Now, here is a scary thought, raised by Daniel Block, as editor at Washington Monthly: What happens in 2020 if Trump loses the election but refuses to give up the office? What if he says the election was rigged, hundreds of thousands of illegals voted, and simply says he won’t give up the presidency? What if the supine Republican party leaders agree with him? What if he challenges the election in court? What if he calls up the armed forces to keep him in office? What if he asks his “Second Amendment people” to barricade the White House?
when I first read this article, it read almost like a satire. Since then, Trump has tweeted that he should get an extra two years added to his first term because of the time “wasted” by the Mueller investigation. His aides say he was only joking. But his craziest ideas begin as jokes, then become reality. We know how little regard he has for the Constitution. He thinks he was elected to be dictator or emperor of president for life.
The scariest part of the questions is that we are even considering this to be a realistic possibility.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Why on earth are we giving Trump ideas?! We can’t operate out of fear. We are, through articles like this, inventing fears of Trump that are terribly counterproductive. The American public is fickle and will get bored of Trump just like we get bored of everyone. We have to stop treating Trump like he’s exceptional. This is how he wants us to treat him. But in actuality, he is an incredibly flawed politician. We have to stop treating him as anything more than that.
LikeLike
Seconded.
LikeLike
momtropolis writes: “But in actuality, he is an incredibly flawed politician. We have to stop treating him as anything more than that.”
Yes, but Trump holds the Office of Presidency–and so it’s not that easy: they are unified in our thought of him and it. And so the Office requires our respect if we are to hold together as unified. Trump does NOT.
So the point is to DISTINGUISH TRUMP from the OFFICE, . . . we need to still reserve our respect for and protect that Office–from Trump. He wants to be a dictator, but the Office is identical with its Oath (of Office), which he started violating the moment he took it.
Here’s my new name for him: Tin-Pot-Trump. CBK
LikeLike
“But in actuality, he is an incredibly flawed politician.”
That’s exactly what Republicans said about Nixon when they demanded that the Democrats shut down the Watergate hearings. It’s always shocking to hear people sounding like the Nixon apologists who insisted all his crimes should have been covered up and the Watergate hearings shut down.
All I can say is I am glad the Democrats didn’t listen to people like these posters in 1972 and 1973 who insisted that Nixon should be allowed to do whatever he wanted and demanded that Democrats ignore it.
The people who tried to NORMALIZE Richard Nixon were wrong.
And those that post here that we should normalize Trump are also wrong.
And I ask them, do they believe the country would be better off if Nixon had been free to do whatever he wanted because the Democrats were too scared to hold hearings and bring the truth to the public?
Are you upset the Democrats didn’t listen to people like you who were demanding that Nixon be allowed to do whatever he wanted and Watergate was a “nothingburger”? Are you upset that Democrats had the Watergate hearings? Or are still you angry about the Watergate hearings because you believe Nixon’s actions were perfectly fine?
Some of us believe that Watergate hearings were vital for our democracy. Others wish Nixon’s cover up could have been successful. These posts that normalize Trump speak for themselves.
LikeLike
Okay, have it your way. Let’s not ignore Trump. Let’s imagine the worst case scenario and plan for it. Let’s say that Trump refuses to leave the White House. What are you going to do about it? What’s the point of this discussion? Are you actually planning anything here? Are you prepared to take personal risks and make personal sacrifices?
Or are you just hyperventilating, which is exactly what Trump wants you to do and he enjoys it very much?
LikeLiked by 1 person
dienne Who cares what Trump wants. That’s the point. It’s not about what we want or what he wants. It’s about sticking with the U.S. Constitution and his own Oath of Office. And btw, not cow-towing to bullying that towering pile of bull excrement. I do like the handcuffs idea.
But if enough of “The People” don’t wake up from their dream (see my other note), then guess what: they’ll wake up . . . to a dictatorship where Nixon’s enemies list will look like political fluff.
If the possibility of THAT happening is the risk we (and Congress) take for sticking with the Rule of Law and the Constitution, then I’ll take it. CBK
LikeLike
I know you object to any mention of Hitler, but I ask you nonetheless to think about whether you would have urged that we ignore whatever he said in the early 1930s. He was very clear and open about his plans. Many people chose to ignore him. At their peril.
LikeLike
dienne77, the people that post here are not going to lead armies to take Trump down if he refuses to step down and leave the White House. Most if not all of us are not going to buy a firearm and drive across the country alone or with a couple of others that feel the same way. That is not going to happen.
However, there will be plenty of others already in positions of leadership in the military (retired or active), in Congress and in state governor’s mansions and legislatures who will lead the rest of us in that fight and some of the people that comment here will join up and follow those leaders.
For instance: Colin Powell or James Mattis. And if Trump has them assassinated, there are hundreds if not thousands of others who will step up to assume the mantel of leadership in that army that will set out to restore the U.S. Constitution.
But the big word here is “IF” and not “WHEN”!
You know what “IF” means, I hope.
LikeLike
“Or are you just hyperventilating” – dienne77 said, as she/he/it hyperventilated.
Almost all, if not all, wars, revolutions, and civil wars start with “hyperventilating”. They don’t blow up like someone flipping a switch and setting of a bomb. People have to get angry enough first and “hyperventilating” comes first.
