politics – Page 2 – Progressive Without Apology

What if You Get it Wrong?

One thing is utterly lost on DOGE. The federal government is not a corporation. He is unable to understand that a government agency does more than just spend appropriated money. Government agencies have very specific purposes–intangible purposes. USAID, for instance, its purpose is American soft power. The problem is that you can’t put a dollar value on that, and therefore in Musk’s mind it has no purpose. But government is about all the things in life that you can’t put a dollar value on.

Take something as seemingly economic as farm subsidies. Being from a rural state I have seen Washington politicians convince themselves that things like crop insurance are solely economic matters. Anybody who lives here will tell you differently. The politics of farm subsidies is about what kind of farming we will have–the life and death of the family farm. What seems to be a matter of mere money is in actuality an existential fight about what it means to be a farmer. Money is not the point.

All of government works this way. Things that seem to be about dollars and cents are really about the things that cannot be bought and sold. By ensuring the government meets the needs of vulnerable populations, Social Security protects our democracy. The Education Department provides oversight, ensuring kids have the resources they need to learn. Expertise is a resource that cannot be bought.

The biggest problem with Mr. Musk is recklessness. When SpaceX fails a rocket blows up. When the government fails, a generation of children are not able to function as workers and citizens. A “move fast and break things” approach may work in the corporate world where the worst thing that could happen is for your venture to go bankrupt. But if the government goes bankrupt there is a lot more at stake than man never making it to Mars. Millions of people will have their lives impacted in really serious ways. I am all for reform. Washington does need to be shaken up. But no one has the right to just put a stop to the business of government. If Twitter shuts down while Musk remakes the company people can’t Tweet. If Musk shuts down USAID for a while millions of people who rely on emergency food aid will be in danger of dying of hunger.

What we have never heard from anyone in the Trump team is an acknowledgement of the terrible responsibility that rests on their shoulders. These people may be the smartest people in the room in Silicon Valley, but that doesn’t mean they are psychologically equipped to deal with a situation in which mistakes cannot be made, and where you have to get it right the first time. We can live without Twitter. Millions of people here and all over the world cannot live without the American government. With power comes responsibility. Have Trump and Musk ever, in their hubris, ever stopped to consider the consequences if they get this wrong?

More Than Just Four Years

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.

“Great Again” When?

Whatever has been is what will be, and whatever has been done is what will be done. There is nothing new beneath the sun!

Ecclesiastes 9:1 Stone Edition Tanach

Trump’s promise to “Make America Great Again” has one glaring flaw. When exactly was “Great?” Rather than restoring America to a former glory, he is refusing to learn from history. For instance, his hostility toward USAID. We take USAID for granted now, but it only became important as America struggled to win the Cold War. In the beginning, America believed in fighting the Cold War solely through military might. Then we learned the importance of soft power and the war of ideas–that the world viewing America as committed to human rights was as important as being a superpower.

Trump’s shocking and utterly unworkable idea to remove Palestinians has been tried before as well, several times. Ironically, one effort was made by USAID. They moved Palestinians to Jordan, hoping they would see themselves as Jordanian. It didn’t work. It became clear that the Palestinians were a people with a homeland and were not going to go willingly. They were displaced once and were not going to be displaced again. The world moved forward and came to understand that a two state solution was needed–except Trump, who insists on repeating history and telling the world it is something new.

Stocking a federal bureaucracy on the basis of loyalty isn’t a new idea either. It was called the “spoils system.” But the rest of us don’t want to return to the 1880’s, before the Pendleton Act established a merit based process for hiring civil servants. It would take a long time for the merit based system to take hold. But as it did people understood it as a step forward. Ironically, the main reason the merit based system was instituted was to increase efficiency.

Furthermore, it is not as if transgender people have never encountered laws that force them into the closet. Not so long ago people went to jail for dressing in “drag”. Cross-dressing was kept secret and if discovered lives would be ruined. It was accepted that gender dysphoria was a mental illness. Then we had the Stonewall Uprising, and the movement it sparked. Transgender people became recognized members of society.

The last two generations have brought negative changes as America has transformed socioeconomically. But this isn’t the first time America has faced such changes. During the Gilded Age, America transitioned from an agrarian economy to an industrial one. There were real problems, like child labor and tainted food. But America did not return to an agrarian economy. We passed child labor laws. Harvey Wiley and his Poison Squad laid the foundation for the FDA. America had to adapt to seismic changes; it could not return to the past.

We should be careful when we use the word “unprecedented” to describe Trump. There are precedents to his backward and dangerous ideas. They exist far back in the annals of the history he is repeating. Trump isn’t making America great again. He is rolling back hundreds of years of human progress, not returning America to a storied past.

