The statement that "really we're just talking about the DOJ" is the most sickening and terrifying statement in your interview because of course we're NOT just talking about the DOJ. We are talking about the entire Federal judiciary. And worse, all the law enforcement agencies -- Homeland security, the FBI, the CIA, NSA... And it gets…
The statement that "really we're just talking about the DOJ" is the most sickening and terrifying statement in your interview because of course we're NOT just talking about the DOJ. We are talking about the entire Federal judiciary. And worse, all the law enforcement agencies -- Homeland security, the FBI, the CIA, NSA... And it gets even worse, we're talking about the entire gigantic US Military-- all branches. No person in the US military will have a career unless he or she is a vetted loyalist. And we are talking about every contractor and company in America that does business with first the Federal government and little by little with every captured state government. Ultimately we are talking about every public employee in the country-- every janitor, schoolteacher, secretary, city engineer, county clerk.
We are talking about the Trump DOJ and IRS initiating a campaign of persecuting enemies and disloyalists. No person who has ever filed a tax return will be safe.
And we are talking about shutting down the press through the court system. Of all the promises Trump ever made, this one is assuredly most dear to his heart:
"One of the things I'm going to do if I win, ... I'm going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them."
And he goes on, even more clearly:
"You see, with me, they're not protected, because I'm not like other people but I'm not taking money. I'm not taking their money," Trump said on Friday. "We're going to open up libel laws, and we're going to have people sue you like you've never got sued before."
"We're going to have people sue you like you've never got sued before." A wrinkle I did not see coming was the innovation in Texas, of circumventing the constitution by legislating that any person can sue anyone else to recover "damages" where hitherto complainants would have had no standing, the defendants can be sued in multiple locations and must defend themselves in each, must prevail in order to not pay, and can't recover damages for being sued frivolously. And the current Supreme Court through its silence on this has given it tacit approval. All they have to do to uphold this wherever it occurs is not accept any case that comes to them.
This I think will be one of the avenues for shutting down the press and it will allow the Supreme Court to ignore the first amendment, because it won't be Congress making a law to restrict the freedom of the press.
I think you should expect at least a 1/3 chance, maybe more than 50/50, that during the first term, if the Republicans seize the Senate, the filibuster will disappear (it's a mirage now anyway) and this last thing will be on the agenda. There is a certainty they will start on the civil service and an absolute certainty that no DOJ appointee will not be an apparatchik. And the military will fall like a row of dominos even without any official change in law because the top brass will disappear -- look for a huge wave of retirements in the first year -- and everyone else down the chain will get the message.
And don't think any other Republican won't do exactly the same thing. They have started their revolution, they are all at war. They can't turn back.
It is appropriate to contemplate this historical fact. The unimaginable and unthinkable can happen very, very fast. Hitler became Chancellor of Germany in January of 1933. The oath of allegiance sworn by members of the military prior to his accession was loyalty to the Constitution and its lawful institutions.
When Hitler became Chancellor it was changed: loyalty to people and country ("Volk und Vaterland.")
Hindenberg died August 3, 1933. On that day the oath changed again, this time loyalty to Adolf Hitler himself. This mutation lasted one year. On August 20 1934 this was superseded by the Law On the Allegiance of Civil Servants and Soldiers of the Armed Forces, which decreed loyalty not only of armed forces but all civil servants.
Article One:
Civilian officials and soldiers of the Armed Forces must take an oath of service on entering the service.
Article Two:
1. The oath of service of civilian officials will be:
“I swear: I shall be loyal and obedient to Adolf Hitler, the Führer of the German Reich and people; respect the laws; and fulfil my official duties conscientiously, so help me God.”
2 The oath of service of the soldiers of the Armed Forces will be:
“I swear by God this sacred oath, that I will render unconditional obedience to Adolf Hitler, the Fuhrer of the German Reich and people, supreme commander of the Armed Forces, and will be ready as a brave soldier to risk my life at any time for this oath.”
I understand your fear. However, you are underestimating the dedication and the principled culture within the federal workforce and the U.S. military. There would be massive resistance, accompanied by mass resignation on an unprecedented scale. The Republicans in the Senate would have little choice but to impeach him or watch the complete dissolution of the entire federal government.
We are not the Weimar republic. We have a culture of democracy which is far too deeply embedded to be uprooted by an executive order. Even this Supreme Court couldn't possibly let Trump's "Schedule F" pass - not after its "major decisions" principle that it exhibited in the recent decision in West Virginia vs EPA.
I realize you probably consider me naive, but trust me - much of the federal workforce was able to ignore Trump even though they didn't like him and were glad their jobs were insulated from the White House. If he tries to reach his stubby little digits into the Civil Service, there will be a massive pushback.
The thing is -- the motivation of the Hawleys and Cruzes and DeSantises and that entire countless rabble of wannabe successors to the Don is absolutely to inherit, not a functional civil service and government of laws that would constrain their rapacity, but a turn-key fascist compliant organization of servile myrmidons instantly responsive to their slightest whim.