Even the Revolutionary War that gave birth to the United States started with “hyperventilating” long before the revolution of 1773 – 1783, but unless there is a King George or a Lunatic like Trump in charge, there is no need to “hyperventilate”.
“The war followed more than a decade of growing estrangement between the British crown and a large and influential segment of its North American colonies that was caused by British attempts to assert greater control over colonial affairs after having long adhered to a policy of salutary neglect.”
https://www.britannica.com/event/American-Revolution
LikeLike
I want the Democrats to hold hearings and to be able to call witnesses, just like they did during Watergate. Because I understand that there is no reason that this cannot happen while Democrats are also campaigning on other issues just like they did during Watergate.
And because not enabling a cover-up of the wrongs that happened during your campaign and afterward is important to democracy. Don’t you agree?
I also hope for a recognition from people like you that what Trump is doing is NOT normal and is as deserving — if not more deserving — of hearings than what Nixon did. I hope that people like you stop promoting Trump’s lie that he is completely exonerated by the Mueller investigation, just like Nixon said he was justified in firing Cox because he didn’t do anything wrong.
Is that okay with you? Anything here you object to?
LikeLike
^^^Read Bob Shepherd’s excellent posts below and maybe you will recognize the harm that is done when you normalize Trump.
LikeLike
You do understand that ignoring and normalizing are not the same things, right? Hyperventilating over everything Trump does (or even might do) serves no purpose, other than feeding his ego. When there are constructive things to be done, by all means, do them. But worrying about whether or not Trump is going to move out of 1600 Pennsylvania in the next 2 to 6 years is not one of those constructive things.
LikeLike
I think that worrying about tyranny is a subject that is on the table, not off.
Especially now as we see the executive branch unilaterally declare that it can ignore Congress, which the Constitution says is a co-equal branch.
Dienne, you don’t need to spend a minute worrying about what Trump does or says.
Forigve the rest of us if we do care.
LikeLike
Diane I think Trump has had this dictator/takeover-card in his hand for a very long time. I think what we see is him finally feeling like he’s backed into a corner that he cannot get out of otherwise, so he pulls out the power card now, in two forms:
(1) rejection of all shared tri-part power (blanket/comprehensive use of executive power).
(2) international saber rattling
(3) something to make others feel sorry for him, like Trump-hating democrats targeting poor Trump.
Let me add this, if I may: A pox on Fox “News”; and also on the so-called-“religious” right who, in fact, have their heads buried deep in the devil’s behind.
CBK
LikeLike
If we “hyperventilated over everything Trump does”, Diane Ravitch would be posting nothing but yet another of Trump’s repellent lies or actions.
In the past day, Trump has done at least 3 or 4 horrible things.
But I find that you often mischaracterize the opposition to Trump in the most negative – and often misleading – ways. Once again you repeat the distorted right wing propaganda view of critics.
What do you think should be done about Trump? You attack his critics and repeat Trump’s claims that the Mueller investigation was a nothing burger.
What do you think should be done? Do you agree with me about hearings like the Watergate hearings being a good idea?
I am genuinely interested in your view of what should be done — I already know that you strongly disagree with Bob Shepherd.
So rather than more attacks and lies about how we “hyperventilate” at everything, tell us what you think should be done.
LikeLike
There is a HUGE difference between ignoring his temper tantrums and rants and being “asleep at the wheel”. He is like a child who doesn’t get his way and is stomping, blustering and ranting. What do we do with children that do this?….we ignore the bad behavior because the attention keeps it going. Do I think they should start impeachment proceedings against him?….yes, I do…based on facts and evidence. When he has an audience he becomes a “showman” and he loves the attention. People like him can’t cope when they don’t get the attention that they think they deserve and it usually doesn’t go very well for these kinds of people in the long run. I don’t think anyone here is saying to stop listening….just stop reacting to the noise. For people like him, silence is deafening.
LikeLike
There is no possibility of ignoring Trump. He is the president. He loves attention. Bad publicity is better than no publicity.
He wants to dominate our lives and our thoughts. He commits a new outrage whenever there is any risk that he might be ignored.
His worst moments as president were H.W. Bush funeral and McCain funeral, because they dominated the news and he didn’t.
He is a man-child.
LikeLike
dianeravitch It’s time to use those handcuffs and that jail, if not for Trump (yet), then for Barr and perhaps for Trump, Jr. and others. I think we should keep talking, and offer what trust we can to those who “get it” and have power, as Nancy Pelosi said yesterday, to do what is right.
But at some point, “what is right” is to take quick and decisive action. If that time was not here yesterday, and is not here today, then my political and spiritual sense is that it’s very, very close. CBK
LikeLike
I think if you are white and not Muslim, or even Jewish, you don’t recognize your privilege and how protected you feel.
It is no different than the Germans who were Christian lecturing to those who feared Hitler’s rise. Sure, those Christian Germans didn’t agree with Hitler, but their willingness to normalize Hitler came out of their privilege as Aryans.
And by normalizing Hitler, they enabled him until he didn’t need their efforts to normalize him anymore.
LikeLike
“We can’t operate out of fear. ”
Huh? Fear is our main, primal motivation to do anything. This is why if politicians want us to do something, they convince us that if we don’t do it, something terrible will happen to us. Why did Germany line up behind the Nazis? Some “Noble” cause, like making Germany making great again? Nah. Let us hear Goehring on the subject, as he explains the basic principle to an American journalist who believes too much in the power of beautiful principles and ideas.
Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.
So no, we won’t make Trump go away by reading the Constitution aloud to each other. No, we’ll make him leave his pulpit out of fear.
LikeLike
All cults, and the thinking that goes with them, eventually either change their ways or run their course and die. It seems to me that Trump is on the latter course–which ultimately is self-destructive. If that’s true, then the question really is: “How much damage will they do before they leave the scene.” CBK
LikeLike
Agreed. Trumpism is a cult. It has all the earmarks of one–a charismatic leader who is a pathological liar, denial by followers of any and all evidence suggesting that their guy isn’t what he says he is, belief on the part of followers in vast conspiracies, a myth of a golden age (make America great AGAIN), massive rallies, and so on.
LikeLike
And complicit people who insist that Trump is a normal politician who should be ignored.
LikeLike
If I may correct: the Republican Party is a cult.
LikeLike
a Cult that worships a demon or the devil
LikeLike
Can you imagine the harm that would have happened in our country if the Democrats had listened to the Nixon apologists and refused to hold any hearings on Watergate?
Can you imagine the harm if people actually believed “we can’t do anything about Nixon because it might give him ideas”.
That’s how fascism starts. That’s how a guy like Putin gets “democratically” elected.
Hitler needed a lot of complicit Germans who insisted that he was just a normal politician whose repellent actions and speech needed to be ignored. Until he wasn’t a normal politician anymore.
Nixon needed that, too, but democracy won out.
Trump needs that and some ignorant folks are insisting that what Trump does is perfectly normal.
LikeLike
yes, yes, yes. This is why the opposition is so important. And why it’s really, really important that the Democrats in the House do the right thing and initiate impeachment proceedings. It’s not OK to normalize Trump’s behavior.
LikeLike
Totally agree with Bob.
LikeLike
NYC public school parent One way to put it is: It’s Trump and dictatorship against The Rule of Law and democracy.
And I think many in this country (namely Trump supporters, or those who are just too busy to look, who remain adolescent in character, and who like to RA-RA with others once in awhile, or who are asleep at the wheel) are really fuzzy about what’s going on under their noses and under their feet, and how important it is–to them.
However, there are also MANY who DO understand the importance of the Rule of Law, and all that goes with it (like habeas corpus as distinct from dictator whim), and who are quite aware of the crisis we are in, including huge numbers of well-healed and law-educated people.
As for Tin-Pot-Trump, he’s ignorant enough to harbor this fallacy in his thinking: that enough others think like he does about just that: The Rule of Law is for me to use as a whip against those who respect it but, otherwise, the law and the U.S. Constitution are just paper trash. <–Same for the Oath of Office I took. CBK
LikeLike
Catherine King,
And some of them hate the Democrats so much that they’d rather see this country fall apart than acknowledge that they were absolutely wrong when they said that Trump was no worse than the Democrats.
It is no coincidence that they are often the same people trying to normalize Trump now — the guy they said was no worse than a Democrat. Acknowledging how much worse he is — and how wrong they were — is simply not something they are capable of doing.
I truly don’t understand why it is so hard for some people to admit that they were wrong about Trump. Or even scarier, that they still believe they were right and are working as hard as they can to insist to normalize Trump.
LikeLike
NYC public school parent writes: “I truly don’t understand why it is so hard for some people to admit that they were wrong about Trump. . . . ”
Basically: ego, a dogmatic attitude (it hurts when I’m wrong, so . . . I’m never wrong) and arrogance.
“Or even scarier, that they still believe they were right and are working as hard as they can to insist to normalize Trump.”
It could be just greed for some–it’s the only time in my life that I have been secretly happy that the stock market is going down (<–that’s a private thought). But I have long wondered if someone has threatened the families of some Republicans, like Mitch McConnell, or Lindsay Graham, or others. These people are “off the charts” and seem impervious to their own hypocrisy. But I think it might also have something to do with Obama (specifically as a black man), and Hillary-hating.
Whatever it is, I think there is a book waiting to be written, in developing that very question. Why? CBK
LikeLike
We need a fully functioning system of checks and balances. It is the only way to combat the overreach of one branch.
LikeLike
This is a good discussion to keep having periodically: are we normalizing Trump, are we overreacting, are we playing into his hands, et al. I find it helpful to hear your educated & thoughtful viewpoints here. The input I hear from citizens on CSPAN’s daily call-in show is in line w/what CBK said above: most are “fuzzy about what’s going on under their noses and under their feet, and how important it is–to them,” and they’re not just Trump supporters. The Trumpers get caught up in the idea that Dems are trying to overturn their vote. Those against him are often missing the important stuff, focusing on his undignified style & the “lies” that are just sales puffery/ image-building. To me, the “important stuff” to watch (as retired teacher implies) is Trump pushing the envelope on the power of the presidency, and whether/ how well the other branches respond.
LikeLike
But the tell-tale sign, the sine qua non, the essential, defining characteristic of the cult is this imperviousness to any evidence. If it quacks like a duck. . . .
LikeLike
I’m taking “it” seriously and am ready to answer the call to arms to oust him and crush his hard-core followers if The Orange Idiot MAGA Man attempts to take over power like that.
The Military Times has conducted polls for active duty troops and 70 percent of officers do not support Trump. A little less than half of enlisted men who are not officers support him.
