If you've read or followed this blog any length of time, you'll know that, in recent years, it's become something of a tradition to write a Fourth of July message. In 2020, we questioned where the COVID pandemic was taking us ("Merry Fourth Of July: Is This A Wake, Or What?"). In 2021, we took empty suits to task for intoning, "Nobody wants to work," even as ever-spiraling inequality continued to harden our nation's arteries ("Fourth Of July Notes (The Long Arc Bends Toward Justice? Suuure...").
In 2022, we called on readers to rally against the fallout of a post-Roe world ("The Roe Bombshell Drops: So What Happens From Here?"). And, in 2023, we attempted to inject a note of cautious optimism, on how we could carve out a better future for ourselves ("O Beautiful, For Spacious Skies (Say What?): Reclaiming Our Democratic Heritage").
Given all the cluster bombs of darkness that dropped left and right last week, it might be fair to ask whether if we've gotten a little ahead of our skis. But let me start with a basic proposition, to frame this year's message, and put that darkness into perspective.
As I write today, Britons are headed for a historic election, one that promises considerable electoral pain for the Conservative Party that pursued the disastrous Brexit referendum of 2016, and whose austerity politics have turned public opinion against it. Current projections show Keir Starmer will become the next Prime Minister, with his Labour Party expected to win 431 seats, to 102 for the Tories, and 72 for the Liberal Democrats.
Those numbers give Labour 212 seats, well above the margin needed to pass legislation in the House of Commons (326 out of 650). For Starmer, today's results represent a triumph that will greatly exceed the record majorities enjoyed by his predecessor, Tony Blair (179 votes, in 1997), and Britain's "Iron Lady," Margaret Thatcher (144 and 102 votes in 1983 and 1987, respectively).
In contrast, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's Conservatives are expected to lose 263 seats from the 2019 election, with the Liberal Democrats picking up a mere seven for themselves. Nigel Farage -- the man who did so much to engineer Brexit -- and his newly-minted Reform UK faction, will also gain a tiny foothold, with three seats. Adding to his humiliation, Sunak could become the first incumbent Prime Minister to lose his own seat (though his own race remains too close to call, apparently).
Various explanations have been advanced for the Conservatives' coming electoral bloodbath. The simplest center on the fallout of Brexit, with a majority of Britons now disowning it as a bad idea -- 57% or so, depending on which poll you read. After losing the European Union's collective bargaining power, and seeing none of the promised economic benefits of Brexit, most Britons have simply had enough.
And here in the US? As we observe our nation's 248th birthday, we stand on the verge of re-electing a convicted felon, an unhinged narcissist whose major goals focus on avoiding any legal accountability, dismantling America's democratic experiment, and pursuing all manner of real or imagined enemies. Polls have consistently shown a tight race, buoyed by Trump's rock-solid MAGA Bunny fanbase, who show little inclination of leaving the alternate universe that he's so adeptly created for them.
In other words, the fear that so many pundits have so confidently rebutted -- "Can't happen here, so move on, folks" -- is literally at our doorstep, with the promise of a full-on hellscape for anyone who isn't white, Christian nativist, and perpetually which tends to place a damper on the national birthday proceedings.
Never has the occasion rang so hollow, nor so glib; never has it felt so grubby, and so cheap. It's the sort of darkness that begs the question -- How, in the name of whatever gods you care to invoke, do we still find ourselves poised on the edge of turning back the clock, public opinion be damned?
<Some things never change, right?
It Must’ve Been Something They Hate Dept.
The MAD Primer of Bigots, Extremists
and Other Loose Ends: Chapter One - The Super Patriot
Written by: Frank Jacobs and Stan Hart
Artist: Jack Davis
MAD #129, Sept. 1969>
<ii.>
Two years ago, the landscape looked so different, when the threatened Republican "red wave" in the fall '22 midterms evaporated to a red ripple. Democratic candidates outpaced expectations, whether in special elections, or the abortion rights referendums that passed overwhelmingly -- starting with Kansas, a state that's hardly a liberal hotbed.
The restoration of Donald Trump also looked a long way off, as the former President grappled with a string of legal cases that promised to keep him eternally preoccupied -- from civil suits for fraud and sexual assault (NY), to a major racketeering case involving fake electors (GA), and the threat of trials for keeping classified materials (FL), and attempting to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power (Washington, DC).
Surely, conventional wisdom suggested, the courts would make mincemeat of the man variously dubbed The Mango McBeth, The Orange Menace, or The One-Man Crime Wave, take your pick -- that, if President Biden didn't land the first hammer blow. That assumption looks misplaced, following Biden's lackluster showing in last week's so-called "debate" against Trump -- who's also gloating at the massive victories that his hand-picked Supreme Court "Justices" have handed him, in terms of expanding the kingly immunity that his .
The less said about the debate, the better, though in fairness to Biden, a more nuanced scorecard might read like this: his first 10 minutes were undoubtedly the worst, followed by a wobbly, stiff first half, and a somewhat stronger, more resolute-sounding second half. However, the most relevant point -- as you'll see, from David Frum's simple, but eloquent summary (see link below) -- is why anyone would platform a failed coup leader in the first place.