And their base actually wants what Trump was promising just the other day -- summary executions of criminals the police already know are guilty, occupation of truculent municipalities by nationalized military units operating at the direction of the President, and of course roundups of millions of "homeless" persons to internment camps.
So between what their base wants, and what they want for themselves after the big guy has finally moved out of the way, it is inconceivable that Republicans in office anywhere would offer any assistance to whatever agency Horatii may be left trying to defend the last bridges against the totalitarian onslaught.
An example that supports your claim that the federal government would dissolve is the refusal of the DOJ officials to "just say it was corrupt" as Trump asked.
You are not wrong. We had a culture of democracy, to be sure, and the four years of haphazard, disorganized MAGA did not pull down all the institutions and systems. But they sure took a beating. And I submit that the last four years were not really a coordinated effort to do much more than just crash a party and drink up all the alcohol. Only toward the end did it really dawn on certain people that they could not only crash the party, they could evict the owners of the house and keep it for themselves. The next four years will not be devoted to having a good time. They will be spent in a wide-ranging, carefully planned and executed seizure and permanent occupation of the United States of America.
This hasn't happened before, chiefly because the people inclined to try it were under the impression that if they did, everyone else would put up a fight that could not be overcome.
This belief was based on the idea that there are rules that apply as much or more to our selves as to everyone else; we enforce these rules by directing tacit and communal opprobrium against violators; and when our own transgressions are detected, we have no choice but the accept the verdict of society, and yield. That's gone. Maybe it was never as substantial as it seemed -- but in any event, it is now exposed as so attenuated as to be functionally negligible.
As to the culture of democracy, at least most of my lifetime it seemed the overwhelming consensus was that all the other citizens had just as much of a right to participate in the polity as we ourselves had -- or at least, we believed that everyone else believed that, so we tried to at least pretend we believed it. That's gone. If there is any single thing at the base of the MAGA revolution, it's this: there are real Americans, and there are others here among us; and those others, false Americans, have no rights we real Americans are bound to respect.
As to the military, I think you are certainly correct, but the very likelihood you describe is exactly one of the circumstances that will make the takeover both rapid and commodious. Mass resignation, on an unprecedented scale, of persons of character and honor, will empty our most critical institutions of good actors. MAGA has no shortage of complaisant malefactors available to fill the vacated places. It has already happened to "traditional" Republicans in public life.
All the good people will leave - at first some, because they can't stomach what is happening, and refuse to be part of it; then, in greater numbers, others who tire of trying to stand against the incoming tide, and just wear out; then, many more, who see writing on the wall, see the good guys disappearing, and cut their losses to keep what retirement and pensions they can; and finally, the remnant, who are forcibly removed, by whatever means come to hand, all foul. And worst of all -- some in the middle, sensing the wind direction and its increasing velocity, decide cynically that it is better to remain-- either securely in place as servile apparatchiks facing in the right direction, or even to prevail, by converting to full MAGA themselves, in return for the glittering prizes that come from climbing up the organization.
I think that's a possible scenario. So many Maga people are motivated, while Democrats are motivated, so many are not really involved. They don't see anything unusual.
On that account, I think the overturning of Roe v Wade will ultimately be a blessing in disguise. It is already having an effect on the generic Congressional ballot. I think it has been a slap in the face, a cold bucket of water dumped on the head of complacent liberals in this country who were too accustomed to the overall arc of society bending in favor of positive change.
I admit the "mass resignation" idea does pose some risks, and is more helpful as a threat than anything else.
I think what will happen this time around, is that if Trump wins the Republican nomination, there will start to be serious conversations among high-level people at federal agencies about how to gird against a breakdown of the executive. You will have agency heads making unprecedented public statements warning of the dangers of Trump's plans. There will be mass mobilization of agency OGCs and private legal professionals to prepare lawsuits against "Schedule F". You will see petitions circulating with tens of thousands of signatories of federal employees and civil servants. Mass resignations may be threatened, but it is just as likely you will see mass refusals to carry out the implementation of "Schedule F".
In short, the potential for utter chaos will be made evident long before Trump assumes power. As to what happens after that - well it's anyone's guess. But I do not expect a quiet transition to an authoritarian Trump regime. Unlike 2016, it will be ugly and loud, the kind of thing that will embarrass a guy like Trump, who expects to be granted all of the pomp and ceremony that normally accompanies the Presidency. And he'll be eight years older than the last time. Not to mention we will likely already have indicted several members of Trump's coup crew, if not Trump himself. How many others will be willing to bet on Trump's fickle loyalty when their asses are on the line? I'm still going to put my money on America.
You should. Aside from its value as an intense and entertaining melodrama, and its high marks for presenting validated historical context, it forces us to look, in a clarifying and convincing way, at how limited our perceptions of ourselves are, how poorly we assess our own motives and our own capacities, and how contingent outcomes turn out to be. And the writing and acting is really good. It is a melodrama and it does perhaps amp up personal conflict between characters, and several of the villains are (of necessity) overdrawn. But when you see people like Greitens, Hawley, and Stefanik in real life, those few characters are by no means implausible.
