This is nothing but a treasonous betrayal by members of my own government. It is a slow rolling attempt at a coup by idiots too cowardly to come right out and overthrow the government after the failed attack on January 6. Thomas Massie seems to be the only one with a spine.
I am sorry but the USA's Democrats are definitely also increasingly authoritarian over time. Did they makers of that graph purposefully choose 2000-2018 as the range?
The graph does show a tiny increase in authoritarianism for the Democrats if you look closely, so the graph agrees with me it is happening, I just disagree about how much it has moved. So not all that extraordinary a claim.
It is the natural pattern for concentrations of power to seek more power to achieve their goals. Even if we agree with those goals the power still accumulates.
For example, Obama was in power from 2009 to 2017, looking at the economist democracy index, it was 8.22 in 2008 and dropped to 7.98 by 2016 or 2017. A clear reduction of 0.24 in democracy, which I hope you agree is correlated with authoritarianism. For an average of 0.12 per term.
In 2020 just before Biden took power it was 7.92, and it dropped to 7.85, a drop of 0.07 per term.
Or from another perspective, since the USA has a law system based on "if it isn't forbidden by law, it is legal", the number of added laws is a decent measure of how many freedoms have been lost. Of course we'd have to distinguish between laws that limit individuals versus laws that limit businesses or government departments, so a deeper dive may be necessary, but generally speaking I think it works as a measure.
The number of laws created by each congress during democratic regimes, was significantly smaller but still in the hundreds of new laws per year. This is not an accident, it is inherent to having a government that power accumulates.
Or you could compare the manifestos for each election, but I leave that as an exercise for others. Especially since you would need to match it with what actually happened after they get elected to get a measure of how honest they are.
I never use any kind of AI, I looked at an actual named source: The Economist Democracy Index. Which you would know if you're capable of reading words.
For the number of laws created I didn't name my source, but it was wikipedia.
I'm not smearing anyone, I am pointing out how they're only relatively superior, they're not an objective force for good. What kind of short-sighted and juvenile perspective must you have that you truly believe there are only two sides to everything and that one of them is 100% good and perfect?
The best way, perhaps the only way, to go after the fascist elements of the Republican Party is to go after those people who are funding them, eliminate the money and you eliminate most of the problem. Next you go after those who provide the intellectual foundations that prop up the fascist platform and provide the legal basis of the movement.
Eliminate these two legs and the third leg cannot stand on its own and comes crashing down upon itself.
Hello dear one, and thanks for all that you do! And do so well!!
The ever-lying google AI sez it might've been this guy:
The essay you are remembering matches the core thesis of Timothy Snyder, a prominent historian and political scientist at Yale University known for his expertise in the rise and fall of authoritarian regimes, democracy, and empires.
During the 2017–2020 period, following the publication of his bestselling book On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century (2017), Snyder wrote several highly influential essays for publications like The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The New York Review of Books.
In his writings during this time — most notably, in essays warning about the subversion of democratic norms — Snyder frequently outlined this exact historical pattern:
• The Cycle: As a powerful system or empire begins to fracture, polarization accelerates.
• The Polarization: Both the public and the ruling elites swing erratically between extremes, paralyzed by a desperate search for a stabilizing figure.
• The Ruin: They ultimately fall victim to a demagogue or authoritarian leader whose primary objective is the absolute retention of power, ultimately steering the state toward institutional collapse and ruin.
No. We learned that in WWII ... but we also learned the solution then, too: Beat 'em on the battlefield, and send the survivors to Nuremberg for trial.
I'm slowly coming to a conclusion that official corruption should be the only capital crime. It's a betrayal of the entire country for an elected official to do something because it personally benefits them. It's also not something you accidentally do. You can't accidentally take a bribe/"campaign donation" to ensure a company gets a government contract. You have a full understanding of the transaction.
"But wouldn't this get Democrats, too?" Let justice be blind, and let it be swift.
.."a coalition that would agree to abide by constitutional norms, stop ignoring judges’ rulings, and recognize free and fair elections as free and fair."
Absolutely not. Norms are gone. Capital will demand it. This is a fool's errand.
They really seemed to go hog wild when that consent decree expired
This is nothing but a treasonous betrayal by members of my own government. It is a slow rolling attempt at a coup by idiots too cowardly to come right out and overthrow the government after the failed attack on January 6. Thomas Massie seems to be the only one with a spine.
He sure showed his spine as he voted time and time again for Trump appointees he knew were no good.
Spine of the mouth is no kind of back bone
This^^^
He's simply smart enough to know that MAGA is coming to an end...He's just being pragmatic
I am sorry but the USA's Democrats are definitely also increasingly authoritarian over time. Did they makers of that graph purposefully choose 2000-2018 as the range?
This is an extraordinary claim. You know what they say about extraordinary claims, don't you?
The graph does show a tiny increase in authoritarianism for the Democrats if you look closely, so the graph agrees with me it is happening, I just disagree about how much it has moved. So not all that extraordinary a claim.
