#but I feel like this is milquetoast enough of a take in 2024 that we can all be cool and mature about it right?

[sillimancer]

it's the villagers. the villagers didn't really get any quality-of-life updates or new features like other elements in the game (e.g. the camera, decorating your house). I kind of expected that, as the rest of the games got more advanced, the villager AI would too. maybe there would be a more robust friendship mechanic that would influence the likelihood of a villager deciding to move out. maybe the villagers could interact with each other more and do things like complain about the neighbors they don't like, making villager compatibility a factor in how you decorate your island. there could have been more little side quests, like getting signatures for petitions, or planting certain flowers around a villager's house. now that there's a cooking mechanic, there could have been a monthly potluck event where you like, spend the week before finding out what everyone wants to bring and gifting them the ingredients they need.

but we didn't get any of that. the NH villagers are basically just walking and talking decorations now. they do have new little behaviors, like doing their little hobbies or sitting down, but they don't have anything to do with you. they're animatronics acting out cuteness. they don't even have all that many new lines; you can cycle through everything a villager is going to potentially say to you pretty quickly if you talk to them every day (which the game encourages and rewards, implying they wouldn't want you to get bored with it, so this move is particularly baffling to me).

and we players treat them like decoration too. there are basically two reasons to covet a particular villager: sentimentality and looks. they're funko pops. they're funko pops and they could've been so much more and frankly I'm disappointed!

wait hold up I think I just finally figured out why I don't like animal crossing new horizons

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Mike Luckovich

* * * *

We have been warned.

May 1, 2024

ROBERT B. HUBBELL

On a day of many important stories, the most important news came from Donald Trump's interview with Time Magazine. See Donald Trump on What His Second Term Would Look Like | TIME. In the interview, Trump confirmed that he will attempt to exercise dictatorial powers in a second term.

We have been warned.

We ignore Trump's threats at our peril and the peril of our democracy.

In describing his fever dream of autocratic powers, Trump said he would take (or allow) the following actions:

Allow states to monitor the pregnancies of women to ensure they comply with abortion bans (a grotesque violation of liberty, privacy, and dignity).

Fire US attorneys who refuse to prosecute defendants targeted by Trump (a violation of US norms dating to the creation of the Department of Justice).

Initiate mass deportations of alleged illegal immigrants using the US military and local law enforcement (neither of which are authorized to enforce US immigration law).

Pardon insurrectionists who attacked the Capitol on January 6.

Prosecute President Biden (for unspecified and non-existent crimes).

Deploy the National Guard to cities and states across America—likely those with predominately Democratic populations (presumably under the Insurrection Act, a deployment would violate the terms of the Act and implementing regulations).

Withhold funds from states in the exercise of his personal discretion (a violation of the Impoundment Control Act of 1974).

Abandon NATO and South Asian allies if he feels the countries are not paying enough for their own defense.

Shutter the White House pandemic-preparedness office.

Fire tens (hundreds?) of thousands of civil servants and replace them with Trump acolytes with dubious qualifications (other than loyalty to Trump).

Most readers of this newsletter understand the seriousness of Trump's threats and are working tirelessly to prevent a second Trump term. But tens of millions of Americans seem oblivious or apathetic in the face of an imminent and dire threat.

If elected, will Trump succeed in achieving any of his stated goals? No—not if Democrats continue their resistance in the courts, in Congress, in state legislatures, and in the hearts and minds of most Americans.

However, whether Trump succeeds in achieving his stated objectives is beside the point. He will attempt to do so—and his attempts will tear at the fabric of democracy and destroy legal norms that have served as the bedrock of our republic since its founding.

To be clear, I am not attempting to frighten readers of this newsletter. To the contrary, I believe that we can and will defeat Trump—or outlast him, whatever it takes. But the interview confirms that we are not frantic alarmists exaggerating the threat posed by Trump.

No, far from it.

