The rise of American authoritarianism

[dps]

Incidentally, why would deporting illegal immigrants be a bad thing, per se? I get torture, extra judicial killings, secret prisons and stuff, but isn't that the point of having immigration laws - that people who break them can't stay? 

Well, yeah, in theory.  In practice, it's probably easier for the IRS to seize all your property even though you don't actually owe any taxes than to successfully deport someone who outright admits that he's in the country illegally, even if he also admits to being a serial killer. 

That's an exaggeration, but not a huge one.

[Berkut]

No, that is a rather huge one actually.

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson announced Monday that federal immigration authorities apprehended 121 adults and children in raids over the New Year's weekend as part of a nationwide operation to deport a new wave of illegal immigrants.The families taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were living in Georgia, Texas and North Carolina, Johnson said in a statement. They are being held temporarily in federal detention centers before being deported to Central America."As I have said repeatedly, our borders are not open to illegal migration," Johnson said. "If you come here illegally, we will send you back consistent with our laws and values."

Johnson said the raids follow a crackdown on illegal immigration that started in summer 2014 and has resulted in about 14 flights a week carrying those who have been apprehended back to Central America.

It is just those kind's of lies and exaggerations that fuel the mythology that ends up with "they are all rapists and criminals. Some of them are good people, I suppose..."


The reality is that we deport illegal immigrants all the damn time.


Of course, for every one we deport there are probably a thousand we have not caught, and really aren't even trying hard to catch.


But the claim that it is "difficult" to deport known illegal immigrants, much less those who have committed a crime, is a complete fabrication. We often do not because we are not fucking assholes (or at least some of us are not), but there is no legal impediment to doing so - just moral ones. IE, we don't deport illegal immigrants generally who are caught and have children that were born here in the US, or have been here for a decade, etc., etc.

[dps]

No, that is a rather huge one actually.

Shhh.  Viper doesn't know that.

OK, yeah, it's a big exaggeration.  OTOH, I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that the IRS probably does do its job better than ICE does its.

[jimmy olsen]

Uggh...

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/03/donald_trump_s_terrifying_and_distinctly_american_authoritarianism.html

An Eclectic Extremist


Donald Trump's distinctly American authoritarianism draws equally from the wacko right and wacko left.

By Jacob Weisberg

In 1935, Sinclair Lewis published It Can't Happen Here, a novel today more referred to than read, which imagined fascism coming to the U.S. The movement's leader is Buzz Windrip, a populist demagogue who promises "to make America a proud, rich land again," punish nations that defy him, and raise wages very high while keeping prices very low.

You can't read Lewis' novel today without flashes of Trumpian recognition. Windrip is a demagogic huckster, "an inspired guesser at what political doctrines the people would like," who understands how to manipulate the media and considers the truth an irrelevancy. His constituency of economically dispossessed white men moos at his xenophobic nationalism and preposterous promises. After he wins the 1936 election, Windrip moves to assert control over the press, lock up his opponents, and put competent businessmen in charge of the country.


Though the novel is in truth not a very good one, Lewis develops it around a key insight: that if fascism came to the US, it would be as a variation on American themes, not European ones. The American man on horseback would be more Huey Long than Benito Mussolini, a folksy opportunist rather than a red-faced ideologue. Lewis was shrewd in guessing that an American fascist leader would likely declare himself an opponent of European fascism.


This is a point that some of those accusing Donald Trump of fascism—including many on the right—misunderstand. Sure, Trump may retweet the odd quote from Il Duce and wonder why anyone would object. Admittedly, his rallies teeter on the edge of racial violence. Again this week, black protesters were forcibly ejected from his events with the help of white supremacist thugs. True, the world leaders Mr. Trump admires are the dictators, not the democrats. Certainly, he sounds like a dictator himself.


But Trump does not draw on traditions of European totalitarianism or even appear to know anything about them. He is not consumed with historical grievances; he's not an anti-Semite; he hasn't tried to build a mass party; and he doesn't demand the restoration of tradition or an old moral order. Indeed, as a reality TV star and cyberbully on his third wife, he is himself a good illustration of the breakdown of any moral order possibly remaining.


