What I still don't understand is how the democrats missed the fascism during Biden's term.
Covid panic, lockdowns, school closures. What do you call it when there is a state of emergency for years, even when it is clear that this lab created virus was not much worse than a bad flu? Be honest, for most people it wasn't. I know that because I am unjabbed and I got it twice and I have dozen of unjabbed friends of all ages and they all got it- and all survived. I also read research. Would we even be arguing about this if covid had been the deadly plague that they claimed and used to justify the lockdowns, school closures and mandates?
Biden mandated the covid vaccine, a brand new mrna lipid nanoparticle concoction. Pregnant women were required to get this vaccine or lose their jobs! It had never been tested. Later we found out that the vaccine was also never studied to see if it prevented transmission. ( it didn't). So why mandate it?
I could go on and on, and also about censorship and deplatforming critics of school closures, lockdowns and vaccine mandates. The democrats refuse to even talk about this. YSo sorry, Cry me a river about fascism, about lawfare ( you did it too), about censorship ( you did it). I just dont believe or trust you.
If only COVID was an innocent as a flu. So many would still be here. If you deride the idea that mask mandates were for the common good, what sort of tyranny consists in asking public to cover their face? A cartoon one? And so goes the idiotic argument to make Biden the Devil and Trump Jesus.
YEs, I do deride the idea that masks mandates were for the common good. I would ask you to look at studies comparing covid infections and deaths between states with longer mask mandates and states with shorter ones. Also look at the data on Sweden which NEVER closed schools , never masked children.... I don't see where I said Biden was the devil and Trump was Jesus ? I said that the democrats are hypocrites crying fascism about Trump's executive orders and lawfare.
You're comparing a culture where the people were very compliant with the recommendations (Sweden) , to the virulent , let's call it 'individualism' to be polite, that courses through our diverse America. Your claim that Biden displayed 'fascism' is another example of it. It's simply absured to compare Trump's extremely and proudly personal attacks on institutions to Biden asking you to *please wear a mask* (it's also absurd to compare the actual billions Trump personally is making off crypto -- including from foreign agents seeking favors, he's not trying to hide it -- to the allegations about Hunter Biden's funneling monmey to Joe). Biden didn't *mandate* that you get vaccinated, either. He didn't *make* schools close -- those were local decisions. And lemme tell ya as a biologist, your grasp of mRNA vaccine tech, COVID origins, epidemiology, and immunology are all primitive at best. It's just the same farrago of ignorance the right has been spewing for years now,
Yes, Swedes were compliant, in general, not all. But the fact that citizens were treated with respect and dignity and given the choice to mask or vaccine, or not, does matter. I was in Stockholm during covid and there was actuallly very little masking. I met many unvaccinated Swedes as I attended a health freedom event in the heart of Stockholm. We were about 1000 people in a conference center. ( no masks).
I dont see much point in arguing with your other points. Biden's party was notably authoritarian over covid. Schools were closed for two years in big democrat cities. The most disadvantaged students were the most harmed. Poor children were stuck at home while their essential worker parents were out working. Many of them are still years behind grade level.
Pregnant women were forced to get the covid vaccine or lose their jobs. The vaccine was never tested on pregnant women. I personally met a new york fire fighter who had a heart attack after the first vaccine dose, he got a medical exemption from getting the second dose, the department refused to honor it, he got the second dose and had a major heart attack and is now disabled. ( He sued, the case was covered in the news, but he lost).
Mr.Biologist, how would you possibly know about my graspt of mrna vaccine technology, covid origins and the rest?
Let's agree to accept your issues with the covid policies (I've seen enough of your comments here to realize you won't be persuaded otherwise) and say that the move to authoritarianism under Biden was worse than what had been happening before. Can you accept that the downward slide is continuing (perhaps even accelerating)? I think it would be more helpful if everybody interested in democracy addressed the perhaps small but realistic threat of the USA becoming like a Latin American dictatorship as one, rather than trying to score points by reliving the past?
I am shocked that the Trump admin is doing some of the same bad things the biden admin did, particularly regarding free speech. I think we can agree that the first amendment is sacred and needs to be broadly interpreted. Government over reach is bad whether its republicans or democrats.