When we challenge the milquetoast, both-siderism reporting of the media or the normalization of Trump by spineless politicians, we are not overreacting. We are sounding the alarm in a responsible, necessary way. For reasons that defy comprehension, our warnings have been unheeded—often dismissed, minimized, or patronized.

We must redouble our efforts. Commit the above list to memory. Copy the URL so you can forward this newsletter or the Time Magazine article to friends, colleagues, and complete strangers who doubt that Trump is a danger to democracy. Pick two or three issues and be prepared to discuss them when the moment arises. We have been warned—and we must act accordingly.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

[jesawyer]

No Power Left to the Vanquished

My feelings, Conscript Fathers, are extremely different, when I contemplate our circumstances and dangers, and when I revolve in my mind the sentiments of some who have spoken before me. Those speakers, as it seems to me, have considered only how to punish the traitors who have raised war against their country, their parents, their altars, and their homes; but the state of affairs warns us rather to secure ourselves against them, than to take counsel as to what sentence we should pass upon them. Other crimes you may punish after they have been committed; but as to this, unless you prevent its commission, you will, when it has once taken effect, in vain appeal to justice. When the city is taken, no power is left to the vanquished.

- Sallust, quoting Cato the Younger, Bellum Catilinae

In the late years of the Roman Republic, a conspiracy arose from within the ranks of the Senate.  The aristocrat Lucius Sergius Catilina attempted to seize control of the government after his bid for consulship failed.  One of the consuls, Cicero, exposed the conspiracy and Catilina fled Rome to prepare an army.  Five of the conspirators were captured after the letters they wrote, in which they urged people to join the conspiracy, were intercepted.  The letters were read before the Senate and Cicero urged for the execution of their authors.

Julius Caesar pled for patience and clemency; after all, Rome had laws and customs to observe. He did not want to set a precedent that the ways of Rome could be set aside because they were inconvenient.  Cato the Younger, a longtime (and future) opponent of Caesar, spoke next.  His appeal won out because the Senate understood the reality of the scenario he was describing: when an institution is in imminent danger from those who seek to dismantle it, you must question if strict adherence to the institution’s laws and customs is worth more than the existence of the institution itself.

Fourteen years later, Julius Caesar, champion of Roman laws and customs, crossed the Rubicon in defiance of law, custom, and the explicit order of the Senate to mark what would become the end of the Roman Republic and the beginning of Caesar’s rule of the Roman Empire.  Caesar’s respect for Roman norms and civitas ended when they put him in personal danger.  As for Cato, he died with the republic and subsequently became its most lionized martyr.

In 1923, Adolf Hitler and Erich Ludendorff, accompanied by hundreds of other Nazis and members of the paramilitary Sturmabteilung staged the Beer Hall Putsch, an attempted coupe d'état against the regional Bavarian government.  Hitler’s goal was to pressure the elected representatives in Munich to turn against the federal government in Berlin through a public show of force and violence.  It failed.  Hitler was imprisoned, but he used his trial testimony to continue spreading his propaganda and dictated Mein Kampf while serving his sentence.  The Beer Hall Putsch was a success for the Nazi party in spite failing to achieve Hitler’s goals.

Ten years later, Hitler was the presidentially-appointed Reichskanzler of Germany. While the Nazis had the most seats in the Reichstag, it was still a minority party.  To ensure the passage of the Enabling Act, which gave the chancellor the power to enact laws without the involvement of the Reichstag, Hermann Göring, President of the Reichstag, suspended the rules for quorum and outlawed the opposition KPD (Communist party) from participating. Sturmabteilung forces entered the assembly chamber to surround and intimidate the non-Nazi representatives into voting for the law.  The passage of the Enabling Act marked the end of the Weimar Republic and the beginning of Hitler’s dictatorship over the German Reich.

The differences between the Beer Hall Putsch and and the Enabling Act were differences of organizational power, instruments, and outcome, not intent.  In both cases, the same bad actors were seeking to overthrow an existing government.  President Paul von Hindenburg and Franz von Papen failed to recognize that Hitler and the Nazis not only threatened the principles of the aristocracy or their other political opponents, but the Weimar Republic itself.