Still, it's hard to fathom why Biden stepped into this particular box canyon, once CNN announced that it wouldn't provide a live fact checker to counter Trump's verbal barrage -- allowing him, yet again, an ideal platform to lie unchecked at the speed of light That left the candidates to police themselves, with the usual dire results, while the so-called moderators twiddled their thumbs. Eight years after the debacle of 2016, the mainstream media still resembles the Bourbon kings of France -- having forgotten nothing, and learned nothing, at the same time.
The notion of a failed coup leader running to regain mastery of the system that he tried so hard to overthrow seems like the stuff of 70-era s black comedy -- until we begin to ponder where that leaves us. Instead of asking, "Is this who we are," maybe we need to wonder, "Is this what we've become? Have we really fallen so far?" The answers, as we'll see, are not pleasant to contemplate.
<Found On Facebook (...I Think):
We'll take it down, if anyone complains (thanks)!>
<iii.>
All right, then. Let's try to game out the unthinkable. What would a Trump dictatorship actually look like? For simplicity's sake, we'll assume that Biden survives his post-debate debacle, and stays on the ticket, but loses anyway in November. An equally important consideration is whether his party goes down with him, or rallies to retake the House, and retain the Senate.
In that case, a Democratic-controlled Congress could offer a significant roadblock to Trump's dictatorial ambitions. It's equally possible that the current muddle continues, with the Democrats clinging to their razor-thin Senate majority, and the Republicans doing likewise in the House. That situation muddies the waters, but would pose at least a short-term obstacle for any Trump restoration to navigate.
So let's assume the worst. What if Republicans retook Congress, along with the Presidency, as they did under Trump, in 2016? On paper, then, the road to autocracy looks far less imposing, depending on whether Trump could implement the infamous Schedule F executive order -- as he did, during his final weeks in office, until Biden canceled it, and, as Project 2025 threatens -- to install a sufficient army of lackeys to do his bidding.
Such measures would certainly stoke a barrage of legal challenges, though it would be wise not to imagine the so-called Supreme Court's right-wing majority giving them any great weight. Trump's appointees -- Neil Gorsuch (2017), Brett Kavanaugh (2018), and Amy Coney Barrett (2024) have broken with their patron, from time to time, but not in any meaningful way.
Certainly, last week's bombshell immunity ruling by the Extreme Supremes, as I call them, is enough to mitigate any disappointments that Trump might have felt toward them in the past. In any case, as impatient as he is, Trump would hardly wait for any legal fallout. Even without Schedule F, he's promised to unleash the full weight of his deportation machine on Day One -- as well as invoking the Insurrection Act -- to mow down the pesky hordes of protesters that would greet his restoration.
He would likely incite his Congressional allies to further bolster his power by passing a series of measures, under the guise of "restoring public order," or invoking some imagined public health emergency or other, to build "tent cities" for the homeless -- as he's already threatened aloud. Those same cities would soon accommodate a growing list of Trump bogeymen and women -- gay and trans people, advocacy group and on-governmental employers -- with specialized gulags saved for higher-profile targets, perhaps, like the January 6th Congressional investigating committee members.
On the legislative side, a different nightmare will unfold, with Republicans unlocking the magic wand of reconciliation -- which allows bills to pass with simple majorities, as part of the budget process. They could then pursue other cherished white whales, such as privatizing Social Security, or converting Medicare to a block grant program, for example, leaving millions to an uncertain fate of permanent impoverishment.
Change would probably come for Trump's judicial enablers, as well. At 73 and 75, respectively, Sam Alito and his evil twin, Clarence Thomas, would face enormous pressure to retire, and make way for younger versions of themselves, leaving them free to enjoy the mountain of largesse they've accepted so happily, for so much of their over-privileged lives.
Or maybe not. It's easy to imagine a newly-dictatorial Trump simply disbanding the court, once he longer needs its patronage. That outcome would parallel the fates of other autocratic lapdogs, like Adolf Hitler's Foreign Minister, Joachim von Ribbentrop, whose influence waned drastically after 1939 -- once World War II broke out, leaving him precious little policy to conduct.
This nightmare scenario wouldn't happen overnight, as is true of so many countries that backslide into dictatorship. It's worth remembering that Nazi Germany's most fearsome death camp, Auschwitz, began with the conversion of an abandoned army barracks in the spring of 1940, to absorb masses of Polish dissenters that local prisons could no longer accommodate. It remained very much an afterthought in the camp system, until the first mass exterminations began, at the start of 1942. As this example shows, the greatest of evils often take time to make themselves felt, which explains why resistance often doesn't materialize -- after they've gained a foothold.
<Down With Tyranny (https://www.downwithtyranny.com/)>
<iv.>
Trump's improvisational talents will undoubtedly prove a major asset in taking America down the dictatorial highway. This brings us back to last week's ruling, which gives him absolute immunity for acts that fall under his core constitutional powers; presumptive immunity, for acts within the "outer perimeter" of his duties; and no immunity for private, or unofficial, acts.
