ari's Responses

Ari definitely had one of the more unique sets of responses. His responses emphasized the prominence of ideology and how ideology is enforced by human nature. I thought that this was an interesting vantage point to view these issues from as his understandings fit less within the customary frame of language in regard to the law. What I also found interesting about his responses is that they look more at the modernity of issues related to language in the backslide of democracy which is largely found in the media's usage of what he calls 'buzzwords.' The usage of such buzzwords largely emphasizes the point that the concept of law and ideology has in this course because it exemplifies the role that cultural understandings of the law, such as understandings perpetuated by the media, can have.

Blake Franklin:

1.  When you think of the term "law," what comes to mind? 

Legal policy that applies to all persons living under the government and institutions that impose these rules

2. What do you understand democracy to be?

Ideally, popular sovereignty involves people voting in their best interests and should have equal opportunity for all to participate.

3. Do you think the United States is experiencing Democratic Backslide, as I defined above? Why or why not?

Yes, the enforcement of laws is not equally applied to all groups of people, and while this was true in all of US history, we are now especially experiencing democratic backsliding due to more awareness about it and a loss of faith in the institutions that falsely claimed to have equal opportunity for all to participate.

4. What role, if any, do you think the law has in democratic backslide?

Some laws directly encourage democratic backslide, including restrictive voting laws, while others more implicitly limit the chance to participate in a democracy, including voter ID requirements.

5. How do you think language plays into democratic backslide? 

language and, more importantly, rhetoric can encourage democratic backsliding when large swaths of people believe that elections are rigged against them when this has been debunked, for example, will rile a base to lose faith in the promise of free and fair elections

My Key Take Away from Blake's Responses

What stuck with me from Blake's responses was the concept of institutions and the faith that people have in them. This focus definitely gave modernity to the concept of democracy and law, as exemplified in his example of restrictive voting laws, which have really been adapting with time as law adapts and as people's expectations for democracy begin to adapt. This focus on the legitimacy of institutions and how this can change what law means highlights what Alexander Dent emphasizes as the importance of understanding how and what we understand our law to be. For example, when large portions of media consumed in the united states include language which is purposefully divisive, this politicization of day-to-day conversations soon leads to a politicization of the law and a loss of faith in the institutions that uphold them; this is most prominently seen in the politicization of the Supreme Court.

Cameron Mays:

1.  When you think of the term "law," what comes to mind? 

A set of rules that are created by a government or central authority which tells people what they can and cannot do. The US federal government with legislative, executive, and judicial branches which create, enforce, uphold/strike down laws. State and local governments set different laws and interact with other governments. Lawyers arguing about laws in front of judges. Police enforcing laws on people. Law is action.

2. What do you understand democracy to be?

A form of government where people can decide which laws are made based on how they are represented in government. There are many types of democracies, such as direct, representative, constitutional, parliamentary, and more. Many of the types are combined differently around the world, so there is usually not one pure type.

3. Do you think the United States is experiencing Democratic Backslide as I defined above? Why or why not?

Yes, but not at an extreme level yet. There has been a clear push to lessen the power of outright get rid of certain institutions such as laws, federal agencies, or checks and balances, which centralize power in the hands of fewer and fewer people. This is a problem now because the people in power are doing this in order to continue breaking down institutions more easily. There has been an increased focus on this happening, so more people are trying to stop it, but there are challenges to doing that. Its much harder to argue something should be kept under the protection of the law than argue it should be left to states or individuals.

4. What role, if any, do you think the law has in democratic backslide?

The law can be used to create backsliding because when the people making laws have an interest in breaking down the institutions of the government, they can use laws to justify it. If the Supreme Court strikes down a law or Congress passes a law that eliminates an institution, it lessens the strength of the government.

5. How do you think language plays into democratic backslide? 

Language is everything when laws are created by legislators or decided by courts. When creating laws, language has to outline exactly what can and cannot be done. When laws are decided, the courts read the laws and any other material to decide if something is allowed under the constitution. When words or meanings leave room for ambiguity, that is where it becomes a challenge to create and decide laws and where different ideologies are able to use their influence to get people to believe their interpretation. Especially because many governing documents are very old, use dated language, and do not account for what could happen in the modern day, there is a ton of interpretation that has to be done to laws. Language is relevant to democratic backsliding because people that aren’t committed to upholding laws and institutions are twisting language in a way that makes their interpretations correct in their eyes.

My Key Take Away from Camerons's Responses

What I found interesting about Cameron's responses was that though his understanding of law and democracy included a lot of what would be considered 'customary language' surrounding the concepts of law and ideology, they really delve into the importance of culture. This is best exemplified in his response to question number five, which he starts by saying, "language is everything"; though seemingly simple, this really encompasses what he says in his responses. The way our institutions function impacts the specific ways in which democracy is created on a day-to-day basis in this country, and the laws coming from those institutions play an equal role; when these institutions are created by the mechanism of language. Cameron points out how the way words are used can leave room for ambiguity, whether on purpose or on accident, and this room for ambiguity leaves room for misunderstanding and, thus, an increase in phenomena such as democratic backsliding.

Emma Joella Tennant:

1.  When you think of the term "law," what comes to mind? 

The norms and statutes that govern a citizen's behavior and often have a large undertone of government and court actors actively influencing and trying to alter or protect laws.

2. What do you understand democracy to be?

The principle is that everyone's voice that is impacted by the law should be heard from in an equitable manner. Voting and representation are the two main things that come to mind.

3. Do you think the United States is experiencing Democratic Backslide , as I defined above? Why or why not?

Yes, efforts to lift up the voices of citizens in an equitable fashion are being attacked. Primarily in the realms of representation and voting, tactics and practices to quiet the voices of some to gain power politically promote democratic backsliding.

4. What role, if any, do you think the law has in democratic backslide?

The actions of those in government or courts to protect unequal laws or promote discriminatory laws to impede the voices of citizens play the most important role in backsliding.

5. How do you think language plays into democratic backslide? 

Language in media, courts, by parties, or even simple communication amongst citizens plays a huge role in backsliding as language is the mode of education. I think education is the key to combat backsliding, and when language is tainted and equipped in backsliding efforts, it is completely relevant.

My Key Take Away from Emma's Responses

Emma's responses included many of the same arguments and understandings that other respondents had, but what I found unique about EJ's response was how she proposed a solution to addressing backsliding, which has been perpetuated by language. Due to the fact that I am in such close proximity to her, I was given the chance to ask her a few more clarifying questions. In essence, what she had to say was that what is understood as customary in the law is incredibly dependent on how current language is used to refer to it. For example, on the left, the language used to describe the supreme court is beginning to display more and more disdain, and thus the legitimacy of the court is coming into question more and more; However, on the right, there has been an increase in the positive language used to discuss the Supreme Court which largely expresses the right's increased satisfaction in the Court's behavior. What she notes is that this clash is the very thing causing our institutions and democracy to erode. However, what is found in common in the erosion of these ideals, is language. In EJ's view, the best way to address this phenomenon is through education. So much of the fear surrounding these concepts is dependent on a lack of education, or a one side education at that; by restructuring the way language about said institutions is presented can give us the opportunity to move past the limitations that currently exist.