To understand why so many officers are against Trump, one must read the oath that those officers took when they were commissions. It is the same oath the President takes to defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. That oath says nothing about being loyal to or obeying the president of the United States but the oath for the enlisted men who are not officers has an added clause that says “to obey the president and their officers”.
What does that mean?
Some of the troops and officers might answer his call but a lot more are going to move to stop them and that means the possibility of a Civil War that could be small or big. IF fighting breaks out among the troops, it will happen on military bases and Navy ships first and spread from there because on U.S. soil, most of the troops do not have access to firearms and bullets accept on the rifle range or when on sentry duty. The firearms are locked up.
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2018/10/15/support-for-trump-is-fading-among-active-duty-troops-new-poll-shows/
According to another Military Times poll, Trump has more support among combat vets like me but I’m not one of them and most of the combat vets I know also can’t stand him. The only MAGA combat vet I know is overweight, in poor health and can hardly walk.
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2018/12/30/poll-shows-high-job-approval-for-trump-from-veterans/
Then there is this: The Demographics of the U.S. Military.
A significant number of active duty troops are minorities.
Racial and ethnic minority groups made up 40% of Defense Department active-duty military in 2015, up from 25% in 1990. (In 2015, 44% of all Americans ages 18 to 44 were racial or ethnic minorities.)
In the same year, blacks made up 17% of the DOD active-duty military – somewhat higher than their share of the U.S. population ages 18 to 44 (13%). Blacks have consistently been represented in greater shares among enlisted personnel (19% in 2015) than among the commissioned officers (9%). The share of the active-duty force that is Hispanic has risen rapidly in recent decades. In 2015, 12% of all active-duty personnel were Hispanic, three times the share in 1980.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/13/6-facts-about-the-u-s-military-and-its-changing-demographics/
If Trump makes an active attempt to grab power and keep it, it isn’t going to be a slam dunk and in the long run, I think he loses everything and the only way he will survive is if he manages to flee to Russia with his family and seek asylum.
If he doesn’t escape, the Troops and the officers that can’t stand him and hate him are liable to execute him and his family as the Civil War is wrapping up.
LikeLike
Thanks. El Paso is an Army town that consistently votes Democrat.
LikeLike
I live in the heart of military Trump town about a hour and a half from yesterday’s rally. While the vast majority of posts on Facebook support Trump, I am seeing more people questioning his decisions and inappropriate comments. I have noticed about one out of five people commenting about #45 are questioning his motives and actions.
LikeLike
I used to think you were overboard with some of your opinions, Lloyd. Time has proven you to be right and me completely wrong. An American civil war is no longer out of the question. When you consider that the logical outcome of “Lock Her/Him/Them Up” and “Enemy of the People” is internment/concentration camps, when you consider the logical conclusion of their hateful chants are killing opponents, it’s hard to draw any other conclusion. I have seriously considered what I need to to do if civil war becomes imminent.
LikeLike
Just yesterday, in Florida: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-rally-president-trump-laughs-off-shoot-them-comment-immigrants-at-panama-city-beach-florida/
The President of the United States, and a crowd of his supporters, laughing about shooting migrants at the border. Revolting.
LikeLike
The Dictator’s Playbook
Featuring…
Episode 1: Kim Il Sung
Episode 2: Saddam Hussein
Episode 3: Benito Mussolini
Episode 4: Manuel Noriega
Episode 5: Francisco Franco
Episode 6: Idi Amin
https://www.pbs.org/show/dictators-playbook/
Episode 7: Donald Trump?
LikeLike
One missing from the list. I think Individual-1’s is most analogous (bet he doesn’t know what that word means) is Juan Peron. He is the prototypical South American fascist dictator. With a second term, he’ll graduate to become a Augusto Pinochet, complete with sports stadiums becoming internment, torture, and death camps.
LikeLike
The military would never support this guy. A lot of military people are none too happy about his making unilateral changes in major military policy by tweet at 3:00 in the morning–troops to the border at Thanksgiving, the withdrawal from Syria. They know he’s a kook.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree. Even in Trumplandia, I believe those that would mount a rebellion are outliers. Lots of the people in the military are intelligent and know the difference between a lunatic and a leader.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed. I live in Tampa, home of CENTCOM. Many of my students’ parents were military. Bright people. And patriotic. A patriot would not betray his or her country in support of a con man. Secretary Mattis’s resignation letter bears rereading.
LikeLike
Having a lot of experience as a military dependent and otherwise, couldn’t disagree more with you. Today’s military is stocked with apparatchiks. They follow directions and do the best they can not to think for themselves.
LikeLike
Military Times poll, conducted September, 2017
46.3 percent of enlisted personnel had a favorable opinion of Trump; 40 percent unfavorable
30.6 percent of officers had a favorable opinion of Trump; 53.4 percent unfavorable
the rest no opinion/undecided
LikeLike
Compare the 2017 Military Times Poll to the 2018 one — I can’t find one for 2019 … yet
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2018/10/15/support-for-trump-is-fading-among-active-duty-troops-new-poll-shows/
LikeLike
“Still, the latest survey shows that military service members are more supportive of the president than the American public at large…”
My turn to cherry-pick!
