As Trump’s proposed cabinet of losers, criminals, and traitors continues to take shape, it is perhaps time to face certain realities. I am reminded of the statements of several wise people over the years.
Alan Bennett, 90-year-old English playwright and creator of The History Boys, wrote, “History? It’s just one f***ing thing after another…”
You no doubt recall the famous line attributed to the philosopher George Santayana, but here is the full quote:
Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
Many others, Winston Churchill among them, have reiterated the last line, usually as a warning, usually ignored.
A variation attributed to Eugene O’Neill was that “There is no present or future – only the past, happening over and over again – now.”
And, of course, President Lincoln stated in his address on June 16, 1858, at what was then the Illinois State Capitol in Springfield, after he had accepted the Illinois Republican Party’s nomination as that state’s US senator, an election he lost:
A house divided against itself, cannot stand.”
I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.
I do not expect the Union to be dissolved – I do not expect the house to fall – but I do expect it will cease to be divided.
It will become all one thing or all the other.
Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become lawful in all the States, old as well as new – North as well as South.
The wisdom of these statements is often overlooked. Not now.
The Republican Party needs a new name. The Republican Party is no longer conservative or patriotic. In the hands of Donald Trump, the GOP is threatening to reduce the federal government to a shadow of its current self and turn such political power as remains outside Trump’s personal dictator hands to the states.
So, let us take a spin through some history that Trump and his billionaire shills have either forgotten, never knew, or simply don’t think is relevant.
I refer to the Articles of Confederation. The Articles were the first “constitution” adopted during the Revolutionary War. The ConstitutionCenter.org explains it this way:
The Second Continental Congress approved the document on November 15, 1777, after a year of debates. The British capture of Philadelphia helped to force the issue. The Articles formed a war-time confederation of states, with an extremely limited central government. The document made official some of the procedures used by Congress to conduct business, but many of the delegates realized the Articles had limitations.
Two days later, Congress submitted the Articles to the states for immediate consideration. However, it took until March 1, 1781, for this “immediate” consideration to become final.
Here is a quick [edited] list of the problems that occurred, and how these issues led to our current Constitution.
-
- The central government was designed to be very, very weak.The Articles established “the United States of America” as a perpetual union formed to defend the states as a group, but it provided few central powers beyond that. But it didn’t have an executive official or judicial branch.
- The Articles Congress only had one chamber and each state had one vote.This reinforced the power of the states to operate independently from the central government, even when that wasn’t in the nation’s best interests.
- Congress needed 9 of 13 states to pass any laws.Requiring this high supermajority made it very difficult to pass any legislation that would affect all 13 states.
- The document was practically impossible to amend.The Articles required unanimous consent to any amendment, so all 13 states would need to agree on a change. Given the rivalries between the states, that rule made the Articles impossible to adapt after the war ended with Britain in 1783.
- The central government couldn’t collect taxes to fund its operations.The Confederation relied on the voluntary efforts of the states to send tax money to the central government. Lacking funds, the central government couldn’t maintain an effective military or back its own paper currency.
- States were able to conduct their own foreign policies.Technically, that role fell to the central government, but the Confederation government didn’t have the physical ability to enforce that power, since it lacked domestic and international powers and standing.
- States had their own money systems.There wasn’t a common currency in the Confederation era. The central government and the states each had separate money, which made trade between the states, and other countries, extremely difficult.
- The Confederation government couldn’t help settle Revolutionary War-era debts.The central government and the states owed huge debts to European countries and investors. Without the power to tax, and with no power to make trade between the states and other countries viable, the United States was in an economic mess by 1787.
George Washington, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Dickinson and others met and proposed that all 13 states meet in Philadelphia to resolve the debacle. The current Constitution emerged from that meeting, was ratified, and then promptly amended by the Bill of Rights to cure certain glaring omissions in the original version. Constitution-making is hard work.
While the issues with the Articles of Confederation were clear, by the time of the Constitutional Convention white people in the southern states were deeply entrenched in the system of slavery on which their economy depended. Compromises were required and made in order to reach a constitutional document that could be promoted among the states for ratification. Without those compromises there would have been no Constitution and no country, at least not one comprised of all the former colonies and territories. Even then, ratification consumed two years and eight months. Ratification of the Bill of Rights took another year.
A very detailed history of the events leading to the Constitution may be found in https://www.britannica.com/topic/American-colonies/The-decision-for-independence if you have interest in it.
What lessons can be learned from this early experience with nation-making?
