19 votes

For the United States, our constitutional crisis is already here

14 comments

  1. [14]
    spit-evil-olive-tips
    Link
    I would also recommend this, from just a few weeks after the Jan 6th insurrection and Biden's inauguration. It has stuck with me more than any other piece of political writing I've read in the...

    The United States is heading into its greatest political and constitutional crisis since the Civil War, with a reasonable chance over the next three to four years of incidents of mass violence, a breakdown of federal authority, and the division of the country into warring red and blue enclaves.

    First, Donald Trump will be the Republican candidate for president in 2024. The hope and expectation that he would fade in visibility and influence have been delusional. He enjoys mammoth leads in the polls; he is building a massive campaign war chest; and at this moment the Democratic ticket looks vulnerable. Barring health problems, he is running.

    Second, Trump and his Republican allies are actively preparing to ensure his victory by whatever means necessary. Trump’s charges of fraud in the 2020 election are now primarily aimed at establishing the predicate to challenge future election results that do not go his way. Some Republican candidates have already begun preparing to declare fraud in 2022, just as Larry Elder tried meekly to do in the California recall contest.

    Republican legislatures are giving themselves greater control over the election certification process. As of this spring, Republicans have proposed or passed measures in at least 16 states that would shift certain election authorities from the purview of the governor, secretary of state or other executive-branch officers to the legislature. An Arizona bill flatly states that the legislature may “revoke the secretary of state’s issuance or certification of a presidential elector’s certificate of election” by a simple majority vote.

    The stage is thus being set for chaos. Imagine weeks of competing mass protests across multiple states as lawmakers from both parties claim victory and charge the other with unconstitutional efforts to take power. Partisans on both sides are likely to be better armed and more willing to inflict harm than they were in 2020. Would governors call out the National Guard? Would President Biden nationalize the Guard and place it under his control, invoke the Insurrection Act, and send troops into Pennsylvania or Texas or Wisconsin to quell violent protests? Deploying federal power in the states would be decried as tyranny. Biden would find himself where other presidents have been — where Andrew Jackson was during the nullification crisis, or where Abraham Lincoln was after the South seceded — navigating without rules or precedents, making his own judgments about what constitutional powers he does and doesn’t have.

    I would also recommend this, from just a few weeks after the Jan 6th insurrection and Biden's inauguration. It has stuck with me more than any other piece of political writing I've read in the past year:

    Going Back to “Normal” After Fascism is the Biggest Mistake America Can Make

    The prevailing mood in America these days is something like this: “Phew, I’m glad that’s over. Now can everything please go back to normal?” But a society can’t just go back to normal after fascism. As if to pretend that nothing much ever happened, trying to brush it desperately under the rug.

    America’s making a big mistake: after fascism, you can’t go back to normal.

    8 votes
    1. teaearlgraycold
      Link Parent
      So I'm not sure I've ever heard a dictionary definition of fascism before. a belief in the supremacy of one national or ethnic group Check a contempt for democracy Check an insistence on obedience...

      So I'm not sure I've ever heard a dictionary definition of fascism before.

      The term Fascism was first used of the totalitarian right-wing nationalist regime of Mussolini in Italy (1922–43); the regimes of the Nazis in Germany and Franco in Spain were also Fascist. Fascism tends to include a belief in the supremacy of one national or ethnic group, a contempt for democracy, an insistence on obedience to a powerful leader, and a strong demagogic approach.

      • a belief in the supremacy of one national or ethnic group

      Check

      • a contempt for democracy

      Check

      • an insistence on obedience to a powerful leader

      Check

      • and a strong demagogic approach

      Check

      And recursing one level down:

      dem·a·gogue
      a political leader who seeks support by appealing to the desires and prejudices of ordinary people rather than by using rational argument

      Check


      Up until this point I didn't want to believe we were here. But it's as if these definitions were written with Trump in mind.

      16 votes
    2. [12]
      skybrian
      Link Parent
      I don't think he gives any evidence that Trump is running? For all we know Trump hasn't even decided yet.

      I don't think he gives any evidence that Trump is running? For all we know Trump hasn't even decided yet.