LikeLike
Let’s skip the cherry picking:
In 2017, “Overall, about 44 percent of all troops surveyed in the Military Times poll have a favorable view of Trump, while roughly 40 percent have an unfavorable opinion of him. That’s a stark contrast to opinion polls of the general public, which have shown Trump’s popularity at less than 40 percent and an unfavorable rating as high as 56 percent.” …
“While almost 48 percent of enlisted troops approve of Trump, only about 30 percent of officers say the same, the poll shows.”
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2017/10/23/military-times-poll-what-you-really-think-about-trump/
In 2018, “Support for Trump is fading among active-duty troops”
Click the next link and scroll down to the chart that shows Trumps Approval Slipping from 2016 to 2017, to 2018.
“Still,” the Military Times says, “the latest survey shows that military service members are more supportive of the president than the American public at large, which, according to the most recent Gallup poll, approves of Trump at a rate of 43 percent compared to the 53 percent who disapprove.
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2018/10/15/support-for-trump-is-fading-among-active-duty-troops-new-poll-shows/
I’m waiting to see what the Military Times Pole will report for 2019.
LikeLike
My point was that the military leadership isn’t overwhelmingly supportive of this president, so we are far, far, far from a situation in which he could stage some sort of coup.
LikeLike
If he tried such a thing, the world would be treated to the extraordinarily satisfying spectacle of Trump being led away from the White House in handcuffs.
LikeLike
Handcuffs or a body bag.
LikeLike
When the days of the Obama White House were on the wane, many of my students were audibly wondering what would happen if he refused to step down, as though at were a real possibility. That was ridiculous. I would like to think contemplating the same for trump is just as silly.
Sooner or later we will see the United States go down the road to tyranny. Every other civilization has either begun or ended in tyranny. Some folks think the US is already there like the Roman Empire, which kept meeting its senate right up until a thousand years after it had seen the last emperor, Romulus Augustus, deposed. I suspect that any tyrant who wants to lead the US will have to preserve the notion of representation, like the Roman Emperors did. Even tyrants have to provide successful government, that is, one which provides the basics of safety to the people. Even the empires of old knew they had to provide the basics.
LikeLike
Thanks, Roy. Yes.
If you happened to live in Rome in the year 170, you could be forgiven for thinking that the empire was eternal. For almost two hundred years, across a vast region that stretched from the Scottish borderlands to the sands of Arabia, people had enjoyed the Pax Romana. The brutish banditry and lawlessness of previous times had become almost unknown. Trade and the arts flourished, and bellies were full. One couldn’t imagine that such a system, the like of which the world had never before seen, would fall apart practically overnight. Then, in 180, Marcus Aurelius died and was succeeded by his son, the weak, cruel, debauched, and possibly insane Commodus. It was the beginning of the end.
A history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire should, I think, begin with the story of a distressed Roman family farmer, in the second century AD, with no choice but to sell the land that had been in his family for centuries to one of the handful of wealthy landowners at the top of the latifundia system that developed in the first two centuries of the first millennium. (This system was the forerunner of the medieval system of large feudal estates worked by serfs and ruled by a baron.) Rome had been built by the strength of its legions of sturdy boys from small family farms who fought for the earth that their fathers (and mothers!) plowed. By the second century, that system of small family farms was gone. From one end of the empire to the other, the land was owned by a wealthy few, and the formerly free peasantry had been reduced to serfdom. Who could blame anyone for not wanting to take up arms to defend the system that oppressed them? By the time the latifundia system developed, Rome was already dead. It just didn’t know it yet. (In this regard, it should be noted that according to the World Bank, income inequality in the United States, as measured by the Gini index, now exceeds that in Uganda, Haiti, Turkmenistan, Philippines, Indonesia, Iran, Georgia, Myanmar, Russia, Greece, India, Liberia, Mali, Poland, Egypt, Romania, Belarus, and Ukraine; the parallel between what is happening here, now, and what happened in Rome, then, is alarming.)
LikeLike
Bob Shepherd 5/9 2:30 pm: The part of your post that jumped out at me: “One couldn’t imagine that such a system, the like of which the world had never before seen, would fall apart practically overnight. Then, in 180, Marcus Aurelius died and was succeeded by his son, the weak, cruel, debauched, and possibly insane Commodus. It was the beginning of the end.”
So there was no systemic protection against potential excesses by a successor.
Again, the key thing to guard against today is executive branch making inroads against structural checks& balances. Trump didn’t create the danger, he’s taking advantage of vulnerability created by decades of congressional passing the buck to executive agencies, but he clearly has more regard for “winning” than preserving govtl structure. I see it as more important than our destabilizing inequality, because that can conceivably be turned around by a functioning govt. If he is not reined in by the other 2 branches, we may end up in the same place—perhaps more benign successors, but nakedly vulnerable to the next nut who takes office.
LikeLiked by 1 person
With you once again. I think I may have posted part of this before, but here are my thoughts on Friedrich Dürrenmatt’s play about Romulus Augustus in case they might interest you:
Romulus the Great is an underappreciated classic that never stops asking questions about political power, the legitimacy of the state, and nature of the patriotism and nationalism.
The last Roman emperor awaits the conquering Germans as surroundings reflect the decay of twenty years of misrule. He is more interested in the egg production of the chickens that roam freely in his house than he is on defending the city. He seems to be the only one who is unconcerned about the impending end of his empire. His ambivalence begins to be explained in a conversation with his daughter Rea:
REA Shouldn’t one love the fatherland more than anything in the world?