Was the Weimar Republic worth saving?  It was, by most accounts, including the little my grandmother remembered of it, an awful state.  Its government was, putting it mildly, dysfunctional.  Many of its citizens lived through an era of terrible poverty and violence following the end of the first World War.  But the Reich is what came after.  All other avenues of evolutionary institutional or truly revolutionary change ended with the fall of the republic.  The world suffered for it.

Trump and his allies have been attacking American institutions for the last four years.  Trump doesn’t have the ideological drive of Hitler or the strategic acumen of Caesar.  He just has the most base populist instincts to agitate a mob.  What he shares with Hitler, Caesar, and other would-be dictators is a desire to remove opposition and the institutional mechanisms of opposition through whatever means are at his disposal.  If he can do it through an executive order, he will.  If he can do it through political pressure, he will.  If can do it through intimidation, quid pro quo exchanges, and other illegal actions, he will.  And if it requires a mob of supporters to storm the capitol during a Senate session to overturn their certification vote, he’ll try use that, too.

People have been likening what happened in the U.S. capitol to the Beer Hall Putsch.  It’s a fair and reasonable comparison, though Hitler did actually march in his own coup attempt and was wounded during its defeat; Trump just gathered people together, lit a fuse, and watched them go.  But it’s important to remember that the differences between the Beer Hall Putsch and the Enabling Act were of organizational power, instruments, and outcome.  What if there had been more pro-Trump agitators at the capitol?  What if the Senate had not been evacuated in time?  What if Trump had more supporters within the Senate to begin with?  What if Trump were even mildly more intellectually competent or the various online factional leaders in his mob were more coordinated in their tactics and goals?

Facebook, twitter, and other social media sites have deplatformed Trump.  Several companies have suspended hosting services for online communities that have been involved in coordinating fascist, white supremacist mobs in the past. Trump’s supporters, in ignorance or bad faith, have decried that this violates 1st Amendment rights.  They are wrong, but even if they were not, the events of January 6th, planned armed protests on the 17th, and threats of violence against Biden’s inauguration on the 20th, represent the kind of imminent institutional danger that Cato spoke of during the Catiline Conspiracy.  “When the city is taken, no power is left to the vanquished.”

We have wrestled with how the government and corporations should moderate social media since these platforms emerged.  We will continue to do so in the future.  While we must take guard against the transformation of severe actions in time of crisis into the de facto way of handling our day-to-day problems, we must also recognize and act to resolve crises as soon as they appear if we have any interest in preserving the institutions they threaten.

I think of myself as a socialist.  My political thought is not as educated, as principled, or as nuanced as many other socialists I know, some of whom think that any efforts to preserve or work within existing American institutions is, at best, naïve; in practice, counterproductive; and, at worst, actively reactionary.  I often look at our institutions through the lens of a designer.  When I do, I see systems that do not work to produce meaningful social change.  I see systems which do not often work to accomplish any goals of its body politic.  In practice, our systems serve the needs and interests of the ruling class and the powers that have the means and knowledge to manipulate the members of that class.  The systems confine the use of violence and its instruments to the state, as the state sees fit, often to the detriment and mortal peril of the most disadvantaged and vulnerable among us.  It is hard for me to sympathize with those who deify the state and its institutions, especially a state like America that treats its citizens so cruelly.  It becomes even harder when adjacent political cousins perennially denounce any hesitance to support milquetoast centrist candidates as tantamount to treason.  Even so, when fascists, white supremacists, advocates of genocide are positioning themselves to imminently dismantle these institutions through intimidation and violence, it is not difficult for me to see the value in their immediate preservation.

