1. Two presidential inaugurations have had planned train trips significantly altered because of threats of violence: Lincoln in 1861 and Biden in 2021.
2. To be clear: a reprise of the American Civil War is impossible. Geographical distribution of polarization is different, there is no overriding issue comparable to slavery cutting to heart of real power, and (as Louisiana governor Earl Long used to say) the Feds have the bomb.
2. Still, political violence far short of a Civil War could easily become the norm: an intermittent cycle of white nationalist violence and law enforcement crackdowns, combined with a tightening internal security state.
3. Some of the symptoms are worth paying attention like violence in halls of congress. In 1856 South Carolina congressman Preston Brooks assaulted Senator Charles Sumner with a cane. Compare to some GOP congresspeople helping the rioters in 2021
4. Or compare this week's heavily militarized inauguration with 1861, where one sharpshooters manned the roofs. As one Washington resident complained about "entering the Capitol through hedges of Marines armed to the teeth.”
5. Politically, Biden faces the same balancing act as Lincoln, of presenting himself as a leader who can unite the nation even as a significant chunk of the population is rejecting his legitimacy. More thoughts here: thenation.com/article/politi…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. Trump has apparently ordered staffers not to mention Nixon's name, which is of course hilarious but also telling. Trump is Nixon's heir and, one hopes, the twilight of Nixonism.
2. Nixon was the president that broke the New Deal coalition and initiated the modern lurch to the right but he was transitional figure & still kept some of the older big government programs. Subsequent GOP (and some Dems) have kept to the Nixon formula.
3. The linkages between Trump and Nixon are many. Trump's mentor Roy Cohn was an old Nixon ally in McCarthy era. Roger Stone -- of Nixon tattoo fame -- is Trump's oldest political crony.
1. This is exactly right. Facebook & Twitter deserve no credit for finally banning Trump when they played so large a role (along with cable companies) in creating Trump. The regretful tears of Dr. Frankenstein are too little, too late.
2. The social media shut out of Trump in an emergency, after he fanned violence against Congress, is eminently defensible but it also highlights the dangerously oversized power these private organizations have in political life.
3. The capriciousness of the social media giants is striking. Trump has been doing incendiary & often racist speech long before he became president. And he wasn't banned for political and economic reasons. Now he's on the way out, they ban him.
1. Trump's retreat on the stimulus package (signing what he once threatened to veto) is further evidence that he's been (as Glassman & others have argued) a weak president in terms of legislation. Where does that leave the idea that he's also an authoritarian threat?
2. The critics of Trump-is-an-authoritarian-threat (most cogently @CoreyRobin & @moyn) have long pointed out that in terms of actually getting things done, or even persuading the public, Trump has been a singular failure. This is true but a weak president can still be dangerous.
3. As a reality show president, Trump's always been more interested in the symbolic part of rule (playing at leadership) than actually doing things. And the way he's performed the presidency has, in fact, broken new grounds in incitement.
1. This gets at why Trump's latest move is such a gift for the Democrats: they can either show Senate GOP is opposed to relief or get the $2000 per person (which would be good).
2. Beyond that, the current juncture opens up the possibility of wedging Trump away from institutional GOP, which would be good for Dems even after Trump leaves office.
3. Trump will have a lot followers even after Jan. 20th and it'll be good for Dems if he's mad at GOP and trying to sabotage GOP agenda.
1. The Intercept has a blockbuster report on the CIA running death squads in Afghanistan & its not getting much attention. Worth asking why. theintercept.com/2020/12/18/afg…
2. The combination of a volunteer army, low USA casualties & the fact that the war is being mainly conducted by CIA run militias means the public is tuning out Afghan news, even though the war itself is unpopular.
3. Unfortunately, there's little reason to hop for anything better from Biden. He might (one hopes) shut down the CIA death squads, but based on Obama era example, no one will be brought to justice. The forever war is likely to continue.
1. So, taking year end stock & am pleased that among the 150 articles I wrote, a few are worth revisiting. My best is this piece on Richard Hofstadter, which is also about why American liberalism fails to understand & effectively fight the radical right thenation.com/article/cultur…