ROMULUS No, one should love it less than one human being. Before all else, one should be skeptical about one’s fatherland. It is never easier to become a murderer as it is for a fatherland.
We slowly begin to understand that Romulus’s blithe incompetence is actually deliberately intended to undermine the empire, as he explains in a dialogue with his future son-in-law, a soldier who has spent three years as a German prisoner of war:
ÄMALIEN You are charged with having betrayed the empire.
ROMULUS I have not betrayed my empire. Rome betrayed itself. It understood the truth, but it chose violence, it understood humanity, but it chose tyranny. It debased itself doubly: before itself and before the other nations that were subject to its power.
My reading of Romulus the Great was inspired by the inane “debate” that is currently taking place in the U.S. about the playing of the national anthem at sporting events—the U.S. is the only country of which I am aware that routinely plays the national anthem at virtually every athletic event ranging from high school through professional ranks; in the rest of the world national anthems are only played when national teams are represented. An excerpt to a recent letter to the New York Times would have pleased Romulus, “The way Americans can demonstrate love of country is to protest the wrongs and work hard to stimulate the change that is required for America to live up to its ideals. At best, singing the national anthem or pledging allegiance to the flag is merely a superficial commitment to country, and at worst, an exercise in tribalism.”
LikeLike
Fascinating, GregB! I need to read this play. Those who love the espoused ideals of this country will work to ensure that they are lived up to. That’s what Diane Ravitch does every day when she works to save democratically run public schools from privatization by oligarchs.
LikeLike
Bob: these are indeed some of the reasons for the failure of Rome. An irony of the matter were those who blamed the Romans who crowded for living on the dole and allowing the German tribes to defend them until the German tribes sacked Rome itself. Sounds like a lot of criticism leveled today at the dispossessed, who sign up for the army in disproportionate numbers only to find themselves without a living when they get out.
Of course, it should be cautioned that no historical situations are ever the same as others. Equating things in history leads to basing decisions on false equivalency.
LikeLike
The reason Rome lasted as long as it did is that that grain kept coming down the Tiber, and the government, during the Republic and the Empire, kept handing out gain and then bread and then bread and olive oil. The dole provided the stability Rome needed. When it stopped, there was hell to pay.
LikeLike
One of our few points of disagreement here, Roy, perhaps I am reading more into your final paragraph than I should. History informs. Ignorance of history blinds and leads to lies being perceived as truth. I think that describes the middle ground between your final two sentences.
My reading of history and political theory informed me in early 2016 that we were tumbling toward fascism should the worst happen that November. Nothing has changed that. I’ve been rereading a lot about Ernst Thälmann, Kurt Tucholsky and Carl von Ossietzky lately as well as other history of the 1930s. Many of the historical situations are analogous and the conclusions can be equated. That is why I think our times are leading toward great violence. The question, as far as I’m concerned, is whether it will be internal only or combined with an external threat or threats.
LikeLike
Greg wondering if you can summarize what you learned from cites, & how it causes you to disagree– & what is the disagreement between the 2 sentences? Because I tend to agree w/Bob that our political polarity, rise of populism & racism all stem from extended economic downturn combined w/rising, now gross inequality; prolonged economic insecurity in working and middle classes. Is it about “the dole”? I have read that we are today more successful than at any other time re: safety nets protecting the poorest among us from destitution. It will not be the poorest, but those in the middle who come w/pitchforks.
LikeLike
Bethree, this is what I don’t like about these exchanges, I was responding to Roy and, if read your questions correctly, you thought I was responding to Bob. I may be wrong and please forgive me if I am. Oy!
But assuming you were referring to Bob’s last two sentences, I also have issues with them. I think the economic deprivation argument is false. In my view, when fascist/reactionary tendencies and opinions are blamed on economic deprivation, all they do is expose latent, deeply-seeded, honest views. A person whose bigoted reactionary views are exposed by economic circumstances is a bigot reactionary through and through.
LikeLike
Greg: I feel gratified that there was so much response. My last two sentences were actually the result of my thinking about a particular issue in American foreign policy. After the isolationist period produced Hitler, an equivalency was made with the appeasement of Hitler and those who wanted to refrain from conflict with the Soviets. This led, in my opinion, to some bad mistakes.
I would mainly agree with all the points you make.
LikeLike
The Republican Party has shown that it is willing to go ever lower. Where does this Limbo Party stop? Does it go so far as denying the results of a Presidential election? An interesting question. Given the many serious charges for which a citizen Trump might be indicted, IQ45 has reason to want to remain in office. For him personally, the stakes are very, very high.
LikeLike
This is a Republican party which has made it their mission to disenfranchise voters who have traditionally voted Democrat — non white non Christians.
The Republican party doesn’t believe in democracy anymore. They are afraid of democracy. They believe in a Russia-like oligarchy where a few billionaires give them their marching orders.
That’s why Republicans like Susan Collins are so corrupt deep down. Even Susan Collins would rather sell out America than not get re-elected. When her privilege is at stake, she always sells out America to protect it. Her privilege is much more important to her than her country.
LikeLike
I have been pleased to note that an activist named Ady Barkan has raised over $4 million to the Democrat who challenges Susan Collins, in response to her craven vote for Kavanaugh.
