This is really great context for understanding the Trump era both in history and in the wider world. But I would add that, in terms of the Unitary Executive Theory, Trump is Dick Cheney's monster. When GWB came to office, he brought a number of people with him, notably Cheney, John Bolton and John Yoo, who were adherence of this strong reading of executive power, and they set out to dismantle checks on presidential power, for example through Yoo's "torture memo." I think Cheney was moderately more principled in his belief in UET than Trump (who likely doesn't understand it, and may not even know the term) and his lackeys. But the only think surprising in any of this is that Cheney is somehow surprised that we ended up here.
This is a great explanation but for those of us who aren’t lawyers what are the plans to get us engaged? What can we do? Already protesting, calling congresspeople, and donating to legal orgs.
I don't think that is the coda. Worth remembering that Project 2025 is a Heritage Foundation product, and the Heritage Foundation in recent years has been heavily influenced by the Danube Institute, a Hungarian think tank dedicated to exporting the strategies of Viktor Orban's "illiberal democracy." That's a misnomer, but if they follow the Orban model, the goal is not to end elections, but to render them meaningless by controlling all the levers of democratic participation.
Fair points! And the anodyne near complicit behaviour of senior Dems supports your contention. The only thing is the rise of good young dems who could form the majority of dems in the house very soon?
We must watch the Smart elections case in Sept for hints?
Money, gerrymander and tech together support your view as well.
But there seems to be be a thirst for absolute power without any remote chance of a 'mistake' and l still think that may drive these to an ending of elections. If not by midterm by 2027-8.
It's possible. Writing yesterday made me think about the fact that of the authoritarians that have emerged in this century, it's a mixed bag. I need to think this through a little bit more. But, off the top of my head, I think maybe you could plot them on two axes: how much they are willing to take the gamble of a reasonably well-rigged election, and how much they are willing to tolerate violence.
A Putin rates high on the violence axis and low on the risk tolerance axis. An Orban is the opposite. Duterte was fine with election, and fine with killing the opposition. Trump, Bolsonaro and Bukele all tolerate risk, and flirt a bit with violence.
I guess what I am stumbling towards is the hunch that Trump won't cancel elections, but if the gaming of them gets a bit bloody, he could live with that.
Adam Bonica: Gaius Octavianus, in his callow youth both shrinking from battle and yet ruthless in the Triumvirate with Lepidus and Marcus Antonius in establishing proscriptions that decimated the opposition, namely those that had opposed Julius Caesar.
After Actium, in 31 BC, Octavian was unopposed and established himself as the First of Twelve Caesars.
As the Senate conferred on Octavian the honorific, „Augustus,“ he was careful to observe, and preserve the law and traditions of the Roman Republic, even reaching back to restore outmoded priestly and Patrician Traditions to add the weight of patriotism and History to the newly established Principiate.
Tacitus reports that the Senate retained its boldness in free speech during the Principiate — Primus inter pares — First among Equals.
Under Tiberius the speech of the Senste was curbed and reigned in.
Ultimately the later Caesars included Caligula and Nero.
The cycle of 12 Caesars had looked like a Conservative Revolution until it devolved into a murderous Despotism.
💯This is so spot on and tell your friends and family about this and use it as a counter argument. So many people say “oh come on they’re not REALLY Nazis they aren’t gas chambering anybody”. No one is going to gas chamber anymore. The world rejected that. Instead, they are going to unemploy us to into submission and cheat cheat cheat through elections. The courts are lost and have been since POTUS 45. 💯
In the third to last paragraph, the word “control” was accidentally split into “contro” and “l” by the insertion of text. Please delete this comment if you have corrected it.
This is really great context for understanding the Trump era both in history and in the wider world. But I would add that, in terms of the Unitary Executive Theory, Trump is Dick Cheney's monster. When GWB came to office, he brought a number of people with him, notably Cheney, John Bolton and John Yoo, who were adherence of this strong reading of executive power, and they set out to dismantle checks on presidential power, for example through Yoo's "torture memo." I think Cheney was moderately more principled in his belief in UET than Trump (who likely doesn't understand it, and may not even know the term) and his lackeys. But the only think surprising in any of this is that Cheney is somehow surprised that we ended up here.