I have heard from people in Red States the Trump supporters are already planning to fight (and they have plenty of arms) to make sure Trump is in power no matter what.
Yeah, they like to talk a lot. As Adam Kinzinger points out, many of these people would be the first casualties of a breakdown in society when they couldn't get their medications for diabetes and hypertension.
It's one thing to have arms. It's another to have experience actually using them to do anything other than shoot cans off a back fence. Committing murder is a line most people are willing to cross only in utter desperation. Trump's supporters may seem unhinged, but they're mostly a bunch of overgrown children cosplaying hero in a society that's never required them to really put their lives on the line or make any real sacrifices.
Not sure if I would be that optimistic. TFG has exposed America's ugly underbelly like no one before. One could argue in good faith prior to 2016 that the Congress & Senate would have controlled the shenanigans that TFG seemed to be involved in on a daily basis. But that turned out to be not true. Didn't it? Over the last 5-6 years, the formula to gain total control has been inserted into the fabric of the country methodically with the purge of true opponents (like a Cheney), the replacement/silencing/defanging of the judiciary, Inspector Generals, politicization of institutes such as Secret Service, DOJ and the mass brain-washing through right wing propaganda media (Fox, OAN etc.). This rot is likely been sown within the federal workforce and US military as well and they too would be stifled, just like the rest of the institutions. As an example, there were reports that suggested Mike Flynn's brother who oversees the National Guard was instrumental in preventing them from being deployed soon enough to help Capitol Police on Jan6th. It is surprising that hasn't received more press. For too long the American population have been waiting for somebody else to rescue them. That isn't happening, if recent history is any proof.
I'd also not let precedence fool me in thinking the SC will be a balance. They have through their recent rulings shown that they will respect precedence sometimes (when convenient) and not others. They have show a clear disposition towards pushing right leaning causes and nobody should be surprised that they would look the other way in the future.
Mass resignations are a central part of Trump’s plan. Replace the civil service with MAGA lackeys. Schedule”F” becomes inevitable with a mass resignation.
But remember, the threat of mass resignation was what kept Trump from replacing his AG with Jeffrey Clark. The idea that Clark would be head of a ghost town federal agency - and that Trump would look bad in the process. Republicans wouldn't be able to ignore something like this with the usual furrowed brows and statements of being "very concerned about the President's remarks". It would quickly be seen as a grave matter of national security.
I agree 100%. I take no deep consolation in my conviction - as JVL points out, the fact that we're even in this position doesn't bode well for the future.
However, it's important to remember that doomsaying per se isn't really planning for the worst. Everyone needs to seriously consider how we're going to respond if Trump gets back in office.
I remember before the 2016 election, there was an article - in Rolling Stone, I think - titled something like "Donald Trump Cannot Be President". It was a perfect summation of how most of us felt. People were perfectly willing to pontificate about how bad it would be.
But as far as how we'd respond, it was more like, "I don't even want to ... no, *no*, this just *can't* happen ...".
Well now we know it can happen. And true, more sober types were saying things like I'm saying now, and some of that turned out to be overly optimistic. But the guardrails of democracy did - ultimately - hold. Weakened and battered, but they held.
So our advantage now is that we know it's coming. People talk about how Trump has learned from his mistakes the first time around. But even if you don't think they're giving Trump too much credit for his ability to learn, the rest of us aren't going to be caught by surprise, either. We have to be ready, and avoid surrendering to fatalism if he wins again. The only other option is surrendering America.
What exactly, are you planning to do if he (or a version of him) wins in '24? How are you recommending we "plan for the worst"? What kind of plans do you see as being effective?
Seems if he (or a clone) wins again, it will be too late. The time for planning is to keep them from winning, not?
I'm not being a duck here... I'm genuinely interested in what kinds of plans you have in mind.
I talked in an adjacent comment about specifically what I expect might happen on the part of people in various positions of authority if Trump gets the nomination.
As to what you or I, individually, can do if he gets elected? That depends on who you are and what your position in society is. If you're just a regular citizen, you can apply pressure to your representatives in Congress, contribute to legal funds to combat Trump's abuses of power, attend protests, participate in get-out-the-vote campaigns for the midterms, etc. If you're someone in the aforementioned positions of authority, you'll have a duty to defend the law and the Constitution to the fullest extent possible.
The point is that we can't all afford to curl up into a ball and start talking about how we're going to move to Canada or just accept that America is fucked. Because that seems to be where a lot of people are leaning right now. The last time people mostly assumed this wasn't going to happen and we were unprepared. This time there will be resistance and pushback from the Federal workforce, because we know the shit Trump tried to pull last time.