Rather, Trump represents what autocratic attitudes look like in a modern American context. He is unfriendly toward the free market, the free press, and the free exercise of religion while paying lip service to these values. He is xenophobic, conspiratorial in his worldview, admiring of violence and torture, contemptuous of the weak, and unwilling to tolerate criticism or peaceful dissent—but all in the name of correcting excesses of tolerance. Various global and historical comparisons shed light on his style and thinking: Perón, de Gaulle, Silvio Berlusconi, Vladimir Putin, and others. But Trump isn't importing Latin caudillismo or Russian despotism. He bullies those who resist him in the contemporary vernacular of American celebrity culture.


This is why those arguing that Trump's policies are more moderate than those of his rivals Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio miss the point. Trump's authoritarianism is an amalgam not of left and right but of wacko left and wacko right: He thinks that George Bush was to blame for 9/11 and that Muslims should be barred from the U.S. Believing both of those things does not make Mr. Trump a centrist—it makes him an eclectic extremist. When it comes to policies, he actually has none in the conventional sense.


The conflict in the 2016 campaign is no longer Trump versus his Republican opponents; it is now Trump versus the American political system. That system is on the verge of missing its best opportunity to spit him out. Since Super Tuesday, the GOP's reaction to Trump has been mildly heartening, with anti-Trump ads on television and principled politicians like Mitt Romney denouncing him amid torrents of personal abuse. Three cheers for Sen. Lindsey Graham, who says Trump is a "nut job" and that the GOP has gone "batshit crazy." Fellow Republicans have taken to calling Chris Christie, who cravenly endorsed Trump last week, a "Vichy Republican." But this is all probably too little, too late.


If sane Republicans fail to derail Trump, that job will fall to Hillary Clinton and the November electorate. Fifty-five percent say they would never vote for Trump, according to a YouGov poll. Nonetheless, there is now a nontrivial risk that he could win the election. The American founders designed a constitutional order to prevent the exercise of tyrannical power. But the country has arguably never had to contend with a dictatorial president, as opposed to a president's dictatorial acts. One can believe in the efficacy of the system without wishing to see it tested in this way.


An America in which Trump can represent one of the major parties feels like a very different country from the one many of us thought we lived in. Like a lot of people, I was much too complacent. It can happen here, and it might.

[derspiess]

Who do I hate again? I keep forgetting.

Touche.

[Grinning_Colossus]

Eclectic extremism seems to be the order of the day. An ostensible hardhat is leading the Republican field while campus radicals oppose freedom of expression and are weirdly chilly toward cultural mixing. It's a fascinating process of reconfiguration. The old world is dying and the new world struggles to be born.

[viper37]

You mean he can't convince Congress to invade another country on false pretense?
He can't torture non american citizens?
He can't open secret prison?
He can't order extra-judicial execution of people deemed to be ennemy of the US?
He can't deport illegal immigrants?
He can't convince Congress to change the rules on whom is allowed to become a US citizen, effectively barring muslim immigration for at least a few years?  Or simply changing the rules via decree so that while not technically impossible it would be extremely hard and long for any would immigrant not on Trump's desirability list to enter the country and/or become a citizen of said country?
He can't interpret the rules of NAFTA his own way to turn the US into an even more protectionist state?
He can't vote any kind of silly plan like "Buy American" where the US government would not contract with businesses unless over 90% of their product are made on US soil?
He can't coerce Congress, with carrot&stick, to vote tax laws quite... good for his businesses?
He can't pull out of international treaties he judges unfair for the country?
He can't convince his losing opponents to support him?  Ah, sorry, it's already been done...

I think the list of what he can do is pretty long.  He can use veto, he can use decree.  Will he be popular?  Depends.  He got that far saying that much and he's very popular.  Heck, the little popularity he might have lost was by announcing he wouldn't kill the families of suspected terrorists.

I don't think he can find a way to vote himself POTUS for life, even if Fox News already told us GW Bush did not have to resign after his 2nd term by some twist of constitutional logic I still don't quite get.  But he can do a lot of damage to international relations and to both US & Canada's economy.

Your list is mostly  list of things he cannot do. 

Right.  Mostly stuff that happenned before, but can't happen anymore because you say so.  Got it

[Razgovory]

Most of the stuff he can't do.  Though, some of them Bush was not supposed to be able to do either...

The biggest danger though is foreign policy.  Trump is a bully, and bully with cruise missiles is a scary idea.  Say he tosses a few missiles at North Korea.  That could easily trigger a war that could kill tens of thousands of South Koreans.

[grumbler]

Right.  Mostly stuff that happenned before, but can't happen anymore because you say so.  Got it

It isn't "mostly stuff that happened before," but, since you consider yourself such an expert on US politics, you go on believing and saying that.  It is harmless and amusing.

