Could just be "Trump’s loose lips and sticky fingers" I suppose. Insider trading is still illegal. — jorndoe

Not really when Trump is in power. Nothing will come of it even if there was insider trading in the White House he'll just pardon them.

It occurred to me that following the sub prime financial crisis. The right has seen the writing on the wall and that the people will want/require/demand a move to the left in policy terms. To preserve their standard of living etc. They realise that their free market ideology and policy can’t now deliver that. It’s become top heavy and relies on the impoverishment of the people to inflate the top. So to fend off the left and the adoption of progressive policy, they have to take the populist pill.

This is clearly what has happened in the U.K. Although in the U.K. there is an added class issue, whereby the privileged classes have been fending off the left ever since voter reform gave the vote to all people in 1918. So one can see where this effort developed over the last century and turned toxic.

There is a clear timeline where one can identify when the Tory party(the right) took the populist pill for this reason and then the Brexit saga and the demise of the Tory party followed.

That returns to my questions... what should the public do about it. Or rather, how far will the US let Trump go before doing something?

If he's aiming to create a true dictatorship, changing institutions to the point he has absolute power, then why does the US population tolerate it? Why do people talk about this like it's ok because he was democratically elected? A democratically elected candidate who turns to demolish the democracy that created him, should be removed by force. Any notion that such action would be anti-democratic is simply delusional and ignorant of the problem with the tolerance paradox.

The US has the ability to stop this, but if he continues, and it gets worse, and people's rights are further being suppressed, they might not be able to. The whole point with comparisons to the third reich is to stop it before it happens. How many fantasies are there in fiction about stopping Hitler before he gained absolute power?

Even if Trump wouldn't go that far, the tendencies, the push to gather loyalists around him, to get rid of critics, to have power over institutions that should govern him, removing people in society and sending them away, are all showing a trend that shouldn't be tolerated in the US.

He's already crossed so many lines that agencies and the people should remove Trump and his loyalists. Brand them as a dangerous political fringe group and force republicans to get their shit together and exile any such people from their party.

Witnessing all of this from the outside, it's like that scene in the movie "Civil War" in which the journalists enter a small town where the owner of a store behaves ignorant of what is going on: "Oh, we don't really follow the news... there's so much negativity" is the gist of it.

When is it time to wake up for real? Less talk more action so to speak.

If you're categorically uninterested in my line of thought, why be so disingenuous as to ask for sources, and then proceed to give me this cunty attitude when I go through the effort of finding quotes for you? I even literally asked you whether you were genuinely interested.

Man, didn't know you were such an asshole.

That returns to my questions... what should the public do about it. Or rather, how far will the US let Trump go before doing something? — Christoffer

There are people who have been trying to ‘stop Trump’ since the first day of his calamitous rule. But as he’s won a democratic vote, there’s no obvious way to do it. Had he been convicted after either of his impeachments, it would have stopped him (damn you, McConnell!) Had the Supreme Court found that Article 19 or whatever it was disqualified him (which seemed obvious to everyone else) that might have stopped him. As it is, he’s been voted in, and the only apparent remedy is that he’s voted out, although whether he irredeemably damages the constitutional order in the meanwhile remains a possibility

//read Paul Krugman on the tarriffs//.

If you're categorically uninterested in my line of thought, why be so disingenuous as to ask for sources, and then proceed to give me this cunty attitude when I go through the effort of finding quotes for you? I even literally asked you whether you were genuinely interested.

Man, didn't know you were such an asshole. — Tzeentch

I read both articles and directly addressed your line of thought and how it's not supported by those articles. You seem to redefine “interest“ as if I have to agree with a badly argued position. I don't agree for the reasons stated. My interest in your position was evident when I spend my valuable time trying to make sense of it.