I read yours after I wrote my diatribe. It lays out the case perfectly. You are not being hyperbolic. The crazy part is that every single one of the Republicans, if in power. Will do exactly the above. They don't even need Trump anymore.
"And it gets even worse, we're talking about the entire gigantic US Military"
I know the skuttlebutt in the political rags is that Trump will have LtGen Mike Flynn as his running mate.
No. He'll appoint Flynn SecDef.
What better way to seize control of the US Military than put a compromised, mentally disturbed, experienced General in charge who also happens to be a Trump lackey?
If Donald Trump gets put in the presidency again, we all better be prepared for civil war.
If he's put into the presidency again there likely won't be a civil war. It'd be one thing if one was to break out around his machinations, or if one was to break out if he loses and claims fraud. But if he's the president in anything that passes for a legitimate way, we'll have as much civil war as Nazi Germany did.
If you are a pessimist, if you are looking for reasons to despair of human folly ever being mitigated, if you seek proof that the species of chimpanzees we call "homo sapiens" is totally unfit for and incapable of anything other than every possible stupid, cruel, and vicious action -- study history! You will not be disappointed!
Quite right about the Reichstag fire and the internecine murders that locked it down for Hitler. it is not an accident, I think, that the Nazi's only dared diddle the oaths after H passed on; he was the last symbol of Germany's imperial greatness, for all that he lost his war, and I suspect they were concerned the old war horse might object to what the Nazis had in mind for his beloved army. Speculation. It is certainly the case the Nazis treated H with great care. He was probably the only figure in Germany whose opposition could create any serious difficulties for them.
And we haven't seen the direct physical violence (yet) that characterized the politics of the collapsing Weimar state, and it's just a happenstance of history that in American the Republican night of the long knives is yet to come -- because Trump, in a strange way, is the Hindenberg of MAGA world. Trumps demise, which could come in the form of just turning into a sort of embalmed and sidelined Francisco Franco in office, wheeled out periodically for public display while around him the actual regime's henchmen execute the project of dismantling the former state and preparing for the intra-snakepit showdown knife fight after his final tweet.
As to Reichstag fires, one would think the Capitol insurrection, which is merely the visible fruit of Trump's long-term plot in 2020 to seize power regardless of electoral results, would be a parallel. And I think it probably will be, but not as the shock that returns a nation to sanity. More likely, the rioters will become the Horst Wessels of the re-magafied nation.
My point was not, what happens here will parallel the fall of Weimar, in the sense that there will be an event A that corresponds to the Reichstag fire, an event B that we will call the Enabling Act, and so on -- that's the armchair historian's idle hour recreation -- although I have also to say such parallels are distressingly available. My point is, the slide into tyranny can happen very quickly indeed. But perhaps it would be better to consider that this apparent rapidity is only because the visible events happen rapidly, but what made those events possible, and in fact inevitable, took a long time, and were less obvious to all but the most intense inspection.
Comparing the Reichstag Fire to Jan 6th - I don't know enough about the former, except that I know the Nazis blamed the Communists for it, and that justified the Enabling Act. But my question is was there an investigation of it that showed it was the Communists?
To any serious student of history, particularly history of Europe from the Napoleonic era to post WWII, it requires a profound exertion of will to seriously entertain the proposition that the Reichstag fire was not a false flag provocation. Certainly the Nazis played that game-- And one hallmark of such doings is that they seem almost invariably so ham-handed and obvious as to have been intentionally intended to strain credulity. The Gleiwitz incident, for example.
But at least some effort at historiographic self-restraint is not out of place here. History is replete with examples of random dumb jackasses playing with matches (in this case not even figuratively, but literally) in flammable surroundings. Lee Harvey Oswald. The Trump-addled mob of gulled ignoramuses on Jan 6. The imbecile "demonstrators" setting fire to property and screaming defund the police. And of course the prince of incompetent accidental historical tinder-lighters, Gavrilo Princip.
Who actually set the Reichstag fire is in a larger historical sense, irrelevant. The thing actually burned down was the Weimar republic and constitutional government in Germany. If in fact it was the hapless Marinus who made the spark, it was the totalitarians who actually had control of it.
So in answer to your question, was there an investigation, the answer is a qualified "yes" -- yes to the extent that the Nazis went to the trouble and motions of an investigation and trial. "No" if by "investigation" you mean an open minded forensic effort to find out what actually happened. Whether the Nazis did it themselves and just grabbed a random patsy, or set him up to commit the arson, or just took advantage of a lucky chance that came their way -- the outcome of the "investigation" was established before it started.
"Who actually set the Reichstag fire is in a larger historical sense, irrelevant. The thing actually burned down was the Weimar republic and constitutional government in Germany." Yes. Why was there no legal basis for preventing the fire as a pretext? That is my question.