But if the state and its institutions do survive the next few weeks, we will still live in a world where social media and the principles of freedom of speech are vulnerable to the predations of those who would use their contentious legal status to spread lies, foment popular dissent, and, if necessary, coordinate another violent coup d'état when the time is ripe.  The next time, perhaps the popular figurehead will not be as ignorant, as incompetent, as craven, as plainly stupid as Donald Trump.  You can already see his would-be successors positioning themselves for 2024 in the waning hours of his presidency.  The next time, the populist agitators may be more focused in their goals, more coherent in their strategy, more careful in their communication.  Those among them who have witnessed the spectacular failure of imbeciles like Jake Angeli, Adam Johnson, and Richard Barnett may be shrewd enough to learn from the disaster as they prepare for the future.

The Weimar Republic became vulnerable to the schemes of the Nazi party because its representatives failed to address the needs of its citizens and because its leaders failed to recognize the magnitude of threat posed by leaders like Adolf Hitler, propagandists like Goebbels, and paramilitary groups like the Sturmabteilung.  Our elected representatives may have finally, at this recent brink of disaster, comprehended the threat that Trump and his supporters pose to the existence of the state.  After they make their way through January 20th, the federal government will have to address the needs of a disaffected, impoverished, violently-policed, often disenfranchised populace.  They will also have to disentangle the mess that the government has created through their laissez-faire attitude toward social and news media regulation.  Their actions in the immediate future will tell if they intend to effect meaningful change or if they are content to use the next four years to pave a road to the ruin of the republic.

[somethingusefulfromflorida]

13 Keys to the White House: 2024 prediction (as of August 15, 2021)

Midterm gains: false, the Republicans are going to sweep the House

No primary challenge: probably true, no Democrat with a future would dare to challenge Biden or Harris

Incumbent seeking re-election: probably true, Biden has indicated he's going to run again even though he'll be 82 at the time

No third party: too soon to tell, we won't know how the Libertarians/Greens fare until 2023 at the earliest

Strong short-term economy: too soon to tell, who knows if we'll be in recession in 2024?

Strong long/term economy: probably false, inflation is rising and Republicans are threatening to let us default on our national debt, so things are looking bad going forward

Major policy change: false, Biden hasn't done shit, and if he doesn't do shit NOW he won't be able to do shit after the Republican dominated midterms

No social unrest: too soon to tell, it will depend on how bad things get between now and 2024

No scandal: too soon to tell, all eyes are on Biden, but there's no telling what he'll do

No foreign/military failure: FALSE, Afghanistan is going down in flames, tens or hundreds of thousands of civilians are going to die when the Taliban takes over, it'll be the worst humanitarian crisis in the planet

Foreign/military success: probably false, withdrawing from Afghanistan was supposed to be a huge success, but the last 20 years have been pointless.

Charismatic incumbent: false, Biden wasn't charismatic in 2020, he's not gonna magically gain 20 or 30 percent more approval going into 2024

Uncharismatic challenger: true, none of the Republican challengers resonate with anyone outside their base, Trump or DeSantis or Cruz or Cotton or anyone else

Democrats need 8 true to hold power

Republicans need 6 false to retake power

1 is definitely true

2 are probably true

4 are too soon to tell

2 are probably false

4 are definitely false

Republicans are almost certainly going to win in 2024 unless Biden pulls a rabbit out of his ass and magically reverses course in the next 15 months; things are in flux now, but come November 2022 they will be set in stone.

Key 1 is a lost cause because of partisan gerrymandering; the Republicans will take the House by force, though they'll likely lose the nationwide popular vote

Key 2 is probably safe because it would require a challenger to get 33% of the vote, and I just don't see that happening against a sitting president

Key 3 is true as of right now, but could easily flip false for any number of reasons. Biden ran on the unspoken promise that he was a transitional president and would step down in 2024, but Kamala Harris isn't more popular than he is (in fact, she's less popular), so the Democrats have painted themselves into a corner; either it's an old old old man or Hillary Clinton 2.0

Key 4 is beyond Biden's control; over the last century, third party candidates have gained traction about every 10 years, once every 2 or 3 election cycles. They did well in 1968, 1980, 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2016, so 2024 is up in the air.

