And the Party Told You: End Democracy to Save It
In George Orwell’s 1984, the ruling regime, ‘The Party’, controls history and whatever is currently known to be true, and truth can be altered at any time. To abide by The Party’s imposed truth, “All that was needed was an unending series of victories over your own memory.”[i] This is the act of “reality control”, or as it is more commonly referred to “doublethink”. Winston describes the mental gymnastics of doublethink when he notes that:
“His mind slid away into the labyrinthine world of doublethink. To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully-constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them; to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy; to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again: and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself.”[ii]
The Party in Orwell’s novel posited both the impossibility of democracy and their status as its sole protector. In the US its equivalent of The Party, the permanent regime, posits both a disdain for democracy and the potential for candidates it abhors to be elected and their role as the final bastion of democracy. The illiberal liberal class routinely engages in the process that Winston describes, repudiating the morality and criminality of Trump while engaging in it themselves, forgetting facts that are inconvenient, and then when they become convenient, remembering them, only to forget again.
The permanent regime and the illiberal liberal class claim that Trump is a dire threat to democracy, thus barring him from participating in democracy is justified. When Trump is banned from ballots and it is declared that any ballots that have Trump as a write in candidate will be invalidated, it is anti-democratic behavior masquerading as democracy protection. As Brendan O’Neill remarks in his response to Colorado’s decision to ban Trump from the ballot, what he calls a “judicial insurrection”, “‘We are defending democracy’, they say, as they beat it to a pulp.”, and he affirms the point that the anti-Trump brigade is engaging in doublethink when he writes that “We are destroying democracy to save it – that’s the doublethink cry of these despotic agitators against a second Trump presidency.”[iii] America’s Party is lost in the “labyrinthine world of doublethink.”[iv] They lay claim to the truth of the actions of Trump and his movement on J6, yet they weave carefully constructed legal theories laden with jargon, backed by partisan constitutional scholars, to conclude that Trump is not allowed to run for election, and that his followers are not allowed to vote for him, even if they write him in on their ballots. These cretins still claim to be on the side of democracy and freedom. They are sowing the seeds of the American Republic’s destruction.
Two states have declared that Donald Trump is banned from primary and general election ballots, Colorado and Maine. In Colorado, the state Supreme Court overturned the ruling of a lower court, which concluded that though they argued that Trump engaged in insurrection, Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment does not apply to the president.[v]
In Maine, the Secretary of State, Shenna Bellows, issued a ruling in which she concluded that Trump’s speech on January 6th and his claims of election fraud in 2020 are not protected by the First Amendment, and that the events of J6 were an insurrection that he incited. Thus, he does not meet the qualifications for the presidency.[vi]
On the issue of whether Trump’s speech regarding the 2020 “stolen election”, Bellows writes that “Principles of free speech do not override the clear command of Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment, namely that those who orchestrate violence against our government may not wield the levers of its power.”[vii] This is false. As established in the Supreme Court ruling Brandenburg vs. Ohio, speech that advocates for violent overthrow of the government is protected under the First Amendment. What is not protected is speech incites immediate violence. Bellows cites Brandenburg vs. Ohio, but notes that it posits that “incitement of lawless action” is not protected under the First Amendment, and she argues that Trump “intended to incite lawless action,”[viii] Is this the case? Does Trump’s conspiracy theory about the 2020 election, culminating in his speech on the Ellipse on J6, qualify as immediate incitement? Trump did say in his speech that the crowd was to march to the Capitol “peacefully and patriotically to make their voices heard.” If Trump had delivered his speech in front of the Capitol, and explicitly called for people to break in and to disrupt the counting of the electoral votes, then it would qualify as immediate or imminent incitement of lawless action. That incitement to lawless action must be imminent is important as if this standard is broadened to include non-imminent incitement, a lot of political speech would be considered incitement to lawless action.
Bellows and the various legal scholars who are arguing that Trump is barred from running for the presidency again are working from their conclusion, that Trump is an insurrectionist and is subject to Section Three of Fourteenth Amendment and are forming their legal reasoning to justify that conclusion.
Some states have rejected the efforts to ban Trump from ballots. Michigan, Minnesota, and California have each refused to remove Trump from primary and general election ballots to the chagrin of the illiberal liberal class.[ix] Even in Maine and Colorado, Trump is appealing, and it will ultimately be up to the Supreme Court to decide whether Trump can be barred from running for office. Since the court has a conservative majority, if it rules in his favor, there could be appeals made by those suing to take Trump off the ballot.
There have already been calls for Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself, notably from Rep. Jamie Raskin, who argues that because Thomas’s wife, Ginni, spread Trump’s ‘big lie’, Justice Thomas should recuse himself from deciding on the Fourteenth Amendment case.[x] However, even if Thomas did recuse himself, the court would still likely rule in Trump’s favor. Further, no matter the ruling, a significant section of the American electorate will be indignant. Either Trump’s movement will be disenfranchised in some or all states, or Trump’s opposition will be outraged at the court and its legitimacy as an institution will be more tarnished.