The statement that "really we're just talking about the DOJ" is the most sickening and terrifying statement in your interview because of course we're NOT just talking about the DOJ. We are talking about the entire Federal judiciary. And worse, all the law enforcement agencies -- Homeland security, the FBI, the CIA, NSA... And it gets even worse, we're talking about the entire gigantic US Military-- all branches. No person in the US military will have a career unless he or she is a vetted loyalist. And we are talking about every contractor and company in America that does business with first the Federal government and little by little with every captured state government. Ultimately we are talking about every public employee in the country-- every janitor, schoolteacher, secretary, city engineer, county clerk.
We are talking about the Trump DOJ and IRS initiating a campaign of persecuting enemies and disloyalists. No person who has ever filed a tax return will be safe.
And we are talking about shutting down the press through the court system. Of all the promises Trump ever made, this one is assuredly most dear to his heart:
"One of the things I'm going to do if I win, ... I'm going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them."
And he goes on, even more clearly:
"You see, with me, they're not protected, because I'm not like other people but I'm not taking money. I'm not taking their money," Trump said on Friday. "We're going to open up libel laws, and we're going to have people sue you like you've never got sued before."
"We're going to have people sue you like you've never got sued before." A wrinkle I did not see coming was the innovation in Texas, of circumventing the constitution by legislating that any person can sue anyone else to recover "damages" where hitherto complainants would have had no standing, the defendants can be sued in multiple locations and must defend themselves in each, must prevail in order to not pay, and can't recover damages for being sued frivolously. And the current Supreme Court through its silence on this has given it tacit approval. All they have to do to uphold this wherever it occurs is not accept any case that comes to them.
This I think will be one of the avenues for shutting down the press and it will allow the Supreme Court to ignore the first amendment, because it won't be Congress making a law to restrict the freedom of the press.
I think you should expect at least a 1/3 chance, maybe more than 50/50, that during the first term, if the Republicans seize the Senate, the filibuster will disappear (it's a mirage now anyway) and this last thing will be on the agenda. There is a certainty they will start on the civil service and an absolute certainty that no DOJ appointee will not be an apparatchik. And the military will fall like a row of dominos even without any official change in law because the top brass will disappear -- look for a huge wave of retirements in the first year -- and everyone else down the chain will get the message.
And don't think any other Republican won't do exactly the same thing. They have started their revolution, they are all at war. They can't turn back.
It is appropriate to contemplate this historical fact. The unimaginable and unthinkable can happen very, very fast. Hitler became Chancellor of Germany in January of 1933. The oath of allegiance sworn by members of the military prior to his accession was loyalty to the Constitution and its lawful institutions.
When Hitler became Chancellor it was changed: loyalty to people and country ("Volk und Vaterland.")
Hindenberg died August 3, 1933. On that day the oath changed again, this time loyalty to Adolf Hitler himself. This mutation lasted one year. On August 20 1934 this was superseded by the Law On the Allegiance of Civil Servants and Soldiers of the Armed Forces, which decreed loyalty not only of armed forces but all civil servants.
Article One:
Civilian officials and soldiers of the Armed Forces must take an oath of service on entering the service.
Article Two:
1. The oath of service of civilian officials will be:
“I swear: I shall be loyal and obedient to Adolf Hitler, the Führer of the German Reich and people; respect the laws; and fulfil my official duties conscientiously, so help me God.”
2 The oath of service of the soldiers of the Armed Forces will be:
“I swear by God this sacred oath, that I will render unconditional obedience to Adolf Hitler, the Fuhrer of the German Reich and people, supreme commander of the Armed Forces, and will be ready as a brave soldier to risk my life at any time for this oath.”
(translation is from https://alphahistory.com/nazigermany/a-new-reichswehr-oath-1934/)
I understand your fear. However, you are underestimating the dedication and the principled culture within the federal workforce and the U.S. military. There would be massive resistance, accompanied by mass resignation on an unprecedented scale. The Republicans in the Senate would have little choice but to impeach him or watch the complete dissolution of the entire federal government.
We are not the Weimar republic. We have a culture of democracy which is far too deeply embedded to be uprooted by an executive order. Even this Supreme Court couldn't possibly let Trump's "Schedule F" pass - not after its "major decisions" principle that it exhibited in the recent decision in West Virginia vs EPA.
I realize you probably consider me naive, but trust me - much of the federal workforce was able to ignore Trump even though they didn't like him and were glad their jobs were insulated from the White House. If he tries to reach his stubby little digits into the Civil Service, there will be a massive pushback.
The thing is -- the motivation of the Hawleys and Cruzes and DeSantises and that entire countless rabble of wannabe successors to the Don is absolutely to inherit, not a functional civil service and government of laws that would constrain their rapacity, but a turn-key fascist compliant organization of servile myrmidons instantly responsive to their slightest whim.
And their base actually wants what Trump was promising just the other day -- summary executions of criminals the police already know are guilty, occupation of truculent municipalities by nationalized military units operating at the direction of the President, and of course roundups of millions of "homeless" persons to internment camps.
So between what their base wants, and what they want for themselves after the big guy has finally moved out of the way, it is inconceivable that Republicans in office anywhere would offer any assistance to whatever agency Horatii may be left trying to defend the last bridges against the totalitarian onslaught.