If only it was the just the 1st amendment. The politicization of the judicial system was also used under Biden, but has got much worse since January. And one area where Trump far outshines Biden is in the way he has used the presidency to enrich himself and his family. If this was happening in another country, it would be viewed as very serious, but in the richest and most powerful democracy in the world I have no idea where this will take us.
You may be correct about the Trump family benefitting from his presidency. I hate to play " what about" but ... How about Hunter Biden's 100k a month consulting contracts from a Ukrainisan oligarch while Joe Biden was charged with Ukaine policy under Obama? What about Hunters payoffs from Chinese companies that were followed by golfting with his Dad? And what about the Clinton Foundation collecting hundreds of millions while Hilary was secretary of state and future presidential candidate?
This seems to be an endemic. ( kind of like covid). And then there is Nancy Pelosi's stock trading prowess....
Well, Dave, if you think that I've "given up like a happy slave", perhaps you should read several of my Substack posts over last year before you decide what I really am.
The 13th Clown on Substack by Bruce Brittain. ICE will eventually get around to guys like me. Should I ask you for help or will you have "given up" by then?
Perhaps if Democrats and Progressives hadn't screamed corruption and that the sky is falling from 2016 through 2024, and if they had taken seriously Biden's corrupt overseas operations, and if they acknowledged their role in Democratic lawfare we could be more moved by the present arguments.
“Roosevelt’s New Deal faced Supreme Court resistance and adapted its approach accordingly. When the Court struck down key legislation, Roosevelt changed tactics rather than ignore the ruling.”
I have a lot of problems with your hand-waiving at the many excesses that paved the way for trump 2.0, but your characterization Roosevelt threatening to pack the courts if they didn’t ignore the constitution and rule in his favor is too hilarious not to highlight.
Fair challenge. Roosevelt's court-packing threat was attempted institutional manipulation, not merely adapting to judicial constraint.
But the distinction that matters for Ferguson's framework holds: Roosevelt's threat failed because it was visible and subject to democratic debate. Congress rejected it. The system held through precisely the kind of institutional resistance Ferguson relies on to measure democratic health.
Trump's approach differs fundamentally by systematically capturing institutions from within – Justice Department purges, regulatory shakedowns, normalised emergency powers – achieving authoritarian control without triggering the visible confrontation that stopped Roosevelt.
Ferguson's framework would catch Roosevelt-style threats. It misses how modern authoritarian capture actually works.
I appreciate your response, but Congress only rejected the plan because the court caved first (“The switch in time that saved nine”). And all of those things Trump is doing is also happening in plane view, subject to democratic debate and scathing observations by every mainstream publication.
Partridge is correct, of course, and it's hard to tell if Ferguson was writing what he really thought or was just being disingenuous. He is very sharp when he's really critical. But I increasingly get the feeling that all the writing about the imminent danger - my own included - is in effect fiddling while the country's constitutional safeguards are going up in smoke. I am much less critical of ordinary Germans in the 1930s than I used to be; even though, as we must hasten to add, Trump; isn't Hitler. It will be surprising if the 2026 elections are genuinely free and fair.
It won't matter much if the midterm elections are fair or not if Congress continues to be subservient to the executive branch. Congress must retake those responsibilities granted by the Constitution that it has somehow devolved to the executive branch over the last half century. So far I have seen few Representatives and Senators, Democrats or Republicans, who take their constitutional responsibilities seriously enough to jeopardize their chances for reelection. We, as voters, still have the right to petition our elected officials for redress of grievances. We need not wait until 2026 to make our voices heard.
Unfortunately there is no legal way of changing any part of the government till November 2026. The US gov't doesn't operate according to public opinion. And if the Voting Rights Act is overturned then there may be little hope left.
An excellent analysis and rebuttal to Ferguson's viewpoint. I learned a lot and I thank you. Knowing how critical the 2026 elections are, I too, wonder about their integrity.
It's hard to keep a level head amid the tsunami of shit, but I'm somewhere between Partridge and Ferguson on this important question of how bad it is.
