Cathy Young linked to a pro-Trump poster who proposed at opponents write down their worst fears and compare them to what actually happens. He assured us that it will be reassuring, and should give us pause as to why he had such fears in the first place. I attempted to do just that with decidedly mixed results.**
Young's general assessment was:
- Rule of law: Complete disregard for any personal rights in immigrants, undermining of court orders, but so far without open defiance, and the arrest of a judge who did not cooperate in what looks like an attempt to intimidate the judiciary.
- Legal retribution against opponents: Not as bad as his calls for televised military tribunals, but retaliation against law firms that opposed him in the 2020 election and calls to investigate cybersecurity expert Chris Krebs for saying the 2020 election was secure.
- Pardon for January 6 insurrectionists: Yes.
- Freedom of the press: Trump brought a frivolous lawsuit against CBS 60 Minutes for routine edits of a Kamala Harris interview, sued the Des Moines Register for an erroneous poll that showed him losing in Iowa, and urged FCC investigation of CBS stories he disliked and is broadly hinting that the future of a merger involving CBS' parent corporation depends on their coverage. So, not good. But (although the article does not mention this) thus far the second Trump term, like the first, has featured an administration that leaks like a sieve and proved a positive spur to investigative journalism by outlets who know that they will never get the truth from him.
- Immigration: The worst has absolutely come about with men shipped off to a brutal prison without due process, children who are US citizens (including cancer patients) deported, attempts to turn Afghan Christians over the the Taliban, deportation proceedings against foreign students for constitutionally protected free speech, authority to enter homes without a warrant and deport without a hearing, cruelty porn videos, harassment of US citizens.
- Ruinous trade wars: Well, duh!
- Self-sabotage as leader of the free world: Again, duh!
- Betrayal of Ukraine: Trump's behavior has been endlessly vacillating, with cutoff in Ukrainian aid, restoration of Ukrainian aid, attempts at negotiation leading nowhere, and threats to sanction Russia with no follow-up. Still, it could be worse. . . .
- Attack on health institutions: Trump promised to name RFK, Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services. Many people didn't expect him to follow through, but he did, and RFK, Jr. has not notably moderated in office. She lists this one was significantly worse than her worst fears. (I agree).
- Appointees who were unqualified at best and completely nuts at worst: Tulsi Gabbard, Kash Patel, Dan Bongino, Ed Martin, Pete Hegseth. Yep!***
- Pushing for a third term: He is putting out feelers. To early to say how it will turn out.
- A popularity completely impervious to facts: That one, at least, has not come about. Young sees it as our one ray of hope.
Nick Grossman takes up the issue of what we have learned in the first 100 days about resistance:
[T]he administration can be delayed, spread thin, confused, frustrated, overwhelmed. The more they stall out, the fewer people they hurt, and the less appealing they look to all but the most cultish supporters.
They have limited time and attention.
They have limited control over the executive branch, and with Elon Musk’s DOGE are destroying significant government capacity.
They have limited resources and personnel. Yes, they have awful people in key positions, but they don’t yet have loyalists all the way up and down the Department of Justice, the FBI, the military, or the intelligence services. They’re having difficulty finding lawyers willing to argue absurdities in court.
Smarter authoritarians would have coasted on the positive economic trends they inherited, gradually purging the government of law-followers and installing loyalists. The Trump team started smashing things and bullying in many directions as soon as they got power.
Above all, he argues, do not yield to any "unreasonable, unethical government demand." Resist instead. Columbia yielded and got only escalating demands. Harvard resisted and has met with retaliation. But (Grossman points out), part of the reason for seeking to make an example of an elite university or two is that the Administration probably does not have the resources to take on all universities in the United States at the same time.
In other words, Grossman agrees with my overall assessment of fighting Trump. Enforcement power in this country is extremely diffuse. The Federal government lacks the resources to impose its will by force on the country without cooperation from local authorities (and possibly vigilantes). Its real power lies in its ability to withhold money. My view was that the best way to fight Trump was to plan for how to deal with a cutoff in federal funding. Grossman makes another point I had not thought of. The weakness of this card is that it can only be played once.**** His advice to universities -- band together to meet the challenge. The Administration can't control all universities in the country at once.d
His advice to judges is similar. When a Wisconsin state judge was arrested for directing a man in her courtroom to leave through a door not blocked by ICE agents, another judge vowed to do the same. Grossman urged state judges everywhere to do the same. The feds can't arrest every state judge. He also urged federal judges not to uphold Trump's illegal actions for fear that he would defy their order. He has undermined some orders and may openly defy others, but he is obeying others. To refuse to rule against Trump for fear of defiance is simply submission in advance. Even partial compliance by the Administration reduces the damage it does.
Of course, this recommendation ignores an important detail. A large portion of the country supports Trump and his actions. But that only emphasizes the importance of undermining his popularity. And Grossman believes that making people aware of Trump's lawlessness, including defiance of court orders, will make him more and more unpopular.
I am not sure I agree with that last. I am inclined to think that what is most likely to make Trump unpopular is economic issues, and that everything else will follow. But the real point, once again, is that Trump is breaking Rule Number One of Smart Authoritarians -- save the unpopular stuff until after you have consolidated complete power.
__________________________________
*Yes, I know, we are almost a month past the 100 day mark and that there have been disturbing changes since then, but bear with me.
**In general, I found he was causing much more senseless destruction of completely unideological programs than I ever feared, but less targeted harassment. His reign of terror against immigrants but as bad as I feared, but more in the form of arrests of people complying with immigration law and less in the form of workplace raids and use of the National Guard. And his damages to healthcare was just insane.
***Ed Martin was ultimately withdrawn, but that was after the first 100 days.
***Ed Martin was ultimately withdrawn, but that was after the first 100 days.
****Neither he nor I foresaw the next, devastating, escalation against Harvard --barring foreign students.
No comments:
Post a Comment