[macNchz]

> slippery slope arguments

If we review democracies through history that have at some point become less democratic, I think describing the process of how that actually happens as being a slippery slope is quite apt. I’d say it’s more of a fallacy to assume that democracy is a secure default state of being rather than an ideal that we must collectively support or lose entirely—that we can safely “slip” a little without risking a slide further down the slope.

[derangedHorse]

The reason why a slippery slope is a fallacy is that the starting point is an arbitrary threshold. Nothing here indicates the end of democracy to me. To someone looking to find some indication, anything can look like the beginning of the end.

[macNchz]

Many of the circumstances being called out as concerning in recent weeks map well to historical examples—the framing of the argument alone doesn’t inherently invalidate it when we have good examples of comparable events (e.g. purge and installation of unqualified loyalists) precipitating critical, difficult to recover from outcomes (democratic backsliding) in other societies. When the stakes are so high, vigilance is rational.

[caminante]

> Many of the circumstances being called out as concerning in recent weeks map well to historical examples

They also map to historical counter-examples.

You don't have to go far. Take hysterical false positives like #RussiaGate, which turned out to be a manufactured hoax.

[buttercraft]

Well, if you wait until that threshold is crossed, it's already too late!

[throwawaythekey]

Personally I enjoy slippery slope arguments which is why I didn't use the term fallacy. What I dislike is the reddit framing of having already slipped!