One is that in the modern world of, say, the post-WWII era, a “nation” in which the major powers are dispersed among many widely spread and independent entities (read “states”) is extremely vulnerable to nations with more power concentrated in a central authority. It’s true, of course, that the separation of what became the United States of America was driven in major part by rejection of the totally centralized power of the King of England. But that king’s authority resided in one person and was absolute.
Under the Constitution (not the Articles of Confederation), the power of the central authority, the federal government, was strong but restrained by several features built into the system, not least of which was the division of federal power into the three co-equal branches we call the Executive (President), Legislative (Congress) and Judiciary (Courts). The idea was that each would serve as a check against the power of the other two. And, among the many brilliant elements of the new Constitution was the principle that the church and state must remain separate so that individuals would always be free to practice, without interference from the government, whatever religion, or none, that they chose.
Over time amendments were judged necessary as the country grew and society recognized that further centralization of certain principles was essential to secure the freedom that the Framers, and the Americans who fought the Revolutionary and Civil Wars to create and preserve the union, sought to protect in perpetuity. For example, the requirements of ‘equal protection’ and ‘due process of law’ apply to both the federal government and the states.
It is now clear that the constitutional regime thus formed has several serious flaws, not least of which is the unplanned for development of political parties. The operation of the Electoral College has also proved to be quixotic at best.
It is also apparent that the widespread rhetorical framework under which Americans claim to a special place in the world is a myth. American “exceptionalism” viewed against the reality of lingering racism, fear of “foreigners,” and fear of the future leads to the inevitable awareness that Americans are no more exceptional than the people of other countries. The US history of intervention in other countries has not endeared the nations of the world to unqualified respect for the intentions of this country.
The threat of climate change and our newly realized vulnerability to disease should be sufficient to bind all peoples together in a common effort to protect the species by protecting the only planet we’re ever going to know. But that’s not what’s happening.
The United States has one of the strongest economies in the world. Our people overall enjoy a standard of living far above most of the rest of the planet. Yet fear of change, fear of the “other” and fear of displacement have led the people to elect a convicted felon as national leader. That same “leader” is plainly guilty of other crimes that will never be adjudicated, including his leading an insurrection against the government to overturn the 2020 election and his theft, and refusal to return, highly confidential government documents.
The Supreme Court, laced with conflicts of interest and outright corruption, has held that the President of the United States may not be held accountable for crimes committed in office if, for example, they are committed while conducting “official acts.” Thus, the Court held that the President may with complete immunity enlist the Department of Justice to join him in a criminal enterprise by simply “discussing” the matter with leaders within the Department.
Trump has made clear that he and his cronies intend not to lead the federal government but to dismantle it. His initial selection of incompetent and blatantly unqualified departmental and other senior leaders is conclusive proof that he has no intention of complying with the oath of office he will nominally take on January 20, 2025.
Trump is literally free, per Supreme Court decision, to ignore the law and proceed with his agenda. Little stands in his way, given the composition of the Congress and the abdication of responsible jurisprudence by the high court. What then?
Many large companies, like Meta and Apple, have surrendered by providing massive funds for Trump’s inauguration, ignoring the advice of Prof. Timothy Snyder not to comply in advance. Trump knows these economically influential entities and their leaders will not resist him. Jeff Bezos, the owner of the Washington Post, stopped the paper from endorsing Kamala Harris.
Perhaps even more remarkably, the Post’s Editorial Board has published a list of some Trump key appointments and indicated they should be confirmed. The list includes the likes of election-deniers Elise Stefanik and Pam Bondi (Trump’s second choice behind the disgraced and grossly unqualified Matt Gaetz. Also Kelly Loeffler, rejected by the voters of Georgia. The only ones who fail to pass the Post’s low bar are Robert Kennedy Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, Pete Hegseth, and Russell Vought.
Granted the Post spend little effort in explaining itself, but the criteria it chose to mention are, well, mind-blowing.
First, the Post says:
We would not have picked any of his choices for our hypothetical Cabinet. But, as we have argued for decades, that is not the standard we — or U.S. senators — should apply when evaluating potential executive nominees for Senate confirmation. The president-elect won the election. He deserves deference in building his team, and the Americans who elected him deserve an operational government, absent disqualifying deficiencies in competence, temperament or philosophy.
By that standard, all but two of Trump’s planned Cabinet nominees seem confirmable — as well as all but two of his picks for Cabinet-rank jobs that require confirmation.