Much of Partridge's analysis concerns Trump's consolidation of executive power. I'm not inclined to go to Defcon 1 over that as such. He is the chief executive, after all. It's bad -- he's a terrible chief executive -- but at least plausibly constitutional and generally falls under the category of norm-busting. Partridge worries about presidential authority over all three branches, but exercising authority over one's own branch isn't that.
The graver concern is the extent to which Trump acts illegally or unconstitutionally and gets away with it. The birthright citizenship executive order is obscenely unconstitutional, but it's not having real-world effects. Its procedural posture, as lawyers say, is byzantine at this point, confusing even to lawyers, but the bottom line is that its effect is stayed for now, and it almost certainly will be rejected by the Supreme Court when it hears the matter in the upcoming term.
Ferguson is already anticipating that such action will conclusively disprove the presence of authoritarianism. it's enough for him that the Supreme Court goes against Trump even once. That's ridiculous. Such logic would allow a Putin type to float a dummy executive action and have it struck down by his judicial lackeys in a show or mere "form," as Partridge has it, of judicial independence, much as dictatorships rig a fake opposition in bogus elections.
If the Supreme Court capitulates to Trump on all but that, we really should worry. It would signal that the Court is so afraid that Trump will simply defy it or have a Trumpist Congress pack it that it must do as it's told to retain its place in the constitutional order and hope for a better day. The Court has so far strenuously avoided direct confrontation. In so doing, it has avoided making bad law for the ages. This posture won't hold for much longer. It may try, concocting narrow grounds on which to uphold Trump's actions, but this will increasingly look corrupt and pathetic. They are not actually lackeys, thank goodness. They have life tenure and take their jobs seriously. That's my read anyway. I've come to think that upcoming decisions over tariffs and the Alien Enemies Act will be important tests of that impression.
Good piece, totally agree. I feel the like we are in the beginning of a longer process that very could lead to full-on fascism and tyranny. Trump is testing the country to see what we will put up with.
What I still don't understand is how the democrats missed the fascism during Biden's term.
Covid panic, lockdowns, school closures. What do you call it when there is a state of emergency for years, even when it is clear that this lab created virus was not much worse than a bad flu? Be honest, for most people it wasn't. I know that because I am unjabbed and I got it twice and I have dozen of unjabbed friends of all ages and they all got it- and all survived. I also read research. Would we even be arguing about this if covid had been the deadly plague that they claimed and used to justify the lockdowns, school closures and mandates?
Biden mandated the covid vaccine, a brand new mrna lipid nanoparticle concoction. Pregnant women were required to get this vaccine or lose their jobs! It had never been tested. Later we found out that the vaccine was also never studied to see if it prevented transmission. ( it didn't). So why mandate it?
I could go on and on, and also about censorship and deplatforming critics of school closures, lockdowns and vaccine mandates. The democrats refuse to even talk about this. YSo sorry, Cry me a river about fascism, about lawfare ( you did it too), about censorship ( you did it). I just dont believe or trust you.
If only COVID was an innocent as a flu. So many would still be here. If you deride the idea that mask mandates were for the common good, what sort of tyranny consists in asking public to cover their face? A cartoon one? And so goes the idiotic argument to make Biden the Devil and Trump Jesus.
YEs, I do deride the idea that masks mandates were for the common good. I would ask you to look at studies comparing covid infections and deaths between states with longer mask mandates and states with shorter ones. Also look at the data on Sweden which NEVER closed schools , never masked children.... I don't see where I said Biden was the devil and Trump was Jesus ? I said that the democrats are hypocrites crying fascism about Trump's executive orders and lawfare.
