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 alc…
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.
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.