Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Patrick | Complex Simplicity's avatar

This stratagem contains the seeds of its own catastrophic flowering. Once you've established that threatening mass harm to civilians is acceptable political leverage, that federal workers can be casually discarded, that essential services can be arbitrarily shuttered, that human consequences are merely bargaining chips, you've irreversibly poisoned the well.

Trump's gleeful proclamation that Democrats "gave him this unprecedented opportunity" is the confession of a hostage-taker who's discovered his captors care more about the hostages than he does.

What we're witnessing isn't merely aggressive governance or hardball politics. It's the construction of a doomsday device wired directly into the administrative state, with Republicans holding the detonator while betting, devastatingly, that Democrats will sacrifice policy priorities rather than let it explode.

The cynicism is breathtakingly horrific. We know you won't let the government collapse. We know you won't let federal workers starve. We know you care about functional institutions, and we will exploit that decency until you capitulate or break.

The myopic sadism of this approach is catastrophically shortsighted. What happens when Democrats inevitably regain power and inherit this framework? That will obviously depend on the type of democrats who take power, but there are only two paths.

Path one is reciprocal Radicalization. Democrats, brutalized by years of watching their commitment to governance weaponized against them, finally internalize the lesson their opponents have been teaching. They return to power not as administrators but as avengers. Every precedent Republicans established becomes a loaded gun pointed back at red America.

Its not hard to imagine the reciprocal response. A Democratic president shuttering the Department of Defense's procurement offices in Republican-heavy districts. Threatening to furlough Border Patrol agents in Texas unless the GOP agrees to comprehensive immigration reform. Holding disaster relief hostage to climate policy concessions.

"We're just following the Vought precedent."

This is how democracies enter death spirals. Each party, when it gains power, escalates slightly beyond what was previously unthinkable, justifying their actions by citing the opposition's last atrocity. The ratchet only turns one direction: toward chaos. The Overton window doesn't shift, it shatters, raining shards of broken norms onto an increasingly ungovernable republic.

Path two, alternatively, Democrats retain their commitment to responsible governance, continuing to staff agencies properly, fund essential services, and treat government as something other than a bludgeon for partisan warfare. They remain the adults in the room, and Republicans, recognizing this exploitable weakness, simply repeat the playbook every time they regain power, only more aggressively, more comprehensively, more cruelly. The shutdowns become longer. The mass firings become more extensive. The hostage-taking becomes more baroque. Democrats' continued commitment to functional government transforms from virtue into fatal vulnerability, a pressure point to be squeezed in perpetuity.

This pathway leads to a peculiar form of political subjugation. One party governing, the other demolishing, with the electorate ping-ponging between brief periods of attempted recovery and extended sieges of deliberate destruction. Government becomes less an institution and more a patient repeatedly admitted to the ICU, stabilized by Democrats, then deliberately re-injured by Republicans, in an endless cycle of trauma and triage.

The truly horrifying reality? Both outcomes are civilizational backslides. Both pathways terminate in a place where American democracy, as conceived and cultivated over two and a half centuries, ceases to meaningfully exist.

In the first scenario, we get government-by-vengeance, where whichever party holds power uses it not to govern but to punish, where federal authority exists solely as an instrument of retribution against the opposing coalition. Essential services become bargaining chips. Bureaucratic continuity becomes obsolete. Every election becomes an existential crisis because losing means your community might be deliberately targeted for administrative cruelty.

In the second scenario, we get an asymmetric oligarchy, where Republicans have discovered they can systematically dismantle responsive government whenever they hold power, while Democrats can only partially rebuild during their brief windows of authority. Over time, the state itself withers, not because of any coherent ideological conviction about small government, but because one party has realized that destruction requires no coalition-building, no compromise, no competence. Just malice and a majority.

Bill's meditation here on the Yom Kippur prayer, beseeching leaders to "administer all affairs of state fairly, that peace and security, happiness and prosperity, justice and freedom may forever abide" reads like an epitaph for an expiring ideal.

The prayer assumes leaders who seek guidance, who recognize their need for wisdom beyond partisan advantage, but what happens when leaders actively glory in their role as "the reaper"?

When they parade their demolition of "Democrat Agencies" as entertainment, as an AI-generated music video set to "Don't Fear the Reaper"? When the cruelty isn't incidental but central, when the cruelty is the entire operating system?

Then the prayer becomes not a supplication but an indictment. A reminder of how far we've fallen, how completely we've abandoned even the pretense that government exists to serve rather than to subjugate.

A reminder that America chose one of the least capable, least competent humans on the planet to be its destructor.

Expand full comment
Jeff's avatar

Let's be perfectly honest about what Trump is doing. Will wrote a whole piece about Trump and how his behavior as a sexual predator is his modus operandi. Trump believes that you, me, and everything inside of America's borders are his to do with as he pleases. He and his partners in fascism are the guys that just tell the woman they are raping to stop fighting, just let it happen and it will be over faster. We were all forced into an abusive relationship with those who do not understand the meaning of consent, and if I'm being blunt, don't want it. They want the fight. They want the violence. They want the trauma.

Expand full comment
285 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?