Tag Archives: democracy

 What is most important about the second Trump administration is not everything Trump is doing with his flurry of executive orders–it’s what he won’t do.  As the debate continues non-stop as to whether America has lost its democracy, one thing gets lost in the back and forth–Trump is so busy wielding the power of the federal government to push his radical philosophical agenda that he isn’t serving his constituents.  The Trump administration wastes time and energy rooting out “wokeism” and targeting DEI initiatives for trans people.  In the meantime, the federal government is disappearing.  It is hard to know whether or not we will look back on this moment and see America as having lost its democracy, or if we are still at a point where our institutions will hold.  But for millions of people who depend on the federal government it is a mute point.  For many, the debate about loss of democracy is in essence pointless.  Whatever happens to American democracy in the future, irreparable harm is being done today.  There are those who cannot wait four more years for the government to step up and meet their needs.    

 Conservatives have long pushed for a smaller government that interferes less in the everyday lives of the American people.  But this is different.  Conservatives and progressives alike believe that the purpose of government is to serve the people, not an ideology.  This isn’t about smaller government; it is about refusing to govern.  The Trump administration believes it has the right to use the disappearance of the federal government as a powerful cudgel in suppressing speech it doesn’t like.  Take NIH funding for breast cancer at Columbia University.  The Trump administration is holding research hostage because of real or perceived anit-Semetism.  The point of this conflict is not whether Columbia hasn’t done enough to address anti-Semetism.  The Trump administration is free to believe that Columbia needs to do more to address anti-Semitism, and to take action because of that belief.  It does not have the right to prevent millions of women from benefiting from lifesaving advances in research because he disagrees with someone’s ideology.

Let us argue that rooting out the incredibly vague idea of “wokeism” really ought to be a national priority.  At this point, however, the conflict becomes one of means and end.  However important the end, the means by which to achieve that end isn’t to withhold government funds for things that logically need to be priorities.

Now, often, when someone is unwilling to toe the MAGA line, the Trump administration threatens that the government will withdraw from the lives of its people.  Such disappearance and hostage taking is far more destructive than the literal disappearance of some of Columbia’s students.  It is the dangerous idea that rather than the federal government having the best interests of its people at heart, it functions only to bring about ideological change.  It is the most destructive and unwise kind of intimidation.  Democracy or no democracy, it must be stopped.

There is no way to adjudicate our way out of another Trump presidency.  The issues we face are just too fundamental to be handled through the courts alone. Once an individual has the kind of grip Trump has on his base, it is very difficult to restore and maintain democratic guardrails.  Much more than just lawyers and precedents will be needed if we are to do something meaningful and get to the heart of Trump’s executive overreach.  

There really are not three co-equal branches of government.  The constitution makes it clear that the legislative branch is the most significant, because it most directly represents the will of the people.  The forefathers simply did not intend for the courts to have this kind of role in democracy under these kinds of circumstances.   

The Supreme Court may be wrong about presidential immunity, but they have a perverse point.  The Justice Department going after a former president is not the way the founding fathers would have preferred us to deal with a man like Trump.  Not to say that Jack Smith’s work wasn’t important, but it was an imperfect way of addressing the problem.  Trump should have been impeached. 

 The question is what to do when members of congress forgo their constitutional responsibilities.  America is facing a constitutional crisis that the forefathers anticipated but knew could be very difficult to advert.  Government simply cannot function without congress’s oversight role.     However, critically, simply because Democrats are narrowly in the minority doesn’t mean that they cannot fulfill their role as direct representatives of the people.  

Trump is convinced that he has a broad mandate for radical change.  This “mandate” is a smokescreen.  Trump won the popular vote by a whopping 1.5%.  It is not that the entire American population has given Trump permission to do whatever he wants.  The people who sent Trump to the White House asked specific things of him.  So far he seems to be delivering on those promises.  

However, it is an issue of just how extreme Trump has become. One of the things about surrounding yourself with yes men is that you lose perspective about how extreme you have become in relation to the outside world.  Trump will go too far for that 1.5% of voters who maybe wanted economic change but didn’t necessarily vote for radical overhauls.  When the effects of Trump’s policies hit home some critical group of voters will regret Trump.  One of two things is going to happen: either the negative consequences of Trump’s nihilistic approach will become untenable, or Trump will be forced to back off.  At that moment, progressive legislators must be there.

There is a role for the judicial branch when it comes to the threat Trump represents, but it is far more important for Democrats in congress to keep fulfilling their constitutional responsibilities, despite being in the minority.  Legislatures do more than just vote, they also give voice to the American people.  Never has that sacred duty been more important.

I would say that we are in for a long four years, but it is going to be a whole lot harder than that.  Whatever happens in the next election cycle, irreparable damage is being done to American democracy as we speak.  Taking a look at the people Trump has gathered around him, it is sobering.  For one thing, impeachment will not be enough.  Even if we find a way to oust Trump we will still be stuck with his nominees, not to mention that now the world’s richest man has better access to sensitive Treasury payment systems than career employees.   Now that Trump has a group of powerful acolytes who are in the business of remaking government, it is going to be really hard to put a stop to the damage being done.  

This is not a moment to hunker down and wait.  It is a moment for action.  The Democratic Party is floundering after being unable to block a raft of dangerous nominees to the most important offices in the land.  That isn’t to say that people aren’t trying. Time and again members of the committees demanded yes or no answers to yes or no questions.  Time and again they received none.  A good example–Pam Bondi hedging, unwilling to say that Biden won the 2020 election, constantly attempting to interrupt and talk about her “experiences” in Pennsylvania. 