An example that supports your claim that the federal government would dissolve is the refusal of the DOJ officials to "just say it was corrupt" as Trump asked.
You are not wrong. We had a culture of democracy, to be sure, and the four years of haphazard, disorganized MAGA did not pull down all the institutions and systems. But they sure took a beating. And I submit that the last four years were not really a coordinated effort to do much more than just crash a party and drink up all the alcohol. Only toward the end did it really dawn on certain people that they could not only crash the party, they could evict the owners of the house and keep it for themselves. The next four years will not be devoted to having a good time. They will be spent in a wide-ranging, carefully planned and executed seizure and permanent occupation of the United States of America.
This hasn't happened before, chiefly because the people inclined to try it were under the impression that if they did, everyone else would put up a fight that could not be overcome.
This belief was based on the idea that there are rules that apply as much or more to our selves as to everyone else; we enforce these rules by directing tacit and communal opprobrium against violators; and when our own transgressions are detected, we have no choice but the accept the verdict of society, and yield. That's gone. Maybe it was never as substantial as it seemed -- but in any event, it is now exposed as so attenuated as to be functionally negligible.
As to the culture of democracy, at least most of my lifetime it seemed the overwhelming consensus was that all the other citizens had just as much of a right to participate in the polity as we ourselves had -- or at least, we believed that everyone else believed that, so we tried to at least pretend we believed it. That's gone. If there is any single thing at the base of the MAGA revolution, it's this: there are real Americans, and there are others here among us; and those others, false Americans, have no rights we real Americans are bound to respect.
As to the military, I think you are certainly correct, but the very likelihood you describe is exactly one of the circumstances that will make the takeover both rapid and commodious. Mass resignation, on an unprecedented scale, of persons of character and honor, will empty our most critical institutions of good actors. MAGA has no shortage of complaisant malefactors available to fill the vacated places. It has already happened to "traditional" Republicans in public life.
All the good people will leave - at first some, because they can't stomach what is happening, and refuse to be part of it; then, in greater numbers, others who tire of trying to stand against the incoming tide, and just wear out; then, many more, who see writing on the wall, see the good guys disappearing, and cut their losses to keep what retirement and pensions they can; and finally, the remnant, who are forcibly removed, by whatever means come to hand, all foul. And worst of all -- some in the middle, sensing the wind direction and its increasing velocity, decide cynically that it is better to remain-- either securely in place as servile apparatchiks facing in the right direction, or even to prevail, by converting to full MAGA themselves, in return for the glittering prizes that come from climbing up the organization.
I think that's a possible scenario. So many Maga people are motivated, while Democrats are motivated, so many are not really involved. They don't see anything unusual.
On that account, I think the overturning of Roe v Wade will ultimately be a blessing in disguise. It is already having an effect on the generic Congressional ballot. I think it has been a slap in the face, a cold bucket of water dumped on the head of complacent liberals in this country who were too accustomed to the overall arc of society bending in favor of positive change.
From your mouth to God's ears.
I admit the "mass resignation" idea does pose some risks, and is more helpful as a threat than anything else.
I think what will happen this time around, is that if Trump wins the Republican nomination, there will start to be serious conversations among high-level people at federal agencies about how to gird against a breakdown of the executive. You will have agency heads making unprecedented public statements warning of the dangers of Trump's plans. There will be mass mobilization of agency OGCs and private legal professionals to prepare lawsuits against "Schedule F". You will see petitions circulating with tens of thousands of signatories of federal employees and civil servants. Mass resignations may be threatened, but it is just as likely you will see mass refusals to carry out the implementation of "Schedule F".
In short, the potential for utter chaos will be made evident long before Trump assumes power. As to what happens after that - well it's anyone's guess. But I do not expect a quiet transition to an authoritarian Trump regime. Unlike 2016, it will be ugly and loud, the kind of thing that will embarrass a guy like Trump, who expects to be granted all of the pomp and ceremony that normally accompanies the Presidency. And he'll be eight years older than the last time. Not to mention we will likely already have indicted several members of Trump's coup crew, if not Trump himself. How many others will be willing to bet on Trump's fickle loyalty when their asses are on the line? I'm still going to put my money on America.
I'm with you.
I never watched "The French Village." Maybe it's time...
You should. Aside from its value as an intense and entertaining melodrama, and its high marks for presenting validated historical context, it forces us to look, in a clarifying and convincing way, at how limited our perceptions of ourselves are, how poorly we assess our own motives and our own capacities, and how contingent outcomes turn out to be. And the writing and acting is really good. It is a melodrama and it does perhaps amp up personal conflict between characters, and several of the villains are (of necessity) overdrawn. But when you see people like Greitens, Hawley, and Stefanik in real life, those few characters are by no means implausible.
I have heard from people in Red States the Trump supporters are already planning to fight (and they have plenty of arms) to make sure Trump is in power no matter what.