This analysis is so insightful and very very helpful. Thank you!
For your reading consideration: Steven Levitsky & Daniel Ziblatt’s “How Democracies Die”
Excellent article
This is a great explanation but for those of us who aren’t lawyers what are the plans to get us engaged? What can we do? Already protesting, calling congresspeople, and donating to legal orgs.
Excellent analysis thanks. But you left out the coda. No more elections needed uno voce uno duce. Ie Fascism in full
I don't think that is the coda. Worth remembering that Project 2025 is a Heritage Foundation product, and the Heritage Foundation in recent years has been heavily influenced by the Danube Institute, a Hungarian think tank dedicated to exporting the strategies of Viktor Orban's "illiberal democracy." That's a misnomer, but if they follow the Orban model, the goal is not to end elections, but to render them meaningless by controlling all the levers of democratic participation.
I've got some more on that here and in a few other posts:
https://everyfingday.substack.com/p/competitive-authoritarianism-or?r=5j6wij
Fair points! And the anodyne near complicit behaviour of senior Dems supports your contention. The only thing is the rise of good young dems who could form the majority of dems in the house very soon?
We must watch the Smart elections case in Sept for hints?
Money, gerrymander and tech together support your view as well.
But there seems to be be a thirst for absolute power without any remote chance of a 'mistake' and l still think that may drive these to an ending of elections. If not by midterm by 2027-8.
It's possible. Writing yesterday made me think about the fact that of the authoritarians that have emerged in this century, it's a mixed bag. I need to think this through a little bit more. But, off the top of my head, I think maybe you could plot them on two axes: how much they are willing to take the gamble of a reasonably well-rigged election, and how much they are willing to tolerate violence.
A Putin rates high on the violence axis and low on the risk tolerance axis. An Orban is the opposite. Duterte was fine with election, and fine with killing the opposition. Trump, Bolsonaro and Bukele all tolerate risk, and flirt a bit with violence.
I guess what I am stumbling towards is the hunch that Trump won't cancel elections, but if the gaming of them gets a bit bloody, he could live with that.
Excellent analysis and commentary. Gracias!
Absolute power means answer to no one. What happens when leader dies? One party system?
Adam Bonica: Gaius Octavianus, in his callow youth both shrinking from battle and yet ruthless in the Triumvirate with Lepidus and Marcus Antonius in establishing proscriptions that decimated the opposition, namely those that had opposed Julius Caesar.
After Actium, in 31 BC, Octavian was unopposed and established himself as the First of Twelve Caesars.
As the Senate conferred on Octavian the honorific, „Augustus,“ he was careful to observe, and preserve the law and traditions of the Roman Republic, even reaching back to restore outmoded priestly and Patrician Traditions to add the weight of patriotism and History to the newly established Principiate.
Tacitus reports that the Senate retained its boldness in free speech during the Principiate — Primus inter pares — First among Equals.
Under Tiberius the speech of the Senste was curbed and reigned in.
Ultimately the later Caesars included Caligula and Nero.
The cycle of 12 Caesars had looked like a Conservative Revolution until it devolved into a murderous Despotism.
💯This is so spot on and tell your friends and family about this and use it as a counter argument. So many people say “oh come on they’re not REALLY Nazis they aren’t gas chambering anybody”. No one is going to gas chamber anymore. The world rejected that. Instead, they are going to unemploy us to into submission and cheat cheat cheat through elections. The courts are lost and have been since POTUS 45. 💯
“Have we, perhaps, traded liberty for a comfortable cage?
Aldous Huxley’s terrifying prophecy - why we willingly sacrifice freedom for comfort.
https://open.substack.com/pub/philosopheasy/p/aldous-huxleys-terrifying-prophecy?r=kxzps&utm_medium=ios
Huxley's book, Brave New World is a masterclass in social engineering.
The citizens of this futuristic society are kept docile and content through a variety of methods…”
PHILOSOPHEASY | SUBSTACK | AUG 4 2025
Sad but true. Follow the colors of nature. Red = hot sun. Green = 💚 nature..
In the third to last paragraph, the word “control” was accidentally split into “contro” and “l” by the insertion of text. Please delete this comment if you have corrected it.