Clearly, there are a lot of Americans who are not fooled.  This was a close election. The margins in the Senate are small and razor thin in the House.  But enough people have been taken in to give Trump enough power to form an administration.  The question is if, over time, voters will see that the people Trump is putting in power are not who they say they are.  

For one thing, we can hope that voters will realize they did not elect Elon Musk.  Hopefully, those who voted for Trump will see that he is abdicating his power to unelected oligarchs.  Trump and Musk are taking a huge risk.  Trump’s promises to wrest America from the deep state may yet blow up in his face.   If their “reforms” cause something to go seriously wrong with the government on Trump’s watch, Trump will have trouble blaming someone else for the mess.  But this is the hard way.  If America goes down this road there will be a lot of destruction left in the wake of Trump’s administration.  The greatest hope we have is that Trump’s administration will crash and burn without taking the entire American government down with it.

Musk is right–this is indeed a fork in the road for America.  It will come down to the values of each individual acting collectively.  It will be a test of American values.  The people will have to decide whether or not they want their democracy, or if they are going to abdicate their role as citizens because of the false promises of a man and a movement attempting to destroy American democracy.

There has been a lot of Democratic soul searching since Trump was reelected.  But there is one thing that contributed to Trump’s reelection that Democrats logically could do nothing about–something that both women and many men have grown increasingly alarmed about for decades–toxic masculinity.  For a long time now, people all over the world have watched as a destructive definition of manhood has overtaken American political culture.  From Mark Zucherburg’s new lock to Dana White’s critical endorsement of Trump to Hulk Hogan’s shirt ripping and proclamations about “real Americans” at the Republican National Convention; Trump won the White House by convincing other men he was a “real man.”  Toxic masculinity has become a threat to our democracy.

I am not surprised.  Democracies aren’t built just on politics.  They are built on a set of shared values.  Values that are non-existent in the “manosphere.”  People whose values revolve around the Ultimate Fighting Championship aren’t going to know anything about the most basic democratic principle of them all: solving conflict without using violence.  This is the point of a democracy, and what makes a democracy a democracy.

There was a time, in my lifetime, when boys looked up to people like Joe Biden, when his achievements would inspire admiration.  But increasingly young men look with disdain on men who show a willingness to solve conflicts through any other means but violence.  A democratic society cannot maintain this forever.  In order for a republic to function, its people must aspire to cooperate and find ways of resolving disputes other than through intimidation.  Terry Gene Bollea (Hulk Hogan’s given name) may be a nice guy, but the kind of values his occupation espouses have no place in a diverse democracy that can function only when people agree to work in a cooperative manner with those with which they disagree.  WWE may be good entertainment and a release for men; but kickboxing, pinning, submitting, and a general attitude of doing anything and everything to intimidate your opponent have no place in the White House.  Hogan said it best himself at the Republican National Convention when he called the Trump-Vance ticket, “The best tag team ever.” referring to a WWE match in which teams compete.

  Like the wrestlers that support him, Trump is a bully, constantly attempting to gain power through threat of force. The “tough guy” attitude that makes Trump so popular is also what makes him dangerous.  And he now has the world’s greatest military power behind him.

But this problem is bigger than Trump’s presidency.  As long as toxic masculinity endures, it will poison American democracy.  Part of defeating Trumpism over the long haul will mean finding healthy role models for young men–men who don’t solve problems through violence.  American democracy will not be truly safe until being a “real man” means wisdom, integrity, hard work, determination, and a belief in the power of the pen and the spoken word.  This, not Hulk Hogan, is what it means to be a “real American.”

Is Trump a fascist?  This seems to be the perennial question.  But it is not the most important question. Time and again, I am struck by how, if you stop and think, the conflicts around Trump have nothing to do with ideology.  It is important to not treat Trump as an ideolog.  That isn’t to say that he isn’t racist and transphobic.  It’s to say that his bigotry is not part of a cohesive set of arguments.  It is his personal prejudices combined with what he thinks is politically salient at any one given time and place.  His ideology is whatever he thinks it needs to be at that moment.  If we can hold out any hope for the next four years it is that Trump has said he believes anything and promised to do anything that mobilizes his base in the moment.  When it comes time to make good on those promises, it may prove harder than he thinks.  More importantly, the time may come when he has to prove that he truly believes the things he has said he believes.  It may become clear to those people whose ideas he has pledged loyalty to that he believes in nothing but his own desire for power.  

People say they like Trump’s policies even as they don’t like his character.  This is a cop out.  Character is central to democracy.  Actually, it’s impossible to have a properly functioning democracy when citizens and representatives lose sight of the fact that leaders in a democracy need to have certain moral characteristics.  No amount of checks and balances will protect a democracy if an entire party, or half of the electorate, abdicate their responsibility to ensure they support someone who holds basic democratic values.  This isn’t to, as they say, “blame the electorate.”  It is to point out that something has gone fundamentally wrong with the way America selects its leaders.  In our hyper-partisan environment, on both sides, character has taken a back seat to political litmus tests.  People have come to care only about a handful of divisive issues and not the big picture–the person they are helping to elect.  Political “nose holding” has become a way of life at the expense of American democracy.

What is at stake is just how screwed up the character of Trump and those that surround him really are.  Take Hegseth, for instance. What is most relevant is not what philosophical approach he is going to take as Secretary of Defense.  He is dangerous because he doesn’t have the character to serve his country.  He faces serious allegations of rape, and, perhaps even more importantly, has supported armed service personnel convicted of war crimes.  They can talk all they want, but in the end MAGA is a movement that cares nothing about the character of the people it sends to the government that is supposed to be serving the people.  And that is just plain wrong.  It is undemocratic.  Since when did character not count?