Yeah, they like to talk a lot. As Adam Kinzinger points out, many of these people would be the first casualties of a breakdown in society when they couldn't get their medications for diabetes and hypertension.
It's one thing to have arms. It's another to have experience actually using them to do anything other than shoot cans off a back fence. Committing murder is a line most people are willing to cross only in utter desperation. Trump's supporters may seem unhinged, but they're mostly a bunch of overgrown children cosplaying hero in a society that's never required them to really put their lives on the line or make any real sacrifices.
Well said!
Not sure if I would be that optimistic. TFG has exposed America's ugly underbelly like no one before. One could argue in good faith prior to 2016 that the Congress & Senate would have controlled the shenanigans that TFG seemed to be involved in on a daily basis. But that turned out to be not true. Didn't it? Over the last 5-6 years, the formula to gain total control has been inserted into the fabric of the country methodically with the purge of true opponents (like a Cheney), the replacement/silencing/defanging of the judiciary, Inspector Generals, politicization of institutes such as Secret Service, DOJ and the mass brain-washing through right wing propaganda media (Fox, OAN etc.). This rot is likely been sown within the federal workforce and US military as well and they too would be stifled, just like the rest of the institutions. As an example, there were reports that suggested Mike Flynn's brother who oversees the National Guard was instrumental in preventing them from being deployed soon enough to help Capitol Police on Jan6th. It is surprising that hasn't received more press. For too long the American population have been waiting for somebody else to rescue them. That isn't happening, if recent history is any proof.
I'd also not let precedence fool me in thinking the SC will be a balance. They have through their recent rulings shown that they will respect precedence sometimes (when convenient) and not others. They have show a clear disposition towards pushing right leaning causes and nobody should be surprised that they would look the other way in the future.
Mass resignations are a central part of Trump’s plan. Replace the civil service with MAGA lackeys. Schedule”F” becomes inevitable with a mass resignation.
But remember, the threat of mass resignation was what kept Trump from replacing his AG with Jeffrey Clark. The idea that Clark would be head of a ghost town federal agency - and that Trump would look bad in the process. Republicans wouldn't be able to ignore something like this with the usual furrowed brows and statements of being "very concerned about the President's remarks". It would quickly be seen as a grave matter of national security.
You are more optimistic than the evidence supports. Because thered be no impeachment; it would quickly devolve into their much wanted civil war.
I believe you are thinking of the “before times”.
But I long to be wrong.
I agree 100%. I take no deep consolation in my conviction - as JVL points out, the fact that we're even in this position doesn't bode well for the future.
However, it's important to remember that doomsaying per se isn't really planning for the worst. Everyone needs to seriously consider how we're going to respond if Trump gets back in office.
I remember before the 2016 election, there was an article - in Rolling Stone, I think - titled something like "Donald Trump Cannot Be President". It was a perfect summation of how most of us felt. People were perfectly willing to pontificate about how bad it would be.
But as far as how we'd respond, it was more like, "I don't even want to ... no, *no*, this just *can't* happen ...".
Well now we know it can happen. And true, more sober types were saying things like I'm saying now, and some of that turned out to be overly optimistic. But the guardrails of democracy did - ultimately - hold. Weakened and battered, but they held.
So our advantage now is that we know it's coming. People talk about how Trump has learned from his mistakes the first time around. But even if you don't think they're giving Trump too much credit for his ability to learn, the rest of us aren't going to be caught by surprise, either. We have to be ready, and avoid surrendering to fatalism if he wins again. The only other option is surrendering America.
What exactly, are you planning to do if he (or a version of him) wins in '24? How are you recommending we "plan for the worst"? What kind of plans do you see as being effective?
Seems if he (or a clone) wins again, it will be too late. The time for planning is to keep them from winning, not?
I'm not being a duck here... I'm genuinely interested in what kinds of plans you have in mind.
I talked in an adjacent comment about specifically what I expect might happen on the part of people in various positions of authority if Trump gets the nomination.
As to what you or I, individually, can do if he gets elected? That depends on who you are and what your position in society is. If you're just a regular citizen, you can apply pressure to your representatives in Congress, contribute to legal funds to combat Trump's abuses of power, attend protests, participate in get-out-the-vote campaigns for the midterms, etc. If you're someone in the aforementioned positions of authority, you'll have a duty to defend the law and the Constitution to the fullest extent possible.
The point is that we can't all afford to curl up into a ball and start talking about how we're going to move to Canada or just accept that America is fucked. Because that seems to be where a lot of people are leaning right now. The last time people mostly assumed this wasn't going to happen and we were unprepared. This time there will be resistance and pushback from the Federal workforce, because we know the shit Trump tried to pull last time.
I read yours after I wrote my diatribe. It lays out the case perfectly. You are not being hyperbolic. The crazy part is that every single one of the Republicans, if in power. Will do exactly the above. They don't even need Trump anymore.
And that... is the scariest part of all!!