A Way of Making America Poor Again

A good name is better than much fine oil.

Ethics of the Fathers Chapter 6 Mishna 7

Donald Trump is promising to make America rich again by using the power of the purse to intimidate our allies. In Trump’s over-simplified universe, all we have to do is intimidate people to get what we want. Since America is an economic and military power-house, it ought to be able to get everything it wants.

But there is another kind of capital that Trump is burning through with record speed–political capital–the good graces of our allies and the respect of our adversaries. For instance, we stand to lose a lot if we alienate Canada. Taking the attitude that Canada is a less rich country and therefore we will simply ignore Canada’s wants and needs, and disregard its interests, is foolhardy. Someday we will need the Canadians; or we will find that we would have been a hell of a lot better off for having their trust and cooperation on some matter of mutual importance. Why tear down this relationship? Trudeau may mollify Trump, but even now the Canadian people have begun to sour on America.

This reckless attitude toward the goodwill of our friends and allies is no different than someone who believes that they have an endless supply of money. Eventually, they end up bankrupt. Trump will burn through American political capital only to find we need something we cannot get simply by throwing our weight around.

Take Columbia–yes, we can throw our economic might in this small, poor country’s face, deciding that we should be able to have all we want simply because we are bigger and might makes right. But why? Why throw away a perfectly good relationship? It is ironic that Trump claims that the flow of drugs into the US is one of his top priorities and then deliberately alienates one of America’s most important allies in stopping the flow of illegal drugs. Sure we are bigger than Columbia, but that doesn’t mean they have nothing to offer us. The diplomatic relationship is still worth a lot. And Columbia knows that. A time will come when we need something from the Columbians that we cannot cajole them into providing. A moment will arise when the political capital we have invested in for years will prove invaluable to the interests of America, and will have a real-world impact on our everyday lives.

It’s almost impossible to make some other country share intelligence. The benefits of a stable economy in a troubled region are something that cannot be obtained by coercion. Aid and democracy efforts keep people from becoming migrants in the first place. Our interests extend beyond our borders.

There are things America needs and wants that bullying cannot afford us. There are more things for which bullying is the really hard way. I’m not asking anybody to be a bleeding heart liberal. Political capital is necessary. It’s about being pragmatic. Just as no one person has an endless supply of money, no one nation can address all of its interests by projecting intimidation.

Breathe Deep

We all need to chill. We need to think about what we are doing and why we are doing it. Like the MacCarthy era, or Salem 1692, this has all the classic characteristics of a witch hunt. We are allowing ourselves to be caught up in mass hysteria. There is a problem at the Southern border. It doesn’t mean immigrants are responsible for all our problems. No, we can’t just ignore illegal immigration. That too is a band-aid. It means we need to strike a balance between recognizing immigrants have much to offer and, yes, no country can function without a border. Yes, a small minority of people who cross the border illegally are truly criminals. Yes, the undocumented have committed a crime by crossing. Most are desperate.

Think about it; how much money would I have to pay you to walk through the Darien Gap? It is 60 miles and can take 10 days. The mud can literally swallow you whole. If you don’t dehydrate in the densest jungles on earth or die from exhaustion walking up steep mountains, you could get eaten by jaguars. It can cost as much as $500.

Despite this, there is a $30 million a year industry guiding the 400,000 people who crossed in 2024. One of the reasons the number is so high is efforts to stop illegal immigration. Mexico tightened its borders so Venezuelans could no longer get in by plane. 40,000 chose the Darien Gap instead. The Trump administration believes migrants living in fear of ICE will deter illegal immigration. If they weren’t afraid of the jaguars…

Are the cartels pedaling fentanyl terrorist organizations? I lost a friend to the opioid epidemic; no one can claim I am soft on drug dealers. But there is no invasion. Everybody has drug dealers; everybody struggles with illegal drugs crossing their border. A lot of the people in this “invasion” are unaccompanied minors–children. Most are families. Many of those children are escaping gangs. They want what we want, what all people want: a safe place to live, a way to make a living. They want the things people want because they are human.

It is appropriate to deport non-citizens who have committed serious crimes. But America has the world’s most sophisticated law enforcement; we can separate the sheep from the goats. We have too many native born citizens committing violent crimes to waste resources tracking down tax-payers whose only crime is being desperate enough to walk through a jungle in search of a better life.