It is the natural pattern for concentrations of power to seek more power to achieve their goals. Even if we agree with those goals the power still accumulates.
For example, Obama was in power from 2009 to 2017, looking at the economist democracy index, it was 8.22 in 2008 and dropped to 7.98 by 2016 or 2017. A clear reduction of 0.24 in democracy, which I hope you agree is correlated with authoritarianism. For an average of 0.12 per term.
In 2020 just before Biden took power it was 7.92, and it dropped to 7.85, a drop of 0.07 per term.
Or from another perspective, since the USA has a law system based on "if it isn't forbidden by law, it is legal", the number of added laws is a decent measure of how many freedoms have been lost. Of course we'd have to distinguish between laws that limit individuals versus laws that limit businesses or government departments, so a deeper dive may be necessary, but generally speaking I think it works as a measure.
The number of laws created by each congress during democratic regimes, was significantly smaller but still in the hundreds of new laws per year. This is not an accident, it is inherent to having a government that power accumulates.
Or you could compare the manifestos for each election, but I leave that as an exercise for others. Especially since you would need to match it with what actually happened after they get elected to get a measure of how honest they are.
Did ChatGPT happen to mention what happened in 2010? Or did you only bother to prompt it for numbers that might help undermine Democratic confidence?
Anybody who bounces into an opinion piece about Republican malfeasance to try to smear the Democrats is a plant, a stooge, or a bot.
I never use any kind of AI, I looked at an actual named source: The Economist Democracy Index. Which you would know if you're capable of reading words.
For the number of laws created I didn't name my source, but it was wikipedia.
I'm not smearing anyone, I am pointing out how they're only relatively superior, they're not an objective force for good. What kind of short-sighted and juvenile perspective must you have that you truly believe there are only two sides to everything and that one of them is 100% good and perfect?
Was the article you referenced actually a series of blog posts from Peter Turchin? He started the series in Oct 2016, foretelling exactly where we are now and why. This was immediately after that election: https://peterturchin.com/the-presidential-election-of-2016-through-the-lens-of-cliodynamics/
Modify your subtitle: "It's time to start *burning* fascists!" seems more apt.
Denny, GREAT to see you on Wonkette!!
The best way, perhaps the only way, to go after the fascist elements of the Republican Party is to go after those people who are funding them, eliminate the money and you eliminate most of the problem. Next you go after those who provide the intellectual foundations that prop up the fascist platform and provide the legal basis of the movement.
Eliminate these two legs and the third leg cannot stand on its own and comes crashing down upon itself.
Hello dear one, and thanks for all that you do! And do so well!!
The ever-lying google AI sez it might've been this guy:
The essay you are remembering matches the core thesis of Timothy Snyder, a prominent historian and political scientist at Yale University known for his expertise in the rise and fall of authoritarian regimes, democracy, and empires.
During the 2017–2020 period, following the publication of his bestselling book On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century (2017), Snyder wrote several highly influential essays for publications like The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The New York Review of Books.
In his writings during this time — most notably, in essays warning about the subversion of democratic norms — Snyder frequently outlined this exact historical pattern:
• The Cycle: As a powerful system or empire begins to fracture, polarization accelerates.
• The Polarization: Both the public and the ruling elites swing erratically between extremes, paralyzed by a desperate search for a stabilizing figure.
• The Ruin: They ultimately fall victim to a demagogue or authoritarian leader whose primary objective is the absolute retention of power, ultimately steering the state toward institutional collapse and ruin.
I don't think "banning" fascists works.
Not banning fascists. Banning fascist parties.
No. We learned that in WWII ... but we also learned the solution then, too: Beat 'em on the battlefield, and send the survivors to Nuremberg for trial.
I'm slowly coming to a conclusion that official corruption should be the only capital crime. It's a betrayal of the entire country for an elected official to do something because it personally benefits them. It's also not something you accidentally do. You can't accidentally take a bribe/"campaign donation" to ensure a company gets a government contract. You have a full understanding of the transaction.
"But wouldn't this get Democrats, too?" Let justice be blind, and let it be swift.
.."a coalition that would agree to abide by constitutional norms, stop ignoring judges’ rulings, and recognize free and fair elections as free and fair."
Absolutely not. Norms are gone. Capital will demand it. This is a fool's errand.
Bravo, Denny.
Killer piece.
End of detailed analysis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbitQ6RGrn4
WATCH: Trump on Iran: ‘Do I annihilate the Islamic Republic?’
MS NOW
LOL I laughed so hard now I've gotta change my undies
Don't guess, let me tell: "You gotta fight like hell or you're not gonna have a country anymore!"
Might this be what you’re looking for? Published in 2016, but referring to a Glubb essay published in 1976. https://raybwilliams.medium.com/the-250-year-cycle-how-the-united-states-mirrors-the-rise-and-fall-of-every-empire-before-it-8b3b6cc89c1c
Well, damn.
Based on Denny's memory & description, this sure seems like it.
I think the use of RICO is called for. (Note: I do not hold the Democrats entirely blameless, either.)