      2 votes
      1. [7]
        spit-evil-olive-tips
        Link Parent
        July: Trump says he's made decision on 2024 August: Trump will run for president in 2024, Sean Spicer claims September: Trump builds ‘turnkey’ campaign operation for 2024 here are the filings with...

        For all we know Trump hasn't even decided yet.

        July: Trump says he's made decision on 2024

        "You are not going to answer, but I have to ask, where are you in the process," Hannity said to Trump on Wednesday, regarding his decision on whether to mount another White House bid. "Let me ask you this, without giving the answer, what the answer is, have you made up your mind?"

        “Yes,” Trump responded.

        August: Trump will run for president in 2024, Sean Spicer claims

        September: Trump builds ‘turnkey’ campaign operation for 2024

        Trump campaign adviser, Jason Miller, declared Thursday that the chances of him running are “between 99 and 100 percent. I think he is definitely running in 2024. I had a good conversation with him last night. I’m going to go see him in another couple days here.”

        Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, who spoke with Trump last week, voiced similar opinions in an undercover video shot Thursday by a Democratic activist, saying “I know so [that Trump is going to run again]. I talked to him yesterday. He's about ready to announce after all of this craziness in Afghanistan.”

        here are the filings with the Federal Elections Commission:

        Make America Great Again PAC

        Trump Victory

        Trump Make America Great Again Committee

        basically an unbroken streak of campaign fundraising starting in 2015/2016 until now.

        do you really think "Barring health problems, he is running" is such an outlandish prediction?

        6 votes
        1. [5]
          EgoEimi
          Link Parent
          Trump is 75 now. Average male life expectancy is 75.1. Obese individuals lose 5–10 years if I recall correctly. As macabre as it may be, I really don’t count on him seeing 2024.

          do you really think "Barring health problems, he is running" is such an outlandish prediction?

          Trump is 75 now. Average male life expectancy is 75.1. Obese individuals lose 5–10 years if I recall correctly.

          As macabre as it may be, I really don’t count on him seeing 2024.

          2 votes
          1. [2]
            Eric_the_Cerise
            Link Parent
            This is a statistical thinking-error. Life expectancy at birth is 75.4. Anyone who is still alive at 75, life expectancy is 85+ ... and for his age, Trump is still pretty healthy.

            This is a statistical thinking-error. Life expectancy at birth is 75.4. Anyone who is still alive at 75, life expectancy is 85+ ... and for his age, Trump is still pretty healthy.

            20 votes
            1. EgoEimi
              Link Parent
              Thanks for the correction, that's a very good point.

              Thanks for the correction, that's a very good point.

              4 votes
          2. [2]
            JXM
            Link Parent
            Sadly, he has access to the best healthcare in the world and all the money to spend on staying alive.

            Sadly, he has access to the best healthcare in the world and all the money to spend on staying alive.

            7 votes
            1. teaearlgraycold
              Link Parent
              He has to be a bit more than just alive, though. For example - I don't see him winning if he can't stand on his own.

              He has to be a bit more than just alive, though. For example - I don't see him winning if he can't stand on his own.

              2 votes
        2. skybrian
          Link Parent
          Thanks for following up on this. No, it’s not outlandish. But Trump makes a lot of claims that end up not happening, so I’m not sure I’ll really believe it until it’s official.

          Thanks for following up on this. No, it’s not outlandish. But Trump makes a lot of claims that end up not happening, so I’m not sure I’ll really believe it until it’s official.

          2 votes
      2. [4]
        psi
        Link Parent
        Focusing on Trump himself misses the bigger picture. Any number of people could pick up the Trumpism mantle, for example Trump Jr or Ron DeSantis. In fact, his successor will probably be worse. He...

        Focusing on Trump himself misses the bigger picture. Any number of people could pick up the Trumpism mantle, for example Trump Jr or Ron DeSantis. In fact, his successor will probably be worse. He will be (and let's not kid ourselves with gender-inclusive language – Trump's successor will be a cis-het man) younger, wittier, and more politically savvy than Trump.