Why exactly did undocumented workers rise to the forefront of the threats to America? Trump hypocritically pardons the Proud Boys and then says our undocumented co-workers and neighbors pose a threat. The most destructive aspect of Trump’s effort will be how it convinces federal agencies to take their eye off the ball of real threats to the nation–like the domestic terrorists he pardoned.

America had immigration problems before Trump. Now, it has all those problems and xenophobia.

Toxic to 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.”

The Limits of Martyrdom

Trump seems to have gotten away with it. However, over time and with careful pressure there is hope yet that Trump’s legal troubles–and some kind of accountability–will follow him into his next term. There is hope that the accumulation of legal problems will undercut Trump’s real or perceived mandate to govern. Eventually, something will stick. Trump has vulnerabilities or he wouldn’t be fighting every attempt to have the truth come out.

Trump displayed his weakness when he felt he had to go after a legacy news agency for misstating the difference between “sexual abuse” and “rape” in reference to E. Jean Carroll’s lawsuit. His need to parse words, and to defame Carrol, shows that he is not as invulnerable as he wants us to believe. His moral troubles may prove more resilient than his purely legal ones. E Jean Carrol is still bravely moving forward with her suit. Her’s is perhaps the most important because it calls Trump out for what he is–morally bankrupt and concerned only with escaping accountability.

Trump has famously claimed that he could shoot someone in broad daylight and get away with it. But that doesn’t mean he can do whatever he wants for any length of time. Eventually, what he does will catch up with him. Granted, there may be a group of people surrounding him that are so fanatically dedicated to him that nothing will cause them to change their minds. But the people who got him into the white house were not that fanatically devoted to him. They gave into his lies about how he could and would improve their lives. Trump’s claim, for instance, that he would lower the price of groceries. This is actually an economic impossibility. Deflation is the worst thing that can happen to an economy. What needs to happen is for real wages to rise enough for incomes to catch up to prices. This will occur on its own–Trump or no Trump.

So, there is a group of people with whom Trump is very vulnerable. The question is how to reach them–or maybe what to reach them with. It is a matter of finding what matters to the right people at the right time. And that takes really understanding why people voted for Trump in the first place. It takes getting your head around why all of this man’s immorality did not disqualify him in the minds of average American voters.

One thing is for sure, an unconditional discharge isn’t going to help; it is a major setback. It puts to rest something that should have followed Trump into the White House. But even with an unconditional discharge, Trump is still a felon. And we do have a report by the special council saying that he would have been convicted. That is not nothing. And it is telling what lengths Trump has gone to to suppress it. It shows us that there are limits to his ability to cast himself as a martyr oppressed by the deep state.

Old Mistakes and a New Syria

It is a time of both hope and uncertainty for the Syrian people. Assad is gone and the international community has an opportunity to strike a blow against terrorism around the world. But will the ones taking over take over–will they even be able to hold onto power? For now the rebel groups seem content to work under the leadership of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), but when the legislative process begins will they be able to hold a diverse country together?

According to Trump and the doctrine of “America First,” what is going on in Syria does not affect America. But “America First” really means “America Only” i.e. America alone in the world.

The problem with isolationism is that in the modern real world there’s no way for any one country to live in isolation from events in another. If the US and the international community don’t act, Syria may very well become yet another base of international terrorism. We can bring stability to Syria now, or we can be forced into a foreign war when a terrorist threat we absolutely cannot ignore develops. Not acting in Syria risks yet another failed state and yet another forever war. Skillful diplomacy and engagement can prevent not only the next conflict in Syria, but help put an end to conflicts throughout the region.

Furthermore, if the US wants to have legitimacy on the world stage it has to take the moral high ground, and make human rights a priority. Otherwise, “America First” will mean “America Alone–” isolated and without the political capital it needs during the next crisis.

America is at a moment when it risks making the same mistake it has made time and time again. We know this story. International pressure and wars against terrorists have finally brought down a dictator. But the absence of a governing force proves even more devastating than authoritarianism. With the war over, will we lose the peace? Right now the international community doesn’t seem to know what to make of the rebel forces. HTS started the business of running the country, and that certainly is a good sign. But no one seems to know for sure whether they are inclusive and relatively moderate or yet another Islamist regime in the Middle East.

What worries me the most is that Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) seems to be having an identity crisis of its own. America and the international community cannot afford to lose this opportunity to apply the pressure necessary to ensure that HTS understands that it is in its interests to pursue a moderate agenda, and to keep any hard-liners within its ranks away from power. HTS has a history of being a terrorist organization. That doesn’t necessarily mean it has to have a future as a terrorist organization.

Truly putting “America First” means understanding that what happens in other parts of the world affects us here at home. It is a simple reality of the modern world that cannot ever be avoided.