[viper37]

Right.  Mostly stuff that happenned before, but can't happen anymore because you say so.  Got it

It isn't "mostly stuff that happened before," but, since you consider yourself such an expert on US politics, you go on believing and saying that.  It is harmless and amusing.

Ok, let's play.

Torture, check.
Secret prison, check.
Extra-judicial execution, check.
Deporting illegal immigrants, so far, no, it hasn't happenned, and he can not reclassify what is an immigrant without Congress, but given the support he has from the Tea Party, it could happen.
Barring muslim immigration.  It requires Congress.  This one will be hard to pass.
Protectionist USA: steel & softwood lumber are two examples of trade conflicts against Europe & Canada.  It can easily be expanded, protectionism is US default state, it requires work to push in the other direction.
Buy American.  Been there, done that.
Generous fiscal policies for very rich people.  Been there, done that.
Pulling out of international treaties.  Been there, done that.  Last time was Kyoto.
Having support from his opponents, once they are defeated: they already said they would support him.


So, my opinion is, if Trump manages to win the primary (that has yet to be done and it won't be a walk in the park), a majority of Republicans will follow him and not oppose him the way they opposed Obama.

[Razgovory]

The Kyoto treaty was never ratified.  You would have gotten more mileage out of the ABM treaty.  I don't know of any extra-judicial executions.  If you do, please share with the class.  Buy American is an ad campaign.


I can see why Grumbler prefers to debate you over me.

[crazy canuck]

Buy American is an ad campaign.

You should look at the Buy American Act which applies to all U.S. federal government agency purchases of goods over a certain value. Under the Act, all goods for public use must be produced in the U.S., and manufactured items must be manufactured in the U.S. from U.S. materials.  In addition a number of states included similar geographic production requirements in their procurement legislation.

[Valmy]

Buy American is an ad campaign.

You should look at the Buy American Act which applies to all U.S. federal government agency purchases of goods over a certain value. Under the Act, all goods for public use must be produced in the U.S., and manufactured items must be manufactured in the U.S. from U.S. materials.  In addition a number of states included similar geographic production requirements in their procurement legislation.

Well that is just a national security issue. When we get blockaded by the British we need to make sure our government can continue to function.

[Razgovory]

Buy American is an ad campaign.

You should look at the Buy American Act which applies to all U.S. federal government agency purchases of goods over a certain value. Under the Act, all goods for public use must be produced in the U.S., and manufactured items must be manufactured in the U.S. from U.S. materials.  In addition a number of states included similar geographic production requirements in their procurement legislation.

That's not actually true.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buy_American_Act

The Buy American Act ("BAA", originally 41 U.S.C. §§ 10a–10d, now 41 U.S.C. §§ 8301–8305) passed in 1933 by Congress and signed by President Hoover on his last full day in office (March 3, 1933),[1] required the United States government to prefer U.S.-made products in its purchases. Other pieces of Federal legislation extend similar requirements to third-party purchases that utilize Federal funds, such as highway and transit programs.

The Buy American Act is not to be confused with the very similarly named Buy America Act, which came into effect in 1983. The latter, a provision of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982, is 49 U.S.C., § 5323 (j), and applies only to mass-transit-related procurements valued over US$100,000 and funded at least in part by federal grants.[2]

In certain government procurements, the requirement purchase may be waived by the Contracting Officer or the Head of the Contracting Activity (HCA) if the domestic product is 50% or more expensive than an identical foreign-sourced product, if the product is not available domestically in sufficient quantity or quality, or if doing so is in the public interest.

The President has the authority to waive the Buy American Act within the terms of a reciprocal agreement or otherwise in response to the provision of reciprocal treatment to U.S. producers. Under the 1979 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) Government Procurement Code, the U.S.-Israel Free Trade Agreement, the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement, and the World Trade Organization (WTO) 1996 Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA), the United States provides access to the government procurement of certain U.S. agencies for goods from the other parties to those agreements. However, the Buy American Act was excluded from the GPA's coverage.

[grumbler]

I'm glad to see more Canadians join the Canadian Ignorant Assertions Movement (CIAM).  You can't expect Viper to make up all the falsehoods by himself.  He came up with a list of nine things, one of which was possible (indeed, required; like all countries, the US deports illegal immigrants).  Surely there is enough Canadian ignorance to extend this list to at least fifteen or twenty things that a president cannot do.  Hell, Trump has already given us another five or six things himself, and he isn't even Canadian!