A fourth federal agency locks its doors to Democratic lawmakers
axios.com
axios.com
Honestly, they want to accomplish anything, they need to prioritize the constitutional order and deprioritize all their other issues. For instance, they should probably try to drive a wedge between Musk and Trump, say by proposing a law to abolish the EV/fuel efficiency regulatory credits Tesla makes ton of money from.
How does one follow from the other? This sounds like looking for the “one weird trick that will drive them crazy!” It does nothing. The moneyed interests don’t get confused so easily, much as Elon Musk puts up the madman front.
I’m imagining 1933 Germany and someone sitting in a bar in Berlin going: “Guys I know, we should drive a wedge between Hitler and I.G. Farben Corporation.” — Didn’t work then, doesn’t work now.
> How does one follow from the other?
Meaning de-emphasize or even give up on many of the policy priorities they've been associated with. Stuff like permissive immigration laws, climate change, trans issues, gun control, etc. One of their problems is they can't seem to prioritize and make tradeoffs. If they have the freedom to go against those positions, they'll have a lot more room to maneuver.
> This sounds like looking for the “one weird trick that will drive them crazy!” It does nothing.
It's identifying points of tension. Elon Musk is rich because of electric cars and the government policies about them, Trump makes a point to oppose green energy (including electric cars).
That's just a random example I thought up in a second. It's not perfect, but it's hell of a lot better than showing up at an agency, demanding a meeting, and being told no. That just makes them look weak and like they have no idea what they're doing.
> The moneyed interests don’t get confused so easily, much as Elon Musk puts up the madman front.
Both Trump and Musk have volatile personalities and appear to have problems with not personally being in total control. They're flawed people, not coolly calculating and cooperative "moneyed interests."
> I’m imagining 1933 Germany and someone sitting in a bar in Berlin going: “Guys I know, we should drive a wedge between Hitler and I.G. Farben Corporation.” — Didn’t work then, doesn’t work now.
This isn't 1933 Germany.
The idea promulgated by the Right that the United States is an "occupied territory" and needs to be "liberated" is used in rallies, similar to the Nazi rhetoric that "Germany is for the Germans", who needed to free themselves of "Jewish Bolshevism." This type of rhetoric promotes a sense of nationalism and exclusion.
The rhetoric used by some American politicians and media personalities includes baffling old school racism, such as referring to Kamala Harris as a "Samoan Malaysian low IQ" individual. This is similar to the racism and eugenics used by the Nazis, who framed certain groups as inferior and a danger to the purity of the nation.
There is a narrative that the government no longer prioritizes Americans, but rather seeks to "replace Americans with people who will be reliable voters". This is comparable to the Nazi ideology of a pure race and the exclusion of those deemed "unreliable" or "disloyal".
Some American politicians have used language about immigrants "poisoning the blood" of the country, which is reminiscent of the "blood framing" and eugenics used by Hitler and the Nazis.
The use of "us vs. them" rhetoric to divide the population is a common theme on the Right.
In the US, immigrants, political opponents, and other groups—including literal Jews!—are portrayed as enemies, much like how the Nazis portrayed Jews and other minorities as enemies of the state.
The spread of misinformation and the creation of false narratives is another point of comparison. One example is the false tale of an apartment building in Chicago being taken over by immigrant gangs, which was spread by Libs of Tik Tok and Elon Musk. This kind of propaganda was also a tool used by the Nazis to demonize minority groups.
Central to MAGA ideology there's an idea of a "harsh father whose love is replaced with fearful authority," and America is framed as a "bad girl" needing domination. This concept ties into Freudian theories about the psychology of fascism, eg people show a "passive masochistic attitude," displaying a deep urge for submission to a leader like Trump.
The leader is not always present but continues to be followed by supporters. This is an aspect of fascist states in which the leader's policies can have serious negative effects, but the followers believe that if only the leader knew, they would stop it.
The leader's supporters are often very dedicated, making the leader the center of their lives in a way that is similar to how a cult leader is followed.
Some MAGA people seem to want to be forced to be right, even if reality disagrees with their beliefs, and they are enraged by those who point out their errors. This is similar to how people supported Nazi policies even when they had negative consequences.
There is an urge to replace individual identity with the group ideal embodied by the leader. Racism is used as a tool to create a sense of belonging, a sort of "a poor man's snobbery". By treating the Jew or others as inferior, people can feel a sense of belonging to an elite. This feeling is not based on merit or labor, but rather on an inherited or given sense of superiority: hate can unify people through a shared anger, leading to a collective that does not require any specialized functions of its members. This arrangement facilitates a desire to "melt suddenly into the group and be carried away by the collective torrent" which is a longing for a "primitive community" where the individual is lost in the group.
All of this was present in Weimar Germany, and all are present in today's America.