“Is ours a government of the people, by the people, for the people, or a kakistocracy rather, for the benefit of knaves at the cost of fools?” ~ James Russell Lowell
For the past few weeks, I have been reviewing articles about the trend toward authoritarianism in the USA. Unfortunately, articles appear faster than I can read and review them, so I’ll have to stop and move on soon. With this in mind, I list a few of the pieces I won’t get to, followed by excerpts from some other good ones.
Paul Krugman – “How Republics End,” The New York Times.
Charles Blow – “This Is Not Normal,” The New York Times.
Henry A. Giroux – “The Authoritarian Politics of Resentment in Trump’s …,” Truthout.
Ben Fountain – “Welcome to the Reign of King Trump,” The Guardian.
Steve Denning – “Trump And Authoritarian Propaganda,” Forbes
Jonathan Chait – “The GOP’s Age of Authoritarianism Has … Begun,” New York Magazine.
Donald Trump Could Threaten U.S. Rule of Law …,” The New York Times.
Robert Creamer – “Can Fascism Triumph in America?” The Huffington Post.
1) Is Donald Trump a Threat to Democracy?” (The New York Times, December 16, 2016 by
Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, professors of government at Harvard University.)
Donald J. Trump’s election has raised a question that few Americans ever imagined asking: Is our democracy in danger? With the possible exception of the Civil War, American democracy has never collapsed … Yet past stability is no guarantee of democracy’s future survival …
The clearest warning sign is the ascent of anti-democratic politicians into mainstream politics … indicators include a failure to reject violence unambiguously, a readiness to curtail rivals’ civil liberties, and the denial of the legitimacy of elected governments.
Mr. Trump tests positive. In the campaign, he encouraged violence among supporters; pledged to prosecute Hillary Clinton; threatened legal action against unfriendly media; and suggested that he might not accept the election results …
Many Americans are not overly concerned about Mr. Trump’s authoritarian inclinations because they trust our system of constitutional checks and balances to constrain him. Yet the institutional safeguards protecting our democracy may be less effective than we think …
Democratic institutions must be reinforced by strong informal norms … Among the unwritten rules that have sustained American democracy are partisan self-restraint and fair play … Such practices helped to avoid a descent into the kind of partisan fight to the death that destroyed many European democracies in the 1930s.
Yet norms of partisan restraint have eroded in recent decades … Norms of presidential restraint are also at risk … Although executive power has expanded in recent decades, it has ultimately been reined in by the prudence and self-restraint of our presidents.
Unlike his predecessors, Mr. Trump is a serial norm-breaker. There are signs that Mr. Trump seeks to diminish the news media’s traditional role by using Twitter, video messages and public rallies to circumvent the White House press corps and communicate directly with voters — taking a page out of the playbook of populist leaders …
An even more basic norm under threat today is the idea of legitimate opposition. In a democracy, partisan rivals must fully accept one another’s right to exist, to compete and to govern … Governments throughout history have used the claim that their opponents are disloyal or criminal or a threat to the nation’s way of life to justify acts of authoritarianism.
The idea of legitimate opposition has been entrenched in the United States since the early 19th century, disrupted only by the Civil War. That may now be changing … as right-wing extremists increasingly question the legitimacy of their liberal rivals …
Such extremism, once confined to the political fringes, has now moved into the mainstream … leading Republicans — including the president-elect — endorsed the view that the Democratic candidate was not a legitimate rival.
The risk we face, then, is not merely a president with illiberal proclivities — it is the election of such a president when the guardrails protecting American democracy are no longer as secure … We must be vigilant. The warning signs are real.
2) “David Frum Predicts the Dark Course of Trump’s Impending Authoritarianism,” (PoliticsUSA, November 9, 2016, by Sara Jones.) Bear in mind that Frum is a conservative, and former speechwriter for George W. Bush, a president accused of expanding and abusing executive power. Frum envisions the following scenario which is, I believe, as prescient as it is chilling:
1) … I don’t imagine that Donald Trump will immediately set out to build an authoritarian state; 2) … his first priority will be to use the presidency massively to enrich himself; 3) That program of massive self-enrichment … will trigger media investigations and criticism by congressional Democrats; 4) ….Trump cannot tolerate criticism. He … always retaliating against perceived enemies, by means fair or foul; 5) … Trump’s advisers and aides share this belief [they] … live by gangster morality; 6) So the abuses will start as payback. With a compliant Gop majority in Congress, Trump admin can rewrite laws to enable payback; 7) The courts may be an obstacle. But w/ a compliant Senate, a president can change the courts—as happened in Poland & Hungary; 8) … few [IRS] commissioners serve the full 5 years; 9) The FBI seems already to have been pre-politicized in Trump’s favor … 10) Construction of the apparatus of revenge and repression will begin opportunistically & haphazardly. It will accelerate methodically. END
3) “An American Authoritarian: The Republican presidential candidate is not a Fascist, but his campaign bears notable similarities to the reign of Italian dictator Benito Mussolini,” (The Atlantic, August 16, 2016, by Ruth Ben-Ghiat, Professor of History and Italian studies at New York University. Professor Ben-Ghiat.)
Trump … has created a one-man-led political movement that does not map onto traditional U.S. party structures or behave in traditional ways. This is how Fascism began as well …
The authoritarian playbook is defined by the particular relationship such individuals have with their followers. It’s an attachment based on submission to the authority of one individual who stands above the party, even in a regime.
