Donny and Vlad

His most determined efforts to the contrary, Donald Trump had no chance of stealing our democracy. He still does not. There is enough evidence of crime to prosecute him for charges that carry with them the inability to hold federal office. After conviction, even if his party won the election with his name on the ballot, he could not serve without the permission of two-thirds of both Chambers. This will not happen. His vice president would serve as acting president until he could garner such a majority - or until he was convinced that this is impossible.

Explain this to Trump (and to the talking heads of CNN, MSNBC and Fox News) so that the fantasy of Trump 2024 can be put to bed without its supper. Not reporting the obvious is the worst kind of journalism.

As I have previously stated, Trump could not have triumphed on January 6th - and if the media had done its job in reporting the facts of the matter - there would have been no Insurrection.

Our democracy was not in danger. The military would never have accepted a commander in chief installed via a coup. The permanent government would have ignored him. He could not have been sworn in by any Justice. Indeed, most of his supporters in the Senate dropped their objections during the electoral vote count. That so many supported him in the House after the Insurrection will become a campaign issue in November - especially after the Select Committee finishes its work this summer.

The best GOP course for November is to cull their ranks of the active insurrectionists and for those who voted with them to accept censure. No amount of gerrymandering will remove the stain of that day without contrition.

Even though many Americans, when polled, have authoritarian leanings - meaning that they do not have a decent respect for the civil rights of their neighbors - those in government and politics largely follow the rule of law. Before the civil rights movement, this was not the case. In the wake of the attempted civil rights counter-revolution, there are those in politics who should now better or get out - but even most of them act according to the rule of law when their loudest constituents are not watching.

This is not the case in Russia.

From the days of the Golden Horde, Russian politics has been toxically prone to authoritarianism. First, they were clients of the Knaate. The Tsars then fashioned themselves as the new Caesars. Not a good look. While Lenin tried to implement the democracy of the council (the soviet), he had no culture of democracy to work with. Stalin could have called himself Tsar Josef and it would not have made him any more or less authoritarian. For the rest of the Soviet era, the cults of personality were replaced with the banality of bureaucratic authoritarianism. Call it slavery without the pomp.

Before going on, let us define terms. In the language of cultural (grid-group) theory, authoritarianism is a society where individuals obey the state - usually an individual authoritarian. The despot may have hangers on and even some form of hierarchical bureaucracy - but the common people - the non-party members - have no entry point. There are no independent institutions which counter the State.

Democracy works because people have rights and are not forced to obey the whims of the leader. In general, libertarian societies feature some measure of respect for the rights of others - at least within their peer group.

Hierarchies balance the following of orders with group membership and structures of rights.

Egalitarians have few rules, but they do cast out (cancel) heretics. Some of our bloodiest history comes from egalitarianism run amok - from the Reign of Terror to the Killing Fields to Rwanda.

Capitalism is a mix of hierarchy among the management or professional classes and authoritarianism for the workers.

An important point is that authoritarianism is not necessarily subjugation. People actively accept, or even seek it, if they would rather not be responsible for results. Being part of the "in group" where there are social inferiors whose rights are not respected gives rise to acceptance of authoritarianism. 

This is why the abortion issue has led to a breakdown in our acceptance of the rights of others. Until the late 1970s, Evangelical Protestants thought abortion was a Catholic issue. Then it realized it needed Catholics to form a moral majority. That sexual authoritarianism was part of the bargain was simply a sweetner (a feature, not a flaw)

In June, we will likely see an incremental decision in the Mississippi abortion case. Let us hope that both sides losing will lead to a compromise that features the kind of living wage and child tax credit that makes abortion as rare as Mrs. Clinton once promised.

Now, back to Russia. Gorbachev led the way out of authoritarianism for Russia, with Yeltsin doubling down on freedom. Under Yeltsin, a plan for conversion from state to employee ownership was implemented (one which I provided information to), but some genius in the process insisted that ownership shares be fungible before retirement. Without a history of democracy, most workers took cash for their shares when it was offered rather than using them to exercise their rights to control the enterprise - in essence actually operate in a true socialist environment.

This led us to the oligarchs. A free market economy did away with the dysfunctions of central planning, although if oligarchs working together to get rich at everyone else's expense is not some sort of central planning, then I do not know what is. 

END OF PART 1.

The oligarchs found themselves a kindred spirit in a former KGB short colonel (which when speaking of Vlad, is redundant). He has more than compensated for his small stature by developing a new cult of personality - using his training to eliminate any challengers.

He was able to do this, where Trump failed, because there were no competing sources of power and legitimate authority. The Russian Orthodox Church has offered no solace to the people, having been co-opted by Putin in exchange for their license to demonize gay Russians.

Reports indicate that Vlad wishes for Imperial and Soviet days gone by. Aside from quelling dissent, he has attacked the Autonomous Republics for ethnic minorities within Russia, especially those who are Muslim. He could not stop the Baltic states from joining NATO - and he has taken his ire out on Ukraine.

Until now, the habits of subjugation have given him a license to steal (and murder). That license seems to be expiring.

The sanctions by the civilized world are having an effect - however it was only a matter of time until the Russian people woke from their stupor. I am sure Vlad had hopes of using sanctions to unite Russians behind his continued cult of personality.

His hopes are being dashed, day by day.

At some point, the military will stop supporting him. Reports are that there is a morale problem in the invasion force. How can there not be? Putin was selling the idea that the Ukrainians were fellow Slavs who belonged in one nation. He is now asking his military to kill these fellow Slavs. There are many ethnic Ukrainians within Russia. Members of the military don't see them as an enemy other.

At some point, Putin's own government, especially the military, will realize that he (like Donnie), is unhinged. There will be no global nuclear war. Sadly, one of his true believers may be sitting in silo in Siberia. I hope not, but it cannot be ruled out.

The difference between an arrested Putin and an assassinated or executed Putin is the effectiveness in preventing such a disaster. I doubt, however, that we will step away from power quietly. Donald certainly has not. They are two peas in the same pod. Let us hope and pray that there is some semblance of the rule of law left among elites in the Russian military and government.

Putin's fear that this is the case is why he sits at one end of the room and his generals are at the other Despots almost always fall into paranoia. Vlad is no exception.

The question is not whether Putin will be removed, but when.

His adventure in Ukraine has sliced open the rot which is the current Russian state. If his army is killed, Putin falls. If his army mutinies, Putin falls. If his army succeeds with violence, Putin falls.

It is not a good month to be Putin or to be an American ex-president who leads his fan club.

The best thing for the GOP is for Putin and Trump to go quickly away. If they do not, then the Insurrection is not the only thing leading them to defeat in November. Being seen as Soft on Putin will be the death knell for any Republican candidate - maybe even in the primaries!