Everyone wants to jump right from Halloween to Christmas.

Let’s not forget Thanksgiving.  It is one of my favorite holidays.

If you’re on Bluesky and follow me, you’ve probably seen that I’m writing threads that really should be the basis for posts at LGM. You’ve also likely gotten a bead on where I am these days. Here’s a summary:

• The Republic as we knew it is over. The fight now is whether the new one will be a fascistic, competitive authoritarian regime or a pluralist democracy that, we can hope, is better than what came before.
• Even if you think restoration is possible, it’s a bad idea. The Constitution has failed. Or, more accurately, the Constitutional order built out of the New Deal, the Second Reconstruction, and the repudiation of the Nixon presidency has failed. This is not a prediction. It’s not a “if we continue on our current course.” The Constitution as designed by the founders, was supposed to prevent the current regime. Its original guardrails did not work. The ones added after the Civil War did not work. The de facto amendments created by the accretion of judicial decisions did not work. The post-Watergate reforms did not work.
• There are two officials — other than Trump and his kleptocratic and fascistic barnacles — who did the most to shiv the Republic in the back: John Roberts and Mitch McConnell. There are two corollaries. First, the small-d democratic opposition should go “scorched earth” on the Court. And by this I mean that it should adopt the same kind of rhetoric — the same denial of legitimacy — that conservatives employed for decades prior to wresting supermajority control. Second, the filibuster has to go. Not only so that we have a chance of implementing the structural reforms we desperately need, but also because the future of constitutional democracy in the United States depends on shifting power to the legislative branch. We know that returning to the status quo ante won’t stop the next Trump. We also need to recognize that no half-baked reform of the filibuster will prevent another McConnell from destroying the legislative branch.
• The regime is not only reactionary, it is kleptocratic and oligarchic. New institutional arrangements cannot survive if the American people and its representatives fail to address the morally offensive concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the very few — or if they leave intact the grift economy that funnels money upwards while creating profound systemic economic risk.
• The single most important problem for pro-democracy forces is that too many people — especially in position of power — seem unable to truly believe that we are living in a consolidating competitive authoritarian regime. Perhaps they are too habituated to the “rules” of the system that no longer exists. Perhaps they still cling to the drug of American exceptionalism, which makes it difficult for them to accept that “it can happen here.” Perhaps they understand it intellectually, but find it too difficult to make the necessary paradigm shift.

I say “seems” because it is possible that, behind the scenes, they are taking necessary steps. These include creating tight working groups — probably at the staff level — to develop contingency plans. And I don’t mean “contingency plans for how to handle another shutdown.” I mean plans for coordinating and leading massive civil resistance against an effort to nullify the 2026 (or 2028) election results, responding to a declaration of martial law, and reacting to a military coup.

Do they have a strategy for dealing with the administration if Trump dies and there is a smooth transfer to a smarter, more ideological Vance? What about if what follow is a power struggle between Vance, Miller, and other contenders?

And what will if they do if they ever regain control of the government?

I know that there is a network of lawyers and state attorneys generals who are coordinating and planning. But I have tapped my contacts and no one is aware of any effort to, for example, rope in people who have experience mobilizing against competitive authoritarian regimes — such as veterans of the Orange and Rose Revolutions.

Similarly, the only analogs to a “Project 2025” appear to be either bullshit sinecures or fundraising mechanisms. I would bet that there are hundreds of academics and policy experts willing to help – ones with specialized knowledge that the Democratic establishment doesn’t even know that it needs: in regime transitions, security-sector reform and demobilization, rebuilding civil society, and so on.

As horrible as things are, the fat lady hasn’t sung. The regime is rushing to consolidate control because Trump is wildly unpopular. The economy is only getting worse. The regime is making mistakes, and Trump is in obvious decline. He has no credible heir. But even a D+10 or D+12 environment won’t matter if the administration successfully fucks with the election. And if you don’t think it will, then you must have slept through August 2020–January 2021.

ETA: Edited for clarity.

The post The State of the Republic is Grim appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

She is shocked to see the poison being poured into the tender minds of our white youth:

Just remember Katie: That train’s never late.

The post Frau Goebbels takes her kids to the public library appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

I recently found online this interesting essay on Len Deighton's spy craft, which reflects on Deighton's position within the canon of UK spy fiction. While he's often placed alongside John Le Carre and Ian Fleming as part of the 'big three' of UK spy fiction - perhaps soon to be joined in a big four by Mick Herron, of Slough House fame, but that's another story altogether - the author of this essay foregrounds the point that in his portrayal of spy craft in his fiction, the fact that of the three Deighton was the only one who was not a spy makes its presence felt in his storytelling, and so marks him out as something different.

As does, of course, the fact that unlike the other two authors in this triumvirate, he didn't attend public school and was assuredly working class in his upbringing. None of this is really new, but this essay I think encapsulates well how these social and career differences manifest themselves in Deighton's writing, particularly in his two most famous creations, the unnamed spy who became Harry Palmer, and Bernard Samson. Both, for example, are recognised as unreliable narrators for the reader, which creates tension and ambiguity when reading the books, given that everything being said my turn out not to be one hundred per cent accurate.

"Deighton’s hero is an unreliable narrator whose commentaries should be sifted, not readily accepted. It isn’t that he deliberately sets out to hoodwink or misdirect us, rather that his outlook is hampered by blind spots. His entirely subjective account prevents him from presenting the whole picture or conveying the exact truth. Anomalies and distortions arise. As Deighton once explained: ‘What happens in The IPCRESS File (and in all my other first-person stories) is found somewhere in the uncertainty of contradiction.’ This makes for stimulating reading."

Not a new insight, but this essay explores well how the author makes the most of this.

With Len Deighton rather having fallen out of public consciousness since the turn of the century - not surprising, perhaps, given his advanced age and non-release of any new fiction during this period - essays and evaluations of his writing are now seen sparingly in the UK media and online generally, so when something like this essay does crop up, it's interesting to see if the author has any new perspectives to offer on often familiar traits.

From the Weird History YouTube channel, an epic undertaking: telling the (US-centric) cultural history of the 70s, 80s, 90s, and 00s in just (just!) 16 hours.

This is like a mega ultra monster extended mix of We Didn’t Start the Fire. The videos are organized chronologically, with each year taking 15-30 minutes to summarize, so you can watch small bits here and there instead of having to ingest a whole decade in one go.

Tags: history · video

💬 Join the discussion on kottke.org →