Mussolini’s rise to power also exemplifies another authoritarian trait America has seen during this campaign: The charismatic leader who tests the limits of what the public, press, and political class will tolerate. This exploration … is accomplished through controversial actions and threatening or humiliating remarks toward groups or individuals.
… Actions many see as irrational make chilling sense when considered under this framework: the many racist tweets or retweets … His early declaration that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue in New York and not lose any supporters. His extended humiliation of powerful politicians … His attempt to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the American electoral process. His intimation that “the Second-Amendment people” might be able to solve the potential problem of Hillary Clinton …
… Authoritarians usually communicate their intentions clearly. Mussolini certainly did. Trump has been frank about his agenda and the groups he’ll target if he’s elected. “The crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon come to an end. Beginning on January 20, 2017, safety will be restored,” Trump said in accepting the Republican presidential nomination …
4) “Donald Trump’s “inverted totalitarianism”: Too bad we didn’t heed Sheldon Wolin’s warnings” (Salon, November 23, 2016, by Chauncey Devega.)
In his 2008 book, Democracy Incorporated: Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism, the late Princeton University political theorist Sheldon Wolin explained how the United States would fully devolve into authoritarianism.
The elements are in place [for a quasi-fascist takeover]: a weak legislative body, a legal system that is both compliant and repressive, a party system in which one party, whether in opposition or in the majority, is bent upon reconstituting the existing system so as to permanently favor a ruling class of the wealthy, the well-connected and the corporate, while leaving the poorer citizens with a sense of helplessness and political despair, and, at the same time, keeping the middle classes dangling between fear of unemployment and expectations of fantastic rewards once the new economy recovers. That scheme is abetted by a sycophantic and increasingly concentrated media; by the integration of universities with their corporate benefactors; by a propaganda machine institutionalized in well-funded think tanks and conservative foundations; by the increasingly closer cooperation between local police and national law enforcement agencies aimed at identifying terrorists, suspicious aliens and domestic dissidents.
I’m sorry I haven’t commented of late; every time I read one of your pieces, I get depressed and lose the energy to comment. Can you devote your next piece to elephant jokes? ?
But I do have one thought that will only make matters worse: we all know that Mr. Trump’s idiotic plans will only yield disaster. I had assumed without much thought that in the near future we’ll be making a lot sad “I told you so” comments to people who voted for Trump. But then I realized that there’s another factor at work: Mr. Trump’s absolute refusal to accept any responsibility for failure. He was all set to blame a “rigged election” if he lost. He always blames somebody else.
So guess what will happen when his policies backfire miserably? He’ll blame Democrats for secretly subverting his brilliant ideas. He’ll claim that a secret underground organization is busily working to destroy America. Then he’ll initiate investigations, then persecutions, then criminal indictments. How far he is allowed to go depends upon the loyalty of the Republicans to the Constitution.
I retain the (probably naive) hope that at some point, Republicans will realize that Mr. Trump is destroying the republic and (Horrors!) their own reputations. At that point, they’ll impeach Mr. Trump. After all, Mr. Pence is one of their own, and while he is a radical conservative, at least he’s not a maniac bent on destroying our republic.
Ah, happy Christmas thoughts… maybe Santa will bring us a shiny new democracy…
Chris – thanks for the insightful comments as always. Your is obviously a mind well trained by physics, computer programming, etc. Too bad most people don’t understand that some people are better thinkers than others. And minds that aren’t well trained are so easily led astray by demagogues, poor arguments, and their own cognitive biases.
Here’s a brighter thought:
We can all imagine hundreds of disaster scenarios starring Mr. Trump. Two of the most frightening scenarios involve him starting a nuclear war and/or becoming a fascist dictator. But while these disaster scenarios are all quite unlikely, there’s one scenario that seems to have somewhat greater probability: the Republicans impeach Mr. Trump.
As crazy as that sounds, let me present three reasons, which individually or jointly might motivate Republicans to remove Mr. Trump from office:
1. Trump violations of the law go too far and Republicans decide that they can no longer tolerate his excesses. Remember, he will be in violation of the emoluments clause the moment he swears his oath of office.
2. Trump ruins the Republican brand. We all know that Mr. Trump’s policies will prove disastrous. It might take a year or two for this to become obvious, but any Republican with a brain can see that Mr. Trump’s ideas are idiotic and could well trigger a depression. The only way that they can save the Republican name will be to impeach him. Otherwise, the Republican Party will always be associated with the Trump Disaster and will need a generation to recover.
3. Trump moves toward dumping the Republicans. This is even more likely. Mr. Trump has treated the Republican Party dismissively. Moreover, his entire life has been devoted to promoting the Trump brand. The only way to insure this is to create a cult of personality around him. Why do you think that he’s expending so much time on his “victory tour”? The election is over — why does he need to court voters? Note that he is only courting populations in the states that voted solidly for him. At some point, the Republican Party will realize that Mr. Trump intends to supplant the Republican Party with the Trump Party. At this point, impeaching him will be the only act of self-preservation available to them.
Remember too that, should they impeach and convict Mr. Trump, they will get Mr. Pence as the President. He’s a loyal Republican, albeit pretty far to the right, but still solidly Republican. He’s a man that other Republicans can work with — unlike Mr. Trump.
Yes, it’s a crazy scenario, but of all the crazy scenarios being tossed around these days, it seems the most plausible to me. I suspect that Republicans are already discussing these ideas among themselves.