Stop trying to save democracy by abandoning it

“From December 1800 to late February 1801, the Union teetered at the verge of collapse as a result of political tensions fueled by sectional jealousies as well as almost paranoid fears of foreign influence and domestic sedition. Federalists and Republicans were willing to believe that their opponents were capable of virtually any action, no matter how treacherous or violent, in order to gain or retain power. Talk was also rife about state militias arming and a possible breakup of the Union and civil war. …”
-  James Roger Sharp, The Deadlocked Election of 1800: Jefferson, Burr, and the Union in the Balance

“Republican newspapers talked of military intervention. The governors of Virginia and Pennsylvania began preparing their state militias for action. Mobs gathered in the capital and threatened to prevent any president from being appointed by statute.”
Gordon S. Wood - Empire of Liberty

It’s Election Day 2024 and the race is too close to call for the 60th time. For Democrats, the nightmare scenario of 2016 is inching closer to becoming reality. Joy and good vibes have been replaced with hysterical warnings about fascism. Kamala Harris's CNN Town Hall with Anderson Cooper on October 24 — where the Vice-President affirmed her belief that Trump was a fascist— was a desperate attempt to turn the ship around at the last minute. The Harris campaign released a last-minute ad featuring Harrison Ford endorsing Harris as a candidate who will respect the ‘rule of law’. Gone are the days of claiming ‘law and order’ were racist, fascist terms. The Democrats are clawing back every republican campaign plank for themselves. Kamala will secure the border, drill baby drill, and protect Israel from the terrorists. 

Democrats like to portray themselves as the ‘adults’, pointing to Trump’s rhetoric as proof that he’s normalized a new wave of nastiness in American political rhetoric. And yet when disappointed by the courts, by Biden's impotence in fighting Trump, and public indifference to Trump's legal troubles— democrats chose the charge of fascism to delegitimize a possible Trump victory at the ballot box. The normalization of ‘fascist’ as a political slur has been happening since Barry Goldwater was analyzed by the media as someone who identified with Hitler, Stalin, and Castro. Sixty years later, traditional media is now the least trusted civic institution in America. The caterwauling from Georgetown professors, former CIA operatives, disgraced Republicans, and other ‘experts’ might have resonated with the public had they not destroyed their credibility in years past. 

The proof of Trump’s fascist leanings is Project 2025: a blueprint for a new counter-revolution to dissolve the US Constitution. History expert Thomas Zimmer has written thousands of words unpacking the meaning of Project 2025, which will usher in the era of the 'unitary executive', Christian nationalism, the stifling of dissent, and the use of government powers to enforce ideological conformity. The sense of shock and anxiety is palpable— Gramscian hegemony and abuse of executive powers were supposed to be exclusive to the left. 

Democrats are also raising alarms over Trump’s threat to invoke the Alien Act of 1798 as a legal basis for mass deportations. It’s a fair argument that a law that hasn’t been invoked since WW2 shouldn’t be revived to resolve such an important issue as illegal immigration. But what's the proposed antidote to Trump’s anti-democratic counter-revolution according to the self-appointed cassandras of American democracy? Expand the courts, impose censorship via a Ministry of Truth, and jail people for spreading misinformation. In other words, the Democrat solution is to resurrect the Sedition Act of 1798—the long-defunct counterpart to the Alien Act.

“In their hostilities they shall become inventors of images and ghosts, and with their images and ghosts they shall yet fight the highest fight against one another.” - Friedrich Nietszche, Thus Spake Zarathustra

History is full of cautionary tales of political movements that, in their efforts to guard against an ideological enemy, ended up propping tyranny in its place. Simon Schama's history of the French Revolution chronicles how the Jacobins launched the Reign of Terror for fear of traitors in their midst. The self-appointed guardians of the revolution became preoccupied with identifying and eliminating counter-revolutionaries. Constantly on the lookout for a Caesar or a Cromwell, the Jacobin murder spree instead ushered in Napoleon. 

Richard Pipes recounts how the Bolsheviks' fear of counter-revolution led to the creation of the cheka (Soviet Secret Police) as a temporary measure, which quickly evolved into a permanent institution dedicated to crushing dissent. The Bolsheviks were paranoid of a Napoleon-type figure rising from their ranks. Lenin, Trotsky, and Dzherzinksi warned of the dangers of a thermidorian reaction that would install a Bonaparte. Ironically, Leon Trotsky was that military genius among the Bolsheviks, having built up the Red Army and leading it to victory during the Russian Civil War. His charismatic leadership made the party Bolsheviks wary, who viewed him as a potential "Napoleon". Eventually, Trotsky was purged to save the workers revolution, and power was thrust upon General Secretary Joseph Stalin. 

Todd Gitlin's history of the 1960s is yet another story of radical movements that fragmented and turned to authoritarianism out of paranoia and a desire for survival. Under pressure from the FBI, the DOJ, and internal politics— the SDS, The Black Panthers, The Weathermen all balkanized into “leadership cadres more concerned with revolutionary stances than political bases.”

Obsessed with the imminent arrival of fascism in a second Trump administration, the American left is repeating history. Members of the Democrat political and managerial class have mistaken their authority for moral certainty for far too long. The preventative actions being promoted by them to stop Trump are fear-driven governance that serves no base but the party elite. Advocating for censorship, demagoguery, targeting the rich, and endless litmus tests are hollow defenses of American constitutionalism and democracy. 

Should Trump win, the challenge facing American journalism and the Democrat party is insurmountable: articulate the risks of a second Trump presidency without lapsing into hyperbole. A more effective approach would be to undergo genuine introspection and develop thoughtful alternatives to the issues Trump is addressing rather than engaging in performative politics, identity fights, and political litmus tests. A good beginning would be to accept the legitimacy of the Republican political perspective, instead of painting every Republican success as the latest nail in the coffin of democracy. It would require recognizing that millions of Americans support Trump not out of hostility to democracy, but because they feel their values and concerns have been overlooked.

Americans have always been wary of being at the mercy of vast, impersonal forces that seek to impose tyranny over a free people. Even the Declaration of Independence sounds a little conspiratorial when Jefferson writes that the British government “evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism.” America was founded in the wake of a violent political revolution, to free the colonies from the autocratic institution that was the British Empire. That strain of skepticism for institutions was borne out of enlightenment ideas of natural rights, popular sovereignty, and protestant philosophy. They shaped the moral and religious fabric of America for centuries, and are still present. The fight to preserve Enlightenment values is not just about resisting authoritarianism—it’s about preserving what made America exceptional. The danger ahead isn’t just that America will become like China or Russia but that it will lose the very qualities that gave it moral authority and global influence.

Elections aren’t supposed to be a schmitt-ian struggle for power. There will be another one four years from now, and four years after that, and so on. We all want to believe we’re living in the end times, but we’re actually living in one of the most prosperous eras in American history. Perhaps there will be another world war, or another global pandemic— we’ll fight them too. There is no permanent solution to the enigma of politics, pride, revenge, or the need to control others. Thankfully, America’s founding fathers were well aware of the frailty of human nature, and designed a system to thwart it. Democrats and Republicans would do them proud if they continued fighting over their differences, but also found bipartisan opportunities where they exist.