        I mean, the reason the political climate is so toxic right now is because of hyper-partisanship. Obviously Trump played a massive role in exacerbating this problem, and he should be rightly blamed for his role, but hyper-partisanship will remain regardless of whether Trump runs in 2024.

        6 votes
        1. [3]
          nukeman
          Link Parent
          I’m going to take a different take: the only worthy successor to Donald Trump is… Donald Trump, and not the junior version either. Trump became popular because he was a celebrity, because he’s a...

          I’m going to take a different take: the only worthy successor to Donald Trump is… Donald Trump, and not the junior version either.

          Trump became popular because he was a celebrity, because he’s a billionaire businessman with gold toilets and a supermodel wife eating fast food when he wants, because he said “Fuck you” to the “elite Washington politicians”. None of the proposed successors (including DeSantis) have these characteristics. The voters don’t want Trump-lite, or diet Trump, they want the full-bodied beverage.

          One anecdote I read about 2020 voters mentioned a man who last voted in 1992. The person he voted for? Ross Perot, another billionaire businessman with an anti-establishment streak. These types of voters were strongly engaged by Trump, and while they also voted down ballot in 2016 and 2020, they didn’t in 2017, 2018, and 2021. While a bit hard to disentangle from standard midterm effects, the psychological profile of these types of Trump voters means the idea makes sense. They aren’t interested in standard Republicans unless Trump is on the ballot.

          4 votes
          1. [2]
            psi
            (edited )
            Link Parent
            I would've agreed with you a year ago. Back then I optimistically expected Biden to win the Presidency, who would shepherd in an era of normalcy. Now, twelve months later, the attacks against...

            I would've agreed with you a year ago. Back then I optimistically expected Biden to win the Presidency, who would shepherd in an era of normalcy. Now, twelve months later, the attacks against Biden have only become more vicious, and doubts about the security of our elections -- the bedrock of our democracy -- have only grown larger. These days I believe it would be a grave mistake to expect Trumpism to end with Trump.

            First, let me address Trump directly. I absolutely agree that his supporters adore him for saying "'fuck you' to the 'elite Washington politicians'", but the idea of supporting Trump because he's a successful billionaire businessman sounds like a post-hoc rationalization -- plenty of politicians run successful businesses, often amassing tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. For that matter, claims that Trump are a good businessman are dubious at best; there's plenty of evidence that his "success" resulted from his mendacity [1-3], not from his business acumen.

            Yet if you were to point out that Trump schemed to commit tax fraud, refused to pay contractors, or stole from charities, his supports would remain unphased and probably mumble something about the liberal media. When Trumps is confronted on these topics, he shrieks about the liberal media and rejects their claims absolutely. That is Trump's real superpower: when he's backed into a corner, he'll double down rather than backtrack, or he'll denies that there's a wall behind him at all.

            So, given these credible accusations of fraud that strike at Trump's successful businessman narrative, why do people still flock to him? I'd argue that people are drawn to his vision, not his celebrity (though of course his celebrity helped draw attention). Trump sells a vision of America that is fundamentally at odds with reality, one where China conspired with Democrats to steal the election and where the Southern border is under constant siege by droves of immigrants. Most politicians (until Trump at least) resisted that sort of vitriolic language and disdain for facts. (Who could forget these moments from John McCain's campaign?) Those politicians operated under the assumption that, while hyperbole was fine, some kernel of truth should remain, lest those politicians be held accountable at the polls. Donald Trump eschews that philosophy, instead molding facts to policy rather than policy to facts.

            Now in 2021, this sort of hyperbolic, hyper-partisan language has become normalized and well-established outside of campaign rallies. This brings me to my second point: Trumpism never flourished through Trump alone.

            Behind the scenes of the Trump administration lay his enablers. While Trump busied himself with flagrantly violating the spirit of the Constitution, these people advanced improbable legal theories justifying his transgressions. After Trump lost the 2020 election, Trump associates pushed bold, outrageous lies about the election. Hundreds of lawsuits were filed in any attempt to subvert the results of the election, with essentially all of them being thrown out. Even after these lawsuits were rejected on their merits (eg, [4]), right-wing media continued (and continues still!) to sow mistrust about the results of the 2020 election. This year the leading challenger to the California gubernatorial recall claimed election fraud before ballots were even tallied [5]!