You're comparing a culture where the people were very compliant with the recommendations (Sweden) , to the virulent , let's call it 'individualism' to be polite, that courses through our diverse America. Your claim that Biden displayed 'fascism' is another example of it. It's simply absured to compare Trump's extremely and proudly personal attacks on institutions to Biden asking you to *please wear a mask* (it's also absurd to compare the actual billions Trump personally is making off crypto -- including from foreign agents seeking favors, he's not trying to hide it -- to the allegations about Hunter Biden's funneling monmey to Joe). Biden didn't *mandate* that you get vaccinated, either. He didn't *make* schools close -- those were local decisions. And lemme tell ya as a biologist, your grasp of mRNA vaccine tech, COVID origins, epidemiology, and immunology are all primitive at best. It's just the same farrago of ignorance the right has been spewing for years now,
Yes, Swedes were compliant, in general, not all. But the fact that citizens were treated with respect and dignity and given the choice to mask or vaccine, or not, does matter. I was in Stockholm during covid and there was actuallly very little masking. I met many unvaccinated Swedes as I attended a health freedom event in the heart of Stockholm. We were about 1000 people in a conference center. ( no masks).
I dont see much point in arguing with your other points. Biden's party was notably authoritarian over covid. Schools were closed for two years in big democrat cities. The most disadvantaged students were the most harmed. Poor children were stuck at home while their essential worker parents were out working. Many of them are still years behind grade level.
Pregnant women were forced to get the covid vaccine or lose their jobs. The vaccine was never tested on pregnant women. I personally met a new york fire fighter who had a heart attack after the first vaccine dose, he got a medical exemption from getting the second dose, the department refused to honor it, he got the second dose and had a major heart attack and is now disabled. ( He sued, the case was covered in the news, but he lost).
Mr.Biologist, how would you possibly know about my graspt of mrna vaccine technology, covid origins and the rest?
Let's agree to accept your issues with the covid policies (I've seen enough of your comments here to realize you won't be persuaded otherwise) and say that the move to authoritarianism under Biden was worse than what had been happening before. Can you accept that the downward slide is continuing (perhaps even accelerating)? I think it would be more helpful if everybody interested in democracy addressed the perhaps small but realistic threat of the USA becoming like a Latin American dictatorship as one, rather than trying to score points by reliving the past?
I am shocked that the Trump admin is doing some of the same bad things the biden admin did, particularly regarding free speech. I think we can agree that the first amendment is sacred and needs to be broadly interpreted. Government over reach is bad whether its republicans or democrats.
If only it was the just the 1st amendment. The politicization of the judicial system was also used under Biden, but has got much worse since January. And one area where Trump far outshines Biden is in the way he has used the presidency to enrich himself and his family. If this was happening in another country, it would be viewed as very serious, but in the richest and most powerful democracy in the world I have no idea where this will take us.
You may be correct about the Trump family benefitting from his presidency. I hate to play " what about" but ... How about Hunter Biden's 100k a month consulting contracts from a Ukrainisan oligarch while Joe Biden was charged with Ukaine policy under Obama? What about Hunters payoffs from Chinese companies that were followed by golfting with his Dad? And what about the Clinton Foundation collecting hundreds of millions while Hilary was secretary of state and future presidential candidate?
This seems to be an endemic. ( kind of like covid). And then there is Nancy Pelosi's stock trading prowess....
Ah, the old “I believe in X, Y or Z, BUT….”. The scale and intent are not in any way comparable.
James Madison said, “A democratic republic requires a well-informed electorate.” If true, and I believe it is, the democracy is already gone.
AKA: “I give up”. Said like a happy slave.
Well, Dave, if you think that I've "given up like a happy slave", perhaps you should read several of my Substack posts over last year before you decide what I really am.
The 13th Clown on Substack by Bruce Brittain. ICE will eventually get around to guys like me. Should I ask you for help or will you have "given up" by then?
Perhaps if Democrats and Progressives hadn't screamed corruption and that the sky is falling from 2016 through 2024, and if they had taken seriously Biden's corrupt overseas operations, and if they acknowledged their role in Democratic lawfare we could be more moved by the present arguments.
One correction. Progressive Democrats, not Democrats and Progressives.
“Roosevelt’s New Deal faced Supreme Court resistance and adapted its approach accordingly. When the Court struck down key legislation, Roosevelt changed tactics rather than ignore the ruling.”
I have a lot of problems with your hand-waiving at the many excesses that paved the way for trump 2.0, but your characterization Roosevelt threatening to pack the courts if they didn’t ignore the constitution and rule in his favor is too hilarious not to highlight.
Fair challenge. Roosevelt's court-packing threat was attempted institutional manipulation, not merely adapting to judicial constraint.