Who is "Washington"? What evidence do you have for it? — Benkei

In this context, "Washington" is primarily the United States foreign policy establishment aka "the Blob". — Tzeentch

The existence of a political elite that holds a lot of sway behind the curtains isn't really all that controversial among political thinkers, though some ascribe more power to them than others. — Tzeentch

This is what you asked evidence for, and that's what I gave. The sources provide a direct answer to your question, as I have underlined.

It's fine if you disagree, but you can disagree without all the phoney shit where you have to pretend there isn't an academic basis for the ideas I'm proposing, and without strawmans about cabals and what not.

I remember you predicting that of all the wars that Trump is lusting to have, a war with Panama was the second likeliest one. Given that the US and Panama recently partnered to secure the canal and deter China, with a special nod to Panama’s sovereignty, I’m curious if your fears abated or if they still remain. — NOS4A2

If the other side surrenders or caves in, there's not going to be a war. And what I've been talking about is that Trump lusts territory for the US. The old colonial way...

Panama seems to be attempting to hold back Trump, which now seems to be blocking the building of permanent bases. And it should be noted that prior to Trump's annexation plans, Panama was open to joint-operations to patrol the lawless Panamanian - Colombian border. But Hegseth's visit to Panama just shows how hell bent Trump is to enlargen the territory of the US and the administration tries to sooth his desires.

The reality is that if Panama would oppose US actions, nobody in the World would care much about it. Just look at yourself: does the media interview Panamanians about what they think about Trump's actions? Greenlanders were talked to, but not Panamanians. The World is totally used to the US being a bully in it's backyard.

(A demonstrator stood over a burning poster with images of Hegseth, Trump, and Panama's President Jose Raul Mulino, during a protest against Hegseth's visit to Panama.)

(France 24, 11th April 2025) US troops will be able to deploy to a string of bases along the Panama Canal under a joint deal seen by AFP Thursday, a major concession to President Donald Trump as he seeks to reestablish influence over the vital waterway.

The agreement, signed by top security officials from both countries, allows US military personnel to deploy to Panama-controlled facilities for training, exercises and "other activities."

The deal stops short of allowing the United States to build its own permanent bases on the isthmus, a move that would be deeply unpopular with Panamanians and legally fraught.

But it gives the United States broad sway to deploy an unspecified number of personnel to bases, some of which Washington built when it occupied the canal zone decades ago.

The real question if the US truly goes forward with taking back the Canal Zone. Far more unlikely is annexing all of Panama. Here likely the White House will try to behave like "the adult in the room" and try to limit the most delusional ideas of Trump. I guess Panama, just like Denmark and Greenland, try to just stay low and have Trump going off at others and forgetting his most delusional ideas.

And let's see if we get the drone war against the Mexican Cartels or US strikes on Iran. All what you wanted so much when voting for Trump.

There are people who have been trying to ‘stop Trump’ since the first day of his calamitous rule. But as he’s won a democratic vote, there’s no obvious way to do it. Had he been convicted after either of his impeachments, it would have stopped him (damn you, McConnell!) Had the Supreme Court found that Article 19 or whatever it was disqualified him (which seemed obvious to everyone else) that might have stopped him. As it is, he’s been voted in, and the only apparent remedy is that he’s voted out, although whether he irredeemably damages the constitutional order in the meanwhile remains a possibility — Wayfarer

First, how can we know that Trump didn't work to oppose all of that behind the scenes? Second, it still shows the guardrails aren't working.

If he continues down the path of actual fascism, then it doesn't matter what the democratic process is as he has then dismantled it. Will people then still continue arguing that "he was elected" and "he wasn't voted out"?

My question is, at what point would people act outside of the normal procedurs to get rid of him? At what step, action or behavior from Trump and his followers, would the people say enough is enough and simply remove him by force.

Because we are witnessing something that could be at the very edge of a hostile takeover of power in the US. An installation of actual governmentally based true fascism. So I'm wondering, what would it take for people to act at the latest to stop something like that?

Or should it have been done already, by any notion of such behavior? Should a democracy tolerate things escalating to the very edge before taking actions to defend it? Or should it defend it sooner?