            These false claims of election fraud will damage our democracy greater than any policy decision the Trump administration ever enacted. Unfortunately their attacks were not only indirect; allies of the Trump administration also took direct action to overthrow our democracy. Some tried to persuade Secretaries of State to (illegally) overturn results [6]. One of Trump's lawyers proposed an absolutely batshit six-point plan to overthrow our democracy [7] by only counting some of the electoral votes, particularly leaving out those "contested" states with "ballot irregularities", and sending the vote to the House, where Republicans would have an advantage. Ultimately the plan failed because Pence was dissuaded by another former Vice President, but it was certainly unconstitutional anyway. However, human beings interpret the Constitution, and one could easily imagine an alternate universe where a more partisan VP and Court selectively interpret the Constitution to expand political power.

            This post has gone on for too long, so let me summarize. (1) I believe what Trump supporters truly want is a strongman, someone who will sell them a vision of America that appeals to their prejudices. Trump is effective at that, but so is Tucker Carlson, for example. I think aspiring Trump successors learned a valuable lesson from the Trump administration, namely that they should never concede to a mistake. (2) Trumpism cannot survive through the whims of a single man alone; an entire industry of lawyers, judges, and journalists must carry it. In that sense, the enablers who legitimize the strongman are at least as important as the strongman. These people erode trust in our institutions, making the next coup attempt easier.


            [1] "Long-Concelead Records Show Trump's Chronic Losses and Years of Tax Avoidance." New York Times.

            [2] "Donald Trump’s Business Plan Left a Trail of Unpaid Bills." Wall Street Journal.

            [3] "How Donald Trump Shifted Kids-Cancer Charity Money Into His Business." Forbes.

            [4] "In blistering ruling, judge throws out Trump suit in Pa.". Associated Press.

            [5] "False Election Claims in California Reveal a New Normal for G.O.P." New York Times.

            [6] "Ga. secretary of state says fellow Republicans are pressuring him to find ways to exclude ballots." Washington Post.

            [7] "The Eastman memo was alarming. Legally speaking, it was also nonsense." Washington Post.

            7 votes
            1. nukeman
              Link Parent
              I’ll clarify; Trumpism and Trumpian rhetoric is not going anywhere, although I’m skeptical as to the effectiveness of the movement without the defining figure. Regarding Trump’s business success,...

              I’ll clarify; Trumpism and Trumpian rhetoric is not going anywhere, although I’m skeptical as to the effectiveness of the movement without the defining figure.

              Regarding Trump’s business success, you are right that he’s actually lost a lot of money. However, think at a lower level: the image of success matters more than actually being successful. Trump has mastered that, fitting working and lower-middle class conceptions of wealth: NYC penthouse and Florida mansion, both with copious amounts of gold and generally gaudiness; supermodel wife; eats fast food (one of his “connections” to the common man), celebrity status outside business. All of those are played up, and useful in deflecting his actual lack of business acumen. People flock to him because they believe he isn’t a bad businessman, instead that “the libtards are colluding with the deep state to make him look bad”.

              I agree the message Trump sells aligns with his voters (look at what happened when he briefly countenanced gun control; gun owners were pissed and he retracted it). Trump has the charisma to sell it (see above). He has his enablers (and often his policy architects, cf. Steven Miller), but they lack the charisma Trump has. Even someone like Tucker Carlson lacks the gaudy and blatant “success” (being one of the good ones in the media pales in comparison to Trump).

              I guess I broadly agree with many of the points you make, but I disagree that Trumpism can thrive without the central figure. Like many other authoritarian cults of personality, once the central figure leaves or dies, the close allies tend to begin infighting with each other. While Trump isn’t dead, since he hasn’t yet entered the race, we see various politicians and figures trying to out-Trump each other in order to gain the support of GOP voters, support that will be moot if Trump runs.

              4 votes