Key 5 could go either way, I don't know enough about economics to make any informed predictions

Key 6 is more nuanced; the creator of the 13 Keys defines it as "real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms." The economy grew under Obama's second term, and tanked under Trump's first, so the average of the last two terms is either zero net growth or very slight shrinkage. If Biden can grow the economy at all, even a little, this key could flip in his favor. If he continues to do nothing, he's as good as gone.

Key 7 is a nonstarter; W turned the US into a police state, Obama slightly improved healthcare, Trump changed taxes from the ground up (and dismantled liberal democracy through a rigged judiciary and disintegration of federal authority over the states), but Biden and the Democrats have pretty much wasted the last 8 months, accomplishing zero of their campaign promises. They passed a neutered stimulus package, and might pass a neutered infrastructure deal, both of which gave major concessions to the Republicans even though they supported neither. Biden is Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and George H.W. Bush rolled into one.

Key 8 could very well lead us into another 2020 situation; not only have zero communities defunded the police, many of them have actually INCREASED funding. Republicans continue to dismantle our democracy by passing voter suppression laws, and are going to gerrymander their House into an unbreakable conservative majority despite only making up about 40-45% of the population. I expect to see major protests against Republican legislatures across the country, which will be quelled by both state and federal forces because Democrats never support active protests, only passive peaceful ones (ones that fail, but look polite on TV)

Key 9 could be real or invented; no matter what Biden does, whether he's squeaky clean or rotten to the core, the Republicans are going to impeach him in 2023. Hell, they'll almost certainly run in 2022 on the platform of "we will impeach Biden if we win." He'll be acquitted of course, but Republicans will control the narrative and gain popular support going into 2024. They might wait to impeach him until the election starts, or impeach him and hold a long protracted trial throughout the primaries and well past the national conventions. If they win the House, they'll almost certainly win the Senate too, which means they have all the power, even if they can't remove him.

Key 10 is a lost cause; there's no coming back from this, Afghanistan is an absolute failure, full stop.

Key 11 is very closely tied to key 10, so I don't see it flipping true because Biden doesn't really have any other major foreign policy objectives within his grasp.

Key 12 is a doubly lost cause because both Biden and his chosen successor are terrible candidates. Biden was picked by the establishment as a milquetoast "civility" candidate in opposition to Trump's extremism, and Harris is so unpopular she dropped out of the presidential race due to lack of enthusiasm before a single vote was cast. Biden was the lesser of two evils, and Harris is a lying centrist cop pretending to be a progressive. As I said in Key 3, the Democrats painted themselves into a corner; Biden/Harris is Carter/Mondale all over again.

Key 13 is safe now and forever because no candidate will ever have national appeal again. The creator of the 13 Keys gave examples like Lincoln, the Roosevelts, and Kennedy, as well as controversial picks like Reagan and Obama in 2008 (though not in 2012). Love them or hate them, these candidates resonated with the entire country in their day, but America has become too polarized for a member of one party to gain support from the other.

This is a disaster waiting to happen. It's unfolding before our eyes in slow motion, and we're unable to stop it. I feel trapped all the time, trapped in the world, trapped in the system, no agency,m, no control, no hope. I don't know what to do, because the powers that be are FUCKING EVERYTHING UP ROYALLY! This party is a laughingstock, and the alternatives are either pure evil or insignificant; I'd be a Green if they stood a snowball's chance in hell, but they don't, not even in a single district, neither federal nor state.

The system has to collapse in my lifetime, it's not tenable as is.