What to do about Kash Patel?

Given Trump’s pick to head the FBI, it is clear we are in for a long four years. The most important thing is to get ready to fight. But fight how? What are progressives–and for that matter conservatives and moderates who care about democracy–going to do about this sycophantic lackey?

Much attention has been given to the prospect of intensive litigation, and that has its place. But litigation alone will not be enough with a Supreme Court stacked with Trump appointees. Litigation will be hard when the opposition knows that if they appeal to the highest court in the land they will win, and progressive organizations will be out tremendous amounts of money on failed legal efforts.

That isn’t to say we should all throw our hands up and sink into despair. Trump is unwilling and incapable of delivering on promises to fix what is broken in the American government. Instead, MAGA embodies dysfunction: hyperpartisanship, an unwillingness to go about the business of government, caring about one’s own power above what is best for one’s constituents, gridlock. This is MAGA’S Achilles heel.

Patel will never deliver on his promises to reform. Instead, he will compound the dysfunction he says he is prepared to eliminate. When it becomes clear that reform is not a part of his agenda, we need to be there to make sure the world, and I mean the whole world, knows it. With the American people distracted with polarization, international pressure may become a critical component of any resistance against a second Trump presidency.

It begins now. As the nomination process moves forward, it is abundantly clear that “reform” is a smokescreen. We know Patel exists solely to carry out Trump’s bidding. The question is how to convey that message in a meaningful and convincing way. This sounds simple enough, but in actuality it will prove to be very difficult, demanding work. But it can and must be done. The point is to start the conversation and start the conversation as quickly as possible.

We need to frame the argument in simple terms–MAGA and Patel are a future disaster for the functioning of the American government. Eventually, Patel will prove inept. Patel will weaken the ability of the FBI to do its job. He will create chaos, or worse yet so distract the Bureau as to make it impossible for them to do their job. An institution Americans both rely on and take for granted will be hobbled. Patel’s “reforms” are going to further weaken an agency the American people rely on in their everyday lives. When the Bureau just isn’t there, people will think twice about Trump’s promises.

Right now, the American electorate is distracted with a disconnect between what the numbers and economists say and the realities of people’s economic lives. But they are taking their institutions for granted. When the real-world consequences of an appointment like Patel’s hit, many Americans will begin to regret their vote.

Left, Right, Forward, and Backward

As Democrats commence with an “autopsy” of their defeat by Donald Trump and his lackeys, over and over it is being said that part of the problem is that Democrats took a position “too far to the left” on the issue of transgender rights. The goals of the Democratic party were not in step with the political middle of America. They should have staked out a position less “extreme.” There is something to be said for the idea that Democrats’ standing up for transgender rights helped Donald Trump win the White House. The most effective ads against Kamala Harris were the ones that targeted her support for a tiny but increasingly important minority.

Having said that, there is no “left” when supporting transgender rights. Either you do or you don’t. Admittedly, Kamala Harris was between a rock and a hard place. Supporting transgender rights may have cost her the election. Not supporting transgender rights would be a betrayal of everything that the Democrats were fighting for in the first place.

If the transgender community were really asking for “extreme” things–a.k.a. incremental progress–I might feel differently. I might say take the fight one step at time and be patient. Changing hearts and minds takes time. But that was not what was at stake in this election cycle. Transgender people are under attack from all sides. People are having to move out of state to get health care. The simple act of having to go to the bathroom is now a contentious issue. Increasingly, transgender people do not feel safe. More importantly, the people in the business of making them feel safe are being criminalized. People fail to connect to the reality of how unsafe any environment, even a home environment, can be for transgender people. This is not a “cultural” issue. It is a bigotry issue.

The reality of it is there is a serious and frightening backlash against the progress transgender people have made over the last generation. If Kamala Harris wanted to campaign on not going back, she could not and should not have ignored the need for people to stand up for transgender rights. People are not supporting bills to roll back transgender rights because they are “more moderate.” They are rolling back transgender rights because a small but vocal minority has been extremely successful at reigniting familiar tropes and stereotypes about transgender people. The mood of the nation is moving backward. The American electorate is regressing. The legislation that has been passed is predicated on ridiculous myths and conspiracy theories. Transgender people are “grooming” children. They are predators in locker rooms. My favorite one was the Trump campaign’s claim that schools were facilitating sex change operations for transgender teens without parental permission or knowledge, something universally regarded as unethical.

This kind of rhetoric is about making transgender people targets of discrimination, exclusion, and hate. Ultimately, there is no right or left to transgender rights. There is forward–and there is backward.