"And it gets even worse, we're talking about the entire gigantic US Military"
I know the skuttlebutt in the political rags is that Trump will have LtGen Mike Flynn as his running mate.
No. He'll appoint Flynn SecDef.
What better way to seize control of the US Military than put a compromised, mentally disturbed, experienced General in charge who also happens to be a Trump lackey?
If Donald Trump gets put in the presidency again, we all better be prepared for civil war.
If he's put into the presidency again there likely won't be a civil war. It'd be one thing if one was to break out around his machinations, or if one was to break out if he loses and claims fraud. But if he's the president in anything that passes for a legitimate way, we'll have as much civil war as Nazi Germany did.
Day-um, how did I not know any of this? Clearly I slept through that part of WWII history. Thank you, @Craig. Scared spitless with my morning coffee.
If you are a pessimist, if you are looking for reasons to despair of human folly ever being mitigated, if you seek proof that the species of chimpanzees we call "homo sapiens" is totally unfit for and incapable of anything other than every possible stupid, cruel, and vicious action -- study history! You will not be disappointed!
Sorry about that, chief.
Quite right about the Reichstag fire and the internecine murders that locked it down for Hitler. it is not an accident, I think, that the Nazi's only dared diddle the oaths after H passed on; he was the last symbol of Germany's imperial greatness, for all that he lost his war, and I suspect they were concerned the old war horse might object to what the Nazis had in mind for his beloved army. Speculation. It is certainly the case the Nazis treated H with great care. He was probably the only figure in Germany whose opposition could create any serious difficulties for them.
And we haven't seen the direct physical violence (yet) that characterized the politics of the collapsing Weimar state, and it's just a happenstance of history that in American the Republican night of the long knives is yet to come -- because Trump, in a strange way, is the Hindenberg of MAGA world. Trumps demise, which could come in the form of just turning into a sort of embalmed and sidelined Francisco Franco in office, wheeled out periodically for public display while around him the actual regime's henchmen execute the project of dismantling the former state and preparing for the intra-snakepit showdown knife fight after his final tweet.
As to Reichstag fires, one would think the Capitol insurrection, which is merely the visible fruit of Trump's long-term plot in 2020 to seize power regardless of electoral results, would be a parallel. And I think it probably will be, but not as the shock that returns a nation to sanity. More likely, the rioters will become the Horst Wessels of the re-magafied nation.
My point was not, what happens here will parallel the fall of Weimar, in the sense that there will be an event A that corresponds to the Reichstag fire, an event B that we will call the Enabling Act, and so on -- that's the armchair historian's idle hour recreation -- although I have also to say such parallels are distressingly available. My point is, the slide into tyranny can happen very quickly indeed. But perhaps it would be better to consider that this apparent rapidity is only because the visible events happen rapidly, but what made those events possible, and in fact inevitable, took a long time, and were less obvious to all but the most intense inspection.
Comparing the Reichstag Fire to Jan 6th - I don't know enough about the former, except that I know the Nazis blamed the Communists for it, and that justified the Enabling Act. But my question is was there an investigation of it that showed it was the Communists?
To any serious student of history, particularly history of Europe from the Napoleonic era to post WWII, it requires a profound exertion of will to seriously entertain the proposition that the Reichstag fire was not a false flag provocation. Certainly the Nazis played that game-- And one hallmark of such doings is that they seem almost invariably so ham-handed and obvious as to have been intentionally intended to strain credulity. The Gleiwitz incident, for example.
But at least some effort at historiographic self-restraint is not out of place here. History is replete with examples of random dumb jackasses playing with matches (in this case not even figuratively, but literally) in flammable surroundings. Lee Harvey Oswald. The Trump-addled mob of gulled ignoramuses on Jan 6. The imbecile "demonstrators" setting fire to property and screaming defund the police. And of course the prince of incompetent accidental historical tinder-lighters, Gavrilo Princip.
Who actually set the Reichstag fire is in a larger historical sense, irrelevant. The thing actually burned down was the Weimar republic and constitutional government in Germany. If in fact it was the hapless Marinus who made the spark, it was the totalitarians who actually had control of it.
So in answer to your question, was there an investigation, the answer is a qualified "yes" -- yes to the extent that the Nazis went to the trouble and motions of an investigation and trial. "No" if by "investigation" you mean an open minded forensic effort to find out what actually happened. Whether the Nazis did it themselves and just grabbed a random patsy, or set him up to commit the arson, or just took advantage of a lucky chance that came their way -- the outcome of the "investigation" was established before it started.
"Who actually set the Reichstag fire is in a larger historical sense, irrelevant. The thing actually burned down was the Weimar republic and constitutional government in Germany." Yes. Why was there no legal basis for preventing the fire as a pretext? That is my question.
thank you. he had a bad defense attorney?
Yes, he had the Nazi party controlling the trial, prosecution and defense.
A patsy, certainly; innocent, possibly.
so he had a bad defense attorney.