The Constitution allows the president to become a temporary dictator during a war. For instance, Lincoln freed the slaves with war power. He suspended habeas corpus and put people in jail for criticizing the government.

If Trump does that (and doesn't end up with a bullet in his head), the problem is that Congress would likely go along with it. That's what's unusual about this situation. People watched Trump try to derail an election and elected him again. This is what a lot of Americans want. There would likely be riots that people like @Joshs would attend, but riots don't do anything.

In other words, the fact that Vance is waiting to become president and we know he favors authoritarianism, means that the Democrats would have to morph into a political dynamo to counter the drift toward dictatorship. Could that happen? I guess. I doubt it.

How about your fears? Do you fear that we now have our first dictator as president? Do you not find this EO terrifying:

No way, I love it. I remember this guy attempting to subvert the duly-elected president from the inside, and being rather public about it. Instead of resigning, like an adult, he wrote gossipy articles and leaked information for his friends in the beltway and among the resistance racket, which was lucrative at the time. It was pure deep-state dinner theater and he should have lost his security clearance years ago.

Thom Hartmann is certainly afraid:

But why are you afraid?

It doesn’t look like your prediction panned out, much like the one you made about the collapse of the FBI. It appears that the opposite is the case: a deal, a partnership, with the United States acknowledging Panamanian sovereignty. That could all still collapse and fall apart into war and annexation, but so far nothing like it.

Next up, cartels and Iran. Both of these will need to occur to get you back in the green. I read you often and enjoy your efforts, but I’m still trying to assess whether I’m being given insight or fear-mongering.

Thom Hartmann is certainly afraid:

But why are you afraid? — NOS4A2

I don’t know you, and haven’t followed most of your previous comments on politics, so I dont know what your political perspective is in general. There has been much written about the New Right, which is a big tent including Peter Thiel, J.D.Vance, Curtis Yarvin, Blake Masters, Tucker Carlson and Elon Musk. Some of them, like Musk, Thiel and Mark Andreesen, are enamored of the ‘technocracy’ movement which believes in government by a technocratic elite. Others (Yarvin) are in favor of something more like a monarchical leadership. A. inner of them have high respect for Victor Orban? What do you think of him, and where you do stand with respect to these figures and this movement? Is there one among them who is a kind of guiding light for you? You certainly don’t sound like someone who considers the Reagan or Bush neo-liberal free market vision to be an inspiration for you.

Protests, on the other hand, can sometimes be surprisingly effective. — Joshs

In this case I think the effectiveness would be in the legacy of the protests. Trump has already shown a penchant for using force against protestors. Some people would likely die in the clash.

In this case I think the effectiveness would be in the legacy of the protests. Trump has already shown a penchant for using for force against protestors. Some people would likely die in the clash — frank

I wonder how many died of the 1 million who demonstrated in Puerto Rico? I’ll bet some would have thought it was worth it.

That's what's unusual about this situation. People watched Trump try to derail an election and elected him again. This is what a lot of Americans want. — frank

I watched him try and derail an election, too. And yet I wasn’t convinced that he is a full-blown dictator until a few months ago. If it took me that long to figure it out, you can imagine that it will take even longer for those non -authoritarian types who voted for him reluctantly to come to that conclusion. We just had no precedent in this country for an all-out authoritarian takeover of the highest office. We haven’t learned how to read the signs. I would even give the benefit of the doubt and assume he doesn’t want an Orban or Putin-like figure running our country. But he only sees scattered pieces of the puzzle and they don’t add up to tyranny for him. Instead, they can be brushed off as the aggressive power-plays of politics as usual.

The Constitution allows the president to become a temporary dictator during a war. — frank

Which is probably why Trump uses "emergency laws" for stuff that's not in emergency. He essentially invents some emergency out of thin air and then do whatever he wants.