[somethingusefulfromflorida]

Biden is going to win, I’m sure of it, but the Senate seems to have slipped through our fingers.  So long as McConnell is majority leader, he will continue to hold it hostage; Biden won’t be getting any judicial appointments unless he makes recess appointments.  The problem with that is recess appointments only last for a single congressional session (max 2 years), and McConnell isn’t going to let the Senate go int recess, so Biden would need to prorogue Congress, which would take approval from Pelosi (the president can only force a recess if the House and Senate disagree on a date), and would be political suicide because the American people are really on edge about authoritarianism right now, and nothing screams dictator like disbanding Congress to pack the courts.  People expect Republicans to be ratfucking bastards, they get a free pass to cheat the system, but Democrats are expected to follow the old rules, to stay in line, to uphold tradition and precedent and whatever the hell else will let Republicans walk all over them.  If a Democrat tried to skirt the rules the way Republicans do,their approval ratings would tank, and the Republicans would ride a red wave into the midterms.

I feel like Biden will be a doormat as president.  He has run on a platform of being palatable, inoffensive, milquetoast, he’s not going to make any waves, he’s not going to try and out maneuver the Republicans, because doing so would sacrifice his veneer of bipartisanship.  He has already said he doesn’t want to use executive orders to sidestep Congress the way Trump has, so he’s going to end up accomplishing very little, all the while completely misunderstanding why young people are becoming increasingly mad at him.  He’s not assertive enough.  I don’t think he has a clearly defined Biden Doctrine.  What will his presidency be about?  Healthcare will be a major issue when the Supreme Court gets rid of Obamacare next week, but he doesn’t stand a chance of getting a new plan passed while McConnell controls the Senate.  And Republicans across the country will blame him instead of trump for gutting their healthcare, saying that Obamacare was his fault when he was terrible and his fault when he was Vice President, but also that its absence is terrible and his fault when he is President.  It’s a lose-lose situation.

Republicans are scheming, Democrats are most definitely not.  Republicans know how to game the system, Democrats don’t.  Biden needs to hit the ground running.  He needs to hire young advisors who can help him play the game in the 21st century, but that’s almost certainly not what he’s going to do.  He’s going to surround himself with old white moderates and a few token moderates of color, and slog his way through the first half of his term before floundering at the midterms because the Republicans will have organized a powerful opposition by then.  He’s not particularly inspiring, he’s just a calming presence compared to Trump, and even THAT wasn’t enough for a blowout; a good 45 - 50% of the country is batshit fucking crazy, and will not hesitate to blow him and his presidency out of the water.  He needs to go big or go home, he needs to add some new songs to his repertoire.  Trump lost because all he knew how to play was Free Bird.  Biden needs to do some experimental shit, throw anything at the wall, see what sticks, make himself more exciting, not just boring, safe, old Grampa Joe.

I do not think Joe Biden is an evil man, I just think he is unambitious and unwilling to take risks because he is stuck in the past.  The country will be better off under him than under Trump, but I just don’t think he’s going to make as many big sweeping changes as we had hoped.  He needs to close the camps, he needs to reunite families (that is if Trump doesn’t actively sabotage this by erasing data to fuck him and the rest of the country over between now and January 20th), he needs to raise taxes and close loopholes so that big corporations don’t just move overseas to avoid paying said taxes.  Economic inequality should be a major platform issue for him, but I don’t know if he’s committed to it as much as we need him to be.  He is not a progressive, we won’t be seeing anything like a President Bernie Sanders, I just hope he has plans for the future; 2024 is going to be HELL ON EARTH if he stays the course.  America doesn’t need any more third-way, neoliberal, moderate centrist bullshit.  I would say we want major progressive reform, but I guess the majority actually doesn’t, because half of them still voted for the worst human alive today.  When Republicans are in power, they don’t give a shit about Democrats, so why should Democrats bother about them?  Why should Biden keep trying to placate them when they’re never going to vote for him; they didn’t this time, they won’t next time, especially if Trump runs for a non-consecutive term or one of his brood runs in his place to establish a dynasty.  Biden needs to play hardball and push through an agenda, regardless of what Republicans do.  We can’t always take the high ground, we need to stop playing fair when the other side plays dirty!