However, there's a catch. The Extreme Supremes also forbade prosecutors from using evidence of official acts to build cases for crimes that a President may commit outside of their role. It means that a jury might never hear about Trump's conversations with Mike Pence, whom he pressured to avoid certifying Joe Biden's election in 2020, which preceded the storming of the Capitol building.
Similarly, cases for bribery or obstruction of justice -- in which motive typically plays a central part -- would also be off-limits. The 6-3 decision that unleashed this travesty of reasoning gives little or no guidance for lower courts, while preserving the ability "to second guess whatever they do," as Greg Germain, a law professor at Syracuse University, told Newsweek.
If you want a better way of laying down the groundwork for a future dictatorship -- we'd like to see it.
Imagine, if you dare, the horrific picture of Trump-directed US troops mowing down protesters by the hundreds, or thousands, during a march on our nation's capital. Call it Kent State on steroids, or Charlottesville X 100. But Trump could get away with it, presumably, as long as he puts on his presidential hat, by wrapping himself in the cloak of the Insurrection Act -- whose language would allow him to "take such measures as he considers necessary" to suppress "any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy." No wonder that it's among the only laws for which he expresses any admiration, or respect.
The irony of giving such a free pass to the same man who has yet to face any accountability for the torrent of violence that he unleashed on January 6, 2021, against those who dared to oppose him, needs no additional elaboration.
<The Shape Of Things To Come? Hopefully Not!
"Invasion Of The Body Snatchers" Parody (MAD Magazine, 9/78
Art: Mort Drucker/RIP: Donald Sutherland>
<v.>
However, now is not the time to wallow in despair, when we have neither the time, nor the luxury. As Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett stated, during an interview with MSNBC: "It is so wild to me, and it's been quite annoying, if I'm going to be perfectly honest, that Democrats get into a frenzy. I mean, it is almost like we are scared of our shadow, sometimes. And I think it is because we understand the stakes."
The first two sentences of Crockett's response are exemplary, though the last one is debatable. If anything, Biden's faltering debate performance showed him trying to do far too many things at once -- rebutting a Trump lie here, trotting out a few stats there, and somewhere in between, continuing to argue his rival's unfitness for the office. However, we can think of a few ways for Biden to reclaim his mojo.
Start by downshifting the elaborate, PBS-style approach that's characterized Biden's campaign so far. Stop getting so lost in the statistical weeds -- which didn't work for Hillary Clinton in 2016, either -- and leave that grunt work to surrogates like Vice President Harris. That's what they signed up for, after all. One day, they can pass that chore onto someone else, when they seek the Oval Office.
Sharpen the campaign to three or four key themes, focused around the reality of who Donald Trump is, and what he intends -- with a special focus on the Extreme Supremes and the mainstream media, the only institutions more unpopular than Biden. Given how often they step on their rakes, it shouldn't be a hard case to make.
Highlight the real threat that the Extreme Supremes' immunity ruling poses, in particular, for pulling our democracy apart at the seams. Tie that greater case into the need for a Congress that will allow Democrats to pass laws that will measurably improve peoples' lives -- such as federal heat protections for outdoor workers, as Biden proposed on Monday.
And if elections really are about the next generation, it's high time for Democrats to begin ushering in new leadership. (Where have we said that before, right?) There is something surreal about the mainstream media continuing to wheel out Clinton-era consultant James Carville, who hasn't worked a domestic election in decades, as some sort of all-seeing oracle. Really? If that's the best we can do, we're in a lot of trouble.
There'd be less need for such a spectacle, if the likes of AOC, Cori Bush, Ro Khanna, Ayanna Presley, and Jamie Raskin -- to name several of the usual suspects -- were called to take on greater roles than they do now, instead of hearing, "Shut up and wait your turn for the next 20 or 30 years, until somebody finally dies off." There is ample talent on the bench, but if nobody capitalizes on
Last, but not least, the Democratic Party needs to start thinking bigger, as it once did, so well. Yes, continue prosecuting the case against Trump, but don't leave it there. The fracturing of Biden's coalition is largely driven by young people's discontent that's boiling in the inequities baked into our society, one that the older generation of Boomer politicians stoutly continues to defend, even as they continue to profit by it. How many non-Boomer landlords or bankers do you know personally?
As a recipe for a functioning democracy, it is a disaster, which is why we cannot allow it to fester. Yes, Biden's failure to effectively address the Gaza situation is also part of that puzzle, but hardly the only one. Without a robust response to the economic pain that so many are feeling, the sugar high of Trumpism -- fueled by its cocktail of class resentment, and populist aggrievement -- will remain difficult to refute.
But the sooner we start, the better. Only then will we meet the test posed in Benjamin Franklin's celebrated response, when asked how he envisioned the United States of America unfolding, in practical terms: "A republic, if you can keep it." Let us keep those words in mind, as we enter the fight of our lives, one that we must win -- until next year's July Fourth message -- and hopefully, one that finds us all in better circumstances. --The Reckoner
Links To Go (Hurry, Hurry,
Our Previous July Fourth Messages:
<https://www.downwithtyranny.com/>