The goal of Trump’s opponents is not noble, nor is it in aid of democracy, it is to take out a rogue candidate from attaining and debasing the presidency, as he did in 2016. The secondary goal is to make an example out of Trump to send a message to any who would dare challenge the interests of the permanent regime, especially in foreign policy. This is the death blow to democracy, and it is being delivered under the guise of upholding democracy. Chris Hedges captures the truth of the ‘Donald Trump problem’ when he writes that “His baseless conspiracy theories, vulgarity and absurd antics are an embarrassment to the established power elite in the two ruling parties.”, and that “He is difficult, unlike Biden, to control.”[xi] The Party is trying to take out Trump to retain their control, and their useful idiots in the corporate media and political class mindlessly mouth the Party line, that to save democracy, it must cease to exist.
Still Paying for The Big Fat Mistake
On Christmas Day, Biden authorized strikes in Iraq on three facilities of Kataib Hezbollah and affiliated militant groups backed by Iran.[xii] Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin released a statement on the strike, saying, “And let me be clear – the President and I will not hesitate to take necessary action to defend the United States, our troops, and our interests. There is no higher priority.” [xiii]Apparently, the US still has interests in Iraq. Many outlets reported on this strike, from The Hill to the BBC, but none asked the question that any journalist should be asking- why is the US still in Iraq? Further, why is the US still all over the Middle East? The US entered Iraq in 2003, invading and deposing Saddam Hussein’s Baathist regime and they then spent years trying to install a democratic government. Both Barrack Obama and Trump promised to leave Iraq, yet when they left office, the US was still there. Journalists are supposed to be critical of the powerful, and none of them seem to be curious at all about why the US is still in Iraq. Thus, they are complicit in US imperialism.
Following the air strike that killed Iranian Major-General Soleimani near Baghdad Airport, the Iraqi Parliament passed a resolution that called for the expulsion of all US troops from their country, declaring that “The Iraqi government must work to end the presence of any foreign troops on Iraqi soil and prohibit them from using its land, airspace or water for any reason.”[xiv] The US defied this resolution, and they continue to occupy Iraq. America has defied all requests to leave, from the American people as well as from the Iraqi people. Instead of pondering the logic of remaining there, Biden and Austin speak and act as if the US still has interests in Iraq.
The 2020 strike on Soleimani, an extrajudicial killing, is one of Trump’s worst crimes, in violation of international law but also a strike against a leader and a country that the US has not declared war on, killing him via an airstrike within another country, however, since these are the actions of the benevolent empire, they are not considered crimes.
After an attack on their servicemembers, Biden retaliated immediately, instead of working to justify US presence in Iraq, even with a single sentence of passage. Austin did the same, saying the strike was just and necessary, but not justifying America’s presence in Iraq. In their minds, there is no need for justification. That the US is right to stay in Iraq is self-evident.
If it were China occupying Iraq in defiance of requests for them to leave, then the discourse would be very different. The same news outlets that report only on the strike ordered by Biden would be talking about Chinese aggression and expansionism. Western media screams about China building artificial islands in the South China Sea, and when the Solomon Islands signed a security agreement with China, Kurt Campbell, Biden’s Indo-Pacific Czar, rushed over to ensure that they were not falling into China’s sphere of influence.[xv]
It is not a defense of China to note that it is not them who established and operate a colonial administration across the Middle East. When China brokered a peace deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran in March 2023, US officials admitted it was beneficial, however, many in the illiberal liberal class saw it as evidence that if the US reduces its presence in the Middle East, it will leave a vacuum for China, Russia, and Iran.[xvi] For example, Jonathan Panikoff emphasized this when he remarked that the peace deal between Iran and the Saudis “should be a warning to US policymakers”, and that is: “Leave the Middle East and abandon ties with sometimes frustrating, even barbarous, but long-standing allies, and you’ll simply be leaving a vacuum for China to fill.”[xvii] Others, especially in the corporate media, questioned whether the peace deal would last.[xviii] No matter the outcome, the US is making it easy for China to declare itself the peacemaker, and America the aggressor in the Middle East. America’s latest strike in Iraq, and its insistence that it must stay there, is more evidence of this.
To anyone who argues that the US does have just cause to remain there, what if China or Russia were the occupying force? If the answer is that if it were China or Russia occupying Iraq, then it would be unjust and autocratic expansionism, then you are mired in contradictions and hypocrisy, not grounded in logic or justice.
[i] Orwell, George. 1984. London: Secker & Warburg, 1949.