But the distinction that matters for Ferguson's framework holds: Roosevelt's threat failed because it was visible and subject to democratic debate. Congress rejected it. The system held through precisely the kind of institutional resistance Ferguson relies on to measure democratic health.
Trump's approach differs fundamentally by systematically capturing institutions from within – Justice Department purges, regulatory shakedowns, normalised emergency powers – achieving authoritarian control without triggering the visible confrontation that stopped Roosevelt.
Ferguson's framework would catch Roosevelt-style threats. It misses how modern authoritarian capture actually works.
I appreciate your response, but Congress only rejected the plan because the court caved first (“The switch in time that saved nine”). And all of those things Trump is doing is also happening in plane view, subject to democratic debate and scathing observations by every mainstream publication.
Partridge is correct, of course, and it's hard to tell if Ferguson was writing what he really thought or was just being disingenuous. He is very sharp when he's really critical. But I increasingly get the feeling that all the writing about the imminent danger - my own included - is in effect fiddling while the country's constitutional safeguards are going up in smoke. I am much less critical of ordinary Germans in the 1930s than I used to be; even though, as we must hasten to add, Trump; isn't Hitler. It will be surprising if the 2026 elections are genuinely free and fair.
It won't matter much if the midterm elections are fair or not if Congress continues to be subservient to the executive branch. Congress must retake those responsibilities granted by the Constitution that it has somehow devolved to the executive branch over the last half century. So far I have seen few Representatives and Senators, Democrats or Republicans, who take their constitutional responsibilities seriously enough to jeopardize their chances for reelection. We, as voters, still have the right to petition our elected officials for redress of grievances. We need not wait until 2026 to make our voices heard.
Unfortunately there is no legal way of changing any part of the government till November 2026. The US gov't doesn't operate according to public opinion. And if the Voting Rights Act is overturned then there may be little hope left.
An excellent analysis and rebuttal to Ferguson's viewpoint. I learned a lot and I thank you. Knowing how critical the 2026 elections are, I too, wonder about their integrity.
It's hard to keep a level head amid the tsunami of shit, but I'm somewhere between Partridge and Ferguson on this important question of how bad it is.
Much of Partridge's analysis concerns Trump's consolidation of executive power. I'm not inclined to go to Defcon 1 over that as such. He is the chief executive, after all. It's bad -- he's a terrible chief executive -- but at least plausibly constitutional and generally falls under the category of norm-busting. Partridge worries about presidential authority over all three branches, but exercising authority over one's own branch isn't that.
The graver concern is the extent to which Trump acts illegally or unconstitutionally and gets away with it. The birthright citizenship executive order is obscenely unconstitutional, but it's not having real-world effects. Its procedural posture, as lawyers say, is byzantine at this point, confusing even to lawyers, but the bottom line is that its effect is stayed for now, and it almost certainly will be rejected by the Supreme Court when it hears the matter in the upcoming term.
Ferguson is already anticipating that such action will conclusively disprove the presence of authoritarianism. it's enough for him that the Supreme Court goes against Trump even once. That's ridiculous. Such logic would allow a Putin type to float a dummy executive action and have it struck down by his judicial lackeys in a show or mere "form," as Partridge has it, of judicial independence, much as dictatorships rig a fake opposition in bogus elections.
If the Supreme Court capitulates to Trump on all but that, we really should worry. It would signal that the Court is so afraid that Trump will simply defy it or have a Trumpist Congress pack it that it must do as it's told to retain its place in the constitutional order and hope for a better day. The Court has so far strenuously avoided direct confrontation. In so doing, it has avoided making bad law for the ages. This posture won't hold for much longer. It may try, concocting narrow grounds on which to uphold Trump's actions, but this will increasingly look corrupt and pathetic. They are not actually lackeys, thank goodness. They have life tenure and take their jobs seriously. That's my read anyway. I've come to think that upcoming decisions over tariffs and the Alien Enemies Act will be important tests of that impression.
Good piece, totally agree. I feel the like we are in the beginning of a longer process that very could lead to full-on fascism and tyranny. Trump is testing the country to see what we will put up with.