She is the kind of Republican who will stand up when it doesn’t count (opposing DeVos on the floor of the Senate when her vote was not needed) but will cave when it matters (voting for DeVos in committee when her vote mattered).
LikeLike
Yes, that describes Susan Collins in a nutshell. She always “stands up” to Republicans whenever they allow it because there is no political cost to them.
She would have voted to confirm DeVos, too, if the Republicans didn’t have the votes they needed to confirm.
She does what she is ordered to do whenever it matters.
When the Republicans only had 40 votes in the Senate, Susan Collins joined in every filibuster to make sure that nothing that bothered the far right got passed. Collins didn’t believe the full Senate should vote on anything that Mitch McConnell didn’t want them to vote on and joined in every filibuster.
So it was particularly galling to hear Collins blatant lie that she “had” to vote for DeVos in committee so the full Senate could vote on her.
Collins takes her marching orders from Mitch McConnell, not the people of her state. I hope they throw her out because I find it hard to believe that Maine voters want a Trump toadie as their representative. Collins will throw her constituents under the bus to please far right Republicans. She always has.
LikeLike
I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating:
Trump and the Republican party constitute a clear and present danger to the Constitution and to the Republic.
I’ve also asked this question here many times, but it’s worth asking again:
Isn’t it far past time to make democratic citizenship the emphasis of public education?
LikeLike
Every school I’ve ever taught in has made democratic citizenship a major part of the curriculum. Among other things, I taught American literature. It was really important to me that my students read the founding documents (they needed lots of help with this) and that they understand the literature they were reading in light of major currents in American thought. But certainly, we can always do a better job of this! One consequence of the execrable Common Core and associated high-stakes testing is that civics and history have been deemphasized.
LikeLike
democracy, my view as a historian–not an activist–is that the fundamental purpose of public education is to prepare young people to be active participants in our democratic society. To learn how to vote thoughtfully, weigh evidence, think about solutions to problems, to do it with others and to do it on your own. Learning these thinking skills prepares you to vote, to serve on juries, to take an active role in your community and to take seriously your obligation to improve our society, now and for future generations. It’s hard to know where the Trumpists came from. I think they are the residue of a racist, misogynist, homophobic society that never made the transition into the late 20th-early 21st century. Now they want to roll back all the social-economic-and-political gains of the past 80 years, back before the New Deal, when everyone knew his place and it was a white Christian country, run by men. No gays, no abortions, no business regulations.
LikeLike
Back to the future–way, way, way back
LikeLike
As I read your words, I wish I was 20 again to live my life and fulfill my beliefs. Not really sure if I should thank you or damn you for making me aware of where I went wrong. Think I’ll lean toward the former.
LikeLike
Oh, no! How did I do that?
LikeLike
You made me think, dammit! I hate it when people do that. It’s so much easier to not think.
LikeLike
democracy, I am “talking out of school” because I’m out of touch w/present curriculum—my youngest graduated in 2010. No question my own ‘50’s-‘60’s public ed & that of my kids ‘90’s-2000’s included a great deal of curriculum relating to democratic citizenship: govtl structure, voting, history incl comparative govtl structures. In my day & that of my kids (at least in our respective sch districts), that included plenty of active class discussion relating the curriculum to current events. All that contributed to our family closely following politics/ voting/ writing representatives/ even some activism.
I’ve gotten a peek at curriculum since then via tutees/ their parents: CCSS-ELA (tho I hate it) has definitely included much material on civil rights & the constitution… However, the unfortunate emphasis has been less on ideas/ historical context, more on details of stylistics. That is a serious concern. In addition, I read much here about narrowing of classtime spent on Soc Stud due to the NCLB/CCSS focus on Math & Eng testing, & Soc Stud teachers being reqd to do double duty as ELA teachers, again focusing written projects on trivial textual details instead of idea/ context/ persuasive argument. My thinking is, action should be focused on getting rid of “ed accountability” systems, for starters.
LikeLike
I teach social studies. Our curricula is always being shortened, dumbed-down, or just plain ignored. My school has just cut civics and current issues from the course offerings, and cut geography to half a year.
I think that pretty much sums up the situation.
LikeLike
Here is one major problem with the curriculum today: Many schools teach students how to write by modeling the ACT writing exam. Well, guess, what? The ACT rules tell students that it is okay for students to MAKEUP statistic-type information on the writing portion of its exam!!! (It’s a timed write)
How can students learn to weigh evidence and analyze its credibility if we are teaching them that made-up “facts” can count as evidence? From ACT’s perspective, as long as they argue fluently, they can get a good score.
Do any of you know the ACT writing committee and can work to change this insane rule?
LikeLike
The SAT and ACT are scored by machines. The machines can not evaluate facts or statistics. A student could write that the earth was destroyed by hail and brimstone in 2005 or 1905 or 1705, and the machine would check for spelling, syntax, etc. but not facts. The machine scores thousands of essays in a minute.