[ii] Orwell. 1984.
[iii] O’Neill, Brendan. “A Judicial Insurrection against Democracy.” http://www.spiked-online.com, December 20, 2023. https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/12/20/a-judicial-insurrection-against-democracy/.
[iv] Orwell. 1984.
[v] Halpert, Madeline, and Brandon Drenon. “Colorado Supreme Court Kicks Trump off Ballot, Citing ‘Insurrection.’” Www.bbc.com, December 19, 2023. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67768873.
[vi] Bellows, Shenna. “Maine Secretary of State Decision in Challenge to Trump Presidential Primary Petitions.” http://www.maine.gov, December 28, 2023.
[vii] Bellows. “Maine Secretary of State Decision in Challenge to Trump Presidential Primary Petitions.”
[viii] Bellows. “Maine Secretary of State Decision in Challenge to Trump Presidential Primary Petitions.”
[ix] Garrity, Kelly. “Minnesota Supreme Court: Trump Can Remain on the Ballot — for Now.” POLITICO, November 8, 2023. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/08/minnesota-supreme-court-trump-ballot-00126210., Mason, Melanie, and Dustin Gardiner. “‘State of Resistance’ No More: California on Sidelines of Trump Ballot Fight.” POLITICO, December 29, 2023. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/29/california-trump-ballot-fight-00133340., and Picciotto, Rebecca. “Michigan Court Rejects Appeal to Disqualify Trump from 2024 Ballot.” CNBC, December 27, 2023. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/27/michigan-court-rejects-appeal-to-disqualify-trump-from-2024-ballot.html.
[x] Luscombe, Richard. “Clarence Thomas Must Recuse Himself from Ruling on Trump’s 2024 Eligibility, Raskin Says.” The Guardian, December 31, 2023, sec. US news. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/31/clarence-thomas-supreme-court-trump-2024-eligibility.
[xi] Hedges, Chris. “The Donald Trump Problem.” scheerpost.com, March 27, 2023. https://scheerpost.com/2023/03/26/chris-hedges-the-donald-trump-problem/.
[xii] Fortinsky, Sarah. “Biden Orders Strikes on Iranian Group in Iraq after 3 US Service Members Wounded.” The Hill, December 26, 2023. https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/4376890-biden-orders-strikes-on-iranian-group-in-iraq-after-three-us-service-members-wounded/.
[xiii] Austin, Lloyd. “Statement from Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III on U.S. Strikes in Iraq.” U.S. Department of Defense, December 25, 2023.
[xiv] Ibrahim, Arwa. “Iraqi Parliament Calls for Expulsion of Foreign Troops.” Al Jazeera, January 5, 2020. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/1/5/iraqi-parliament-calls-for-expulsion-of-foreign-troops.
[xv] CNBC. “U.S. Advisor Kurt Campbell Visits Solomon Islands after Nation Signed Security Deal with China.” CNBC, April 22, 2022. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/22/kurt-campbell-visits-solomon-islands-after-china-security-deal.html.
[xvi] Toosi, Nahal, and Phelim Kine. “U.S. Officials Project Calm as China Stuns World with Iran-Saudi Deal.” POLITICO, March 13, 2023. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/13/china-middle-east-deal-00086888.
[xvii] Panikoff, Jonathan. “Experts React: Iran and Saudi Arabia Just Agreed to Restore Relations, with Help from China. Here’s What That Means for the Middle East and the World.” Atlantic Council, March 10, 2023. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/experts-react/experts-react-iran-and-saudi-arabia-just-agreed-to-restore-relations-with-help-from-china-heres-what-that-means-for-the-middle-east-and-the-world/#Aboudouh. There are the opinions of several foreign policy experts, but Panikoff was the only direct reference out of all of them for this post.
[xviii] Hadar, Leon. “China Wants to Bring Peace to the Middle East? Good Luck with That.” The National Interest, March 15, 2023. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/lebanon-watch/china-wants-bring-peace-middle-east-good-luck-206307., and Weissenstein, Michael. “China Presents UN with Vague Mideast Peace Plan as US Promotes Its Own Role in Easing the Gaza War.” AP News, November 29, 2023. https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-gaza-middle-east-united-nations-b66f15460296169e32e38c90286db1df.
References
Austin, Lloyd. “Statement from Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III on U.S. Strikes in Iraq.” U.S. Department of Defense, December 25, 2023. https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3626180/statement-from-secretary-of-defense-lloyd-j-austin-iii-on-us-strikes-in-iraq/.
Bellows, Shenna. “Maine Secretary of State Decision in Challenge to Trump Presidential Primary Petitions.” http://www.maine.gov, December 28, 2023. https://www.maine.gov/sos/news/2023/BellowsDecisionChallengeTrumpPrimaryPetitionsDec2023.html.
CNBC