But then the Post describes some of the nominees this way:
Marco Rubio for Secretary of State – “The son of immigrants, Rubio is respected by Senate colleagues and understands the vital importance of American leadership.”
My comment: this was news to me given Rubio’s post-2020 obeisance to Trump and the MAGA crowd. No sources are cited.
Scott Bessent for Secretary of Treasury — a “hedge fund billionaire, who seeks to stimulate growth and reduce the deficit, is among Trump’s most reasonable intended nominees.”
My comment: Again, no sources or authority cited. Maybe “billionaire” is sufficient for the Post’s purposes. It certainly is for Trump.
Pam Bondi for Attorney General – “Florida’s former attorney general is qualified; lawyers who have worked with her report that she is serious.”
My comment: Bondi is a 2020-election-denier and apparently has lobbied for foreign governments in the past. She’s serious alright. Bondi will be the perfect accomplice to Trump’s continuing efforts to use the Justice Department, with his Supreme Court’s approval, to commit further crimes without accountability.
Doug Burgum for Secretary of Interior – “The outgoing North Dakota governor and Stanford MBA built a successful software company that he sold to Microsoft.”
My comment: Being a software entrepreneur is not an obvious qualification for managing our natural resources. Prepare to lay your body down in front of a national park.
Howard Lutnick – Secretary of Commerce – “The co-chair of Trump’s transition team is a natural fit for a job traditionally held by a presidential friend.”
My Comment: A founding member of DOGE. Billionaire. His pinned Twitter/X account says: “Welcome to DOGE. We will rip the waste out of our $6.5 Trillion budget. Our goal: Balance the Budget of the USA. We must elect Donald Trump President. @elonmusk @realDonald Trump” The accompanying photo is of Lutnick & Elon Musk!
Balance the budget – riiight. Standard Republican rhetoric. Balance the budget and destroy the economy. A “natural fit.”
Lori Chavez-DeRemer – Secretary of Labor – “The former congresswoman from Oregon maintains surprisingly unorthodox views on organized labor.”
My comment: what “unorthodox views” means we are left to guess, and I’m guessing they are not good for unions.
Scott Turner – Secretary of Housing & Urban Development – “The former motivational speaker has never run a big organization, but that is not disqualifying.”
My comment: Lack of experience is self-evidently irrelevant in a Trump administration.
Sean P. Duffy – Secretary of Transportation – “The former reality TV star is also a former congressman from Wisconsin. He’ll still need to study.”
My comment: …..
Chris Wright – Secretary of Energy – “The Colorado oil and gas executive acknowledges that climate change is real.”
My comment: I suspect he also agrees the Earth is not flat. Prepare to lay your body down in front of a national park.
Linda McMahon – Secretary of Education – “The other co-chair of the president-elect’s transition team led the Small Business Administration during Trump’s first term.”
My comment: Betsy Devos redux? Her SBA experience definitely, certainly, obviously, assuredly qualifies her to lead American education policy, though her opportunities to do more damage to our education system may be brief if Trump fulfills his plan to eliminate the Department.
Douglas Collins – Secretary of Veterans Affairs – “He was a firebrand as a congressman from Georgia, but his heart seems to be in the right place in caring for veterans.”
My comment: You can’t make this stuff up. The most the Post has to say is that the nominee cares about veterans.
Kristi L. Noem – Secretary of Homeland Security – “Dog jokes aside, she has served in Congress and two terms as governor of South Dakota.”
My comment: The Post apparently thinks Noem’s shooting her dog was a joke! And, South Dakota being at the center of our national security concerns, Noem is imminently qualified for … something, though not the complex task of securing the homeland against attacks, especially with Trump in charge.
Interestingly, the Post did not mention Trump’s anointing of Kash Patel as inside man at the Department of Justice with instructions, redundant in his case, to get even or better with many of Trump’s main enemies list.
You get the picture, I’m sure. This is the “government” that Trump promised and that the American people chose, albeit by the slimmest of margins.
The United States is in the deepest trouble.
Corporate America is lining up to bend the knee to Trump. Under Donald Trump the United States seems destined to become a weak state and an international pariah as Trump in turn bends the knee to dictators like Vladimir Putin.
Thus far, the Democratic Party, reeling from the loss of the presidency and both houses of Congress, and with a Supreme Court having conferred immunity for the president’s crimes in office, has nothing much to say. Everyone, it seems, is waiting to see the actual shape of the catastrophe about to begin. It won’t be long now.
SHINING SEA 