LikeLike
I for one do not worry for a minute that Trump would refuse to leave office if finally defeated in electoral votes in 2020 as well as in the popular vote. I am far more worried about the billionaire class and what it has been doing to the public sector and to the constitution in the past 40 years. The billionaires would be smart to carry Trump out of the White House in Jan 2021 the way soldiers carried the head of a major corporation in 1942 when he refused to make peace with labor unions during WWII. The billionaires as a class are smarter and more dangerous than is Trump. Going along with a coup d’erat would arouse millions against them in a pitchfork rebellion they’d rather avoid. Besides, there’s nothing we should do different than we are now doing to prepare for ousting Trump. We have been patiently rousing organized opposition month by month which is exactly our task. Diane has been doing this for years and will continue. So will MeToom BlackLivesMatter, Immigrant Rights advocates, Environmental and GreenNew Dealmilitants, abortion defenders, LivingWage campaigners, Taxthe Rich and free public college brigades, BATs and parents opting out, queer liberation combatants, and so on. The larger and more militant and more consolidated and more mutually connected these trends become, the more we will be ready for the creature Trump’s bizarre behavior in 2020 and the billionaires who will continue to loot us after then.
LikeLike
YEP! A voice of reason!
LikeLike
Correction–CEO Avery Sewell of Montgomery-Ward was carried out of his Chicago corporate office by two National Guardsmen under the orders of FDR’s Attorney General Biddle, April, 1944, not 1942, after Sewell heatedly rebuffed FDR’s requests for labor peace in that giant mail order/retail business in wartime. Biddle returned Sewell to office May 9 but Sewell again went to war with labor, so the military took over the office but this time allowed Sewell to stay there symbolically. Word is that he and the General in charge warred over the executive parking space reserved for the company chair.
LikeLike
What an astonishing story! Thank you, Ira!!! The war over the parking space reminds me of a story:
Years ago, I was working in a publishing house that got a new Managing Editor. The Managing Editor is typically the person who oversees production–typesetting and design.
In the building where this house was located was a vast room with desks and cubicles and maybe twenty designers and the Design Director working in it. The new Managing Editor moved them all into a rented space in a separate building so she could have the enormous room for an office suitable for a person of her august stature.
The Executive Editor who oversaw the substantive editors and copyeditors was incensed. She had a regular-sized office like everyone else. But there was an enormous conference room with floor-to-ceiling windows on two sides. So, she moved her office into that.
“The barge she sat in, like a burnish’d throne. . . .”
LikeLike
Wow, the chutzpah to evict 20 employees.
LikeLike
Been seeing a fair amount of this type of hysterical posts lately.
LikeLike
cartoon: https://bobshepherdonline.wordpress.com/2019/05/09/donnie-baby/
LikeLike
Trump refusing to leave office in 2020 (if he loses) seems so fantastical and beyond the tradition of American democratic traditions. Even some of the most despicable presidents left when their time was up. BUT………..I thought it was fantastical that we would ever have a Trump presidency, I was wrong and he won in large part due to the Electoral College and misogny against Hillary. Trump may not lose because I can already see the in-fighting within the Democratic party and the rifts between liberals, progressives and hyper ideologically puritanical uber-progressives like Jimmy Dore or Chris Hedges. They will never ever in a million years vote for a corporate Democrat or even a moderate Democrat versus Trump. They will vote Green or some other third party loser. I will certainly vote for Bernie in the primaries but if he loses I will vote Democratic………….PERIOD!!!!! Trump could win a second term if Democrats, liberals and progressives don’t get on the same page in the general election.
LikeLike
Someone sent me this trope: Are we ready for a gay president? are we ready for a woman president? No one ever asked, are we ready in 2016 for a racist, xenophobic, misogynist, ignorant president?
LikeLike
Ha! Good point.
I just have to say I find the idea of Rethuglicans fighting to keep Trump if he loses very ironic, considering that The Donald never wanted to be president in the first place. He was upset that he won. He was just trying to hype his brand. Funny. And sad.
LikeLike
Dear Registered Republican, please select the one answer for the president you want to lead the United States:
A – a racist, xenophobic, misogynist, ignorant president who will tell you anything you want to hear so he can become the first U.S president for life.
B – a woman president who can think for herself and cannot be bought by Wall Street
C – a gay president that is married to another man and cannot be bought by Bill Gates, the Waltons, or the Koch brothers
D – I can’t think for myself. Let Hannity decide for me
ANSWER: 82 percent of registered Republicans that finished the pole selected “A”. The other 18 percent selected “D”
LikeLike
Once Trump loses the election, I expect militias form all over the country, and start shootings for all kinds of reasons, especially in the South.
LikeLike
Asassination
LikeLike
Articles like this are meant to scare people into voting for Trump. I am sorry to see it on your blog.
LikeLike
That is ridiculous. Trump scares me. His latent fascism is not very latent. Who would read this article and decide to vote for the Tangerine Tyrant?
LikeLike
Wait: what?
LikeLike
Here is an interesting response from a friend to the blog note:
“Once the new president completes taking the oath of office, the Secret Service switches its primary protection responsibility from the previous president to the new one. It would escort the old one out of the White House–in whatever manner is necessary–if the previous president were to reject the election results. He would be considered a threat to the duly-sworn president.” CBK
. . . there is the potential problem of sabotage of the Secret Service. (It’s REALLY “potential” and not just fear-mongering because we know Tin-Pot-Trump and how he works. CBK
LikeLike
I’ll risk sycophancy here by saying that this is one hell of a thread–it’s really the definition of the word “discourse.” I thank everyone for trying to bring sanity to a world that by all appearances has simply gone bats**t crazy.
LikeLike
For once, I am rendered speechless.
What you said, marksextterminal, 5/10, @ 12:44 PM.
LikeLike