If Trump does that (and doesn't end up with a bullet in his head), the problem is that Congress would likely go along with it. That's what's unusual about this situation. — frank

Not really, if Trump installs loyalists all around and threaten the careers of people, he can intimidate the congress to just follow what he wants. This is how fascist dictators comes into power from a democracy. Lazy and cowards who drop down kissing his ass because they risk losing their position of power or career. Republicans are full of these kinds of fuckers.

There would likely be riots that people like Joshs would attend, but riots don't do anything. — frank

Depends on the scale. If the US stands on the brink of actual dictatorship and fascism, I would hope millions of people take those fuckers down before its too late.

In other words, the fact that Vance is waiting to become president and we know he favors authoritarianism — frank

If so, then bullet to the head. Seriously, political violence is not a thing that should exist in democracies. But if democracy is dismantled and a nation is transformed into a proper dictatorship, then operation Valkyrie the way out of it. Preferably with success.

I mean, this is the core of my question. When will the people of the US do something? Like,at what point of a transition over to authoritarianism and a dictatorship is it appropriate to take action? And how do one know if it is going in that direction for certain?

We have the side of respecting democracy and protecting it even when someone we don't like has the power. And then we have nazi Germany. At what point in between do we know that "now is the time for another type of action to prevent nazi Germany"?

In my opinion, the time for action is already here. Trump has gone too far so many times that he should be dragged out of office and the nation initiates a re-election. It's better to do that now rather than risking it going so far that it's either too late or violence gets too real.

Exactly what is the negative aspect of doing a re-election demanding republicans to put forth a more proper candidate?

In my opinion, the time for action is already here. Trump has gone too far so many times that he should be dragged out of office and the nation initiates a re-election. It's better to do that now rather than — Christoffer

Have you been attending the 50501 protests? There’s another one planned for next Saturday. I think you’ll find that they will grow significantly in size over the course of the year. https://www.fiftyfifty.one/

This is what we need to do here:

https://theweek.com/speedreads/854197/1-million-people-could-take-part-puerto-rico-protests

wonder how many died of the 1 million who demonstrated in Puerto Rico? I’ll bet some would have thought it was worth it. — Joshs

My only regret is that I have but one life to give for my country. Go Joshs. Do that protest! Quote some Hegel to them. That'll leave them befuddled.

And yet I wasn’t convinced that he is a full-blown dictator until a few months ago — Joshs

Eh, he's 78. He's going to be too tired to be a dictator in 4 years. Fortunately he's all we have to pay attention to. Nobody else. :roll:

It’s clear from President Donald Trump’s decision to pause the sweeping global tariffs that he said he would never back down from that the man is a formidable genius and arguably the greatest president in American history.

After seeing U.S. financial markets plummet and the threat of a recession grow exponentially, Trump decided on April 9 to lower his tariffs on most other countries to 10% for 90 days. Boldly getting nothing in return for negotiating against himself over the trade war he started.

[…]

Clearly the best president ever, folks. No U.S. leader has ever lost so much for no reason while regaining some of it and accomplishing nothing with such efficiency. 

https://apple.news/AdbjSJ7ijQ9S8SBvkbyN3SQ

That about sums up this past week, where the “great businessman” and grand negotiator managed to negotiate his way into trillions of lost dollars.

Reminds me of the “Alcohol is the cause of, and solution to, all of life’s problems” joke. In this case, the alcohol is Trump— maybe Trump Vodka, for example, which went belly up.

Anyway— as the casino-bankrupting Trump sinks the economy and once again reduces the United States to a laughingstock, while accomplishing nothing beyond more efficiently distributing wealth to the .001%, I wonder two things: (1) when will China be the world’s sole superpower? Looking more like a decade or two, tops.

And (2): given this was all totally predictable, just how stupid is the American electorate? Perhaps it’s a sign of resignation, a suicide wish. A degenerated culture. Can’t blamed them, I guess— they’ve been systematically reduced to slaves over the years. Still, it’s worth pondering…

My only regret is that I have but one life to give for my country. Go Joshs. Do that protest! Quote some Hegel to them. That'll leave them befuddled. — frank

And what do you plan on doing? Anything? What would
you do if you were a university president threatened with loss of grant money, or a news service or law firm threatened with loss of access? Would you fight back or acquiesce?

I remember when I first discovered that one of the things the 1% does with their money is control the public conversation to reinforce their position. I was so shocked I was ready for the revolution then. I remember wanting to be part of a firing squad.

Give me a revolution and I'll salute it.

↪Joshs
I remember when I first discovered that one of the things the 1% does with their money is control the public conversation to reinforce their position. I was so shocked I was ready for the revolution then. I remember wanting to be part of a firing squad.

Give me a revolution and I'll salute it. — frank

I’m not interested in a revolution. I’m interested in protecting people in my community that I care about. And you didn’t answer my question:

What would you do if you were a university president threatened with loss of grant money, or a news service or law firm threatened with loss of access? Would you fight back or acquiesce?

I’m not interested in a revolution. — Joshs

I have been for a while now. I was born at the wrong time. And you sir are no leftist.

What would you do if you were a university president threatened with loss of grant money, or a news service or law firm threatened with loss of access? Would you fight back or acquiesce? — Joshs

Fight back how? Through the courts? Or standing in the middle of the street with a freaking sign in my hands?

So, in one short week, the Moron has:

* Crashed the stock market
* Crashed the bond market
* Crashed the dollar
* Alienated all of our allies (except Russia)
* United the entire world against us (except Russia)

And these are just the immediate effects of his malignant imbecility. Longer term, we can expect surging inflation, factory closures, exploding debt, recession at minumum.

I hope all the Trumpies are happy!

Lol.

We haven't been even three months in on a four year term, and here you are eagerly trying to declare Trump a success and declaring my views to be wrong...because nothing of them has happened in less than three months. Let's just look at what at least a couple years give us under Trump. Let's just enjoy all the winning Americans will be through then.

Besides, let's just look at the forecast you have made:

(2 months ago)

I just want to submit the following for discussion.

Talks are now occurring in Canada in regards to zero tariffs, which is exactly what the president wants. — NOS4A2

Does he want zero tariffs? EU would be open to them. Trump isn't at all interested. He wants tariffs and domestic manufacturing. Trade is bad. But as I said, it's just been few months...

Canada might even be the 51st state. — NOS4A2

Let's see just what happens to this forecast of yours.

And are you walking around in Canada with your Maga hat on, @NOS4A2?

Nobel Peace Prize winner Maria Ressa, in Stockholm today, draws parallels to Rodrigo Duterte and warns about how the slide into authoritarianism can happen faster than people realize. And without a proper political opposition that is clearly rallying an opposition within the people, it can soon and quickly backslide the democracy.

https://swedenherald.com/article/feels-like-a-replay-comparing-trump-to-duterte

I also just saw a new video by "Then & Now" on YouTube which goes into detail the parallels between populists of the past and populists right now. And made the argument that we should talk about these times for what they are and not just call it "fascist". That the era we live in is truly populistic, in the same way we've seen populists in history rise and fall, but today, at a much greater scale.

The augmentation of populists through the use of social media has skyrocket their rise in society and formed a new global political behavior. The authoritarianism we see is fundamentally populistic rather than fascist. This form of populism will probably stay with us for long, as long as social media helps rallying these movements in the corners of democracies.

We will never be able to dismantle it because it's an inherent consequence of democratic societies. But in our social media age, it has risen to become a far more influential percentage of power within a democratic government.

And since the US operates on a bipartisan system, if populists gain power in one of the parties, they have a much greater chance to fully overtake the government, and to do it fast.

It all depends on how willing the people are to let this happen. If the Democrats are unable to muster an opposition fast, they can't be turned to for a solution. And so it's up to the people to govern and save democracy in the US from the risk of this backslide escalating.

In what way? I'm not sure, but million people marches and demonstrations outside the White House would certainly be the first step. To put a pressure on the powers on a scale rarely seen and not easily ignored. On top of that, making sure to help any investigative journalists getting access to evidence of Trump abusing his power, rigging the markets, connections to other authoritarian leaders of the world etc.

As we've seen in the protests so far, they can gain in strength. And the pressure cooker is on, people are starting to wake up to what Trump is doing and I think the wind blows in the right direction at the moment.

I just hope the momentum is there to course correct this blunder of giving Trump the keys to the kingdom before things get harder to do so.

Nobel Peace Prize winner Maria Ressa, in Stockholm today, draws parallels to Rodrigo Duterte and warns about how the slide into authoritarianism can happen faster than people realize. — Christoffer

It's a good and interesting parallel.

I visited Philippines when I was 16 with my parents who were on a work trip there. We stayed in a nice skyscraper hotel in Makati in the business district of Manila. Few months later there was a military coup attempt and the visitors of the hotel were taken hostage by the rebelling military forces for a while. The coup failed and the hostages were released.

That was what Philipines was like in the 1980's after the ouster of the dictator Marcos, when Philippines was under the shaky times of Corazon Aquino. This just shows what kind of democracy the Philippines is. However now Duterte is now under custody of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Yet on the other hand, Bongbong Marcos, the son of the dictator Ferdinand Marcos, is the current president. Democracy has survived, sort of, in the Philippines. Can we say that the Philippines is a democracy? Yes, perhaps not the most well functioning example of a justice state, but still.

Perhaps this is the most likely outcome of the Trump era: the US won't face authoritarianism like a dictatorship of Mussolini or Hitler, but a situation where the institutions of the Republic continue... sort of. Yet by any measurement of just how democratic the US is will simply plunge.

I don’t know you, and haven’t followed most of your previous comments on politics, so I dont know what your political perspective is in general. There has been much written about the New Right, which is a big tent including Peter Thiel, J.D.Vance, Curtis Yarvin, Blake Masters, Tucker Carlson and Elon Musk. Some of them, like Musk, Thiel and Mark Andreesen, are enamored of the ‘technocracy’ movement which believes in government by a technocratic elite. Others (Yarvin) are in favor of something more like a monarchical leadership. A. inner of them have high respect for Victor Orban? What do you think of him, and where you do stand with respect to these figures and this movement? Is there one among them who is a kind of guiding light for you? You certainly don’t sound like someone who considers the Reagan or Bush neo-liberal free market vision to be an inspiration for you.

I can’t say I have any guiding lights and don’t silo myself into any particular brand of this or that political philosophy. I like to know what others think so my readings have spanned the entire spectrum and I am comfortable gleaning insights from all of them. My political perspective is always changing but I tend towards anarchy and individualism; and if I had to put a label on it, the only one I would wear comfortably is “individualist”.

What is your perspective in general?

All that being said, I haven’t read anything of the figures you’ve mentioned save for some of Elon’s X posts. I don’t know Orban, have never seen him speak, nor have I read anything he’s written. All I know is that, according to some, I’m supposed to fear him because his name is often evoked with some frightening words.

I have declared zero successes, to be sure, nor have I made any predictions of future events. That’s a fool’s game, yet it is absolutely pertinent to the lucrative anti-Trump racket.

The racket goes like this: predict a future Trump calamity, like a depression or nuclear war or fascist takeover. When it never arrives, promote oneself and one’s own failed prophesies as part of the efforts that helped stop it. Rinse, repeat.

The racket goes like this: predict a future Trump calamity, like a depression or nuclear war or fascist takeover. When it never arrives, promote oneself and one’s own failed prophesies as part of the efforts that helped stop it. Rinse, repeat. — NOS4A2

What about the inverse situation, if one makes a correct prediction? If for example, someone correctly predicts Trump's assassination, would that person be accused of aiding and abetting, or even conspiring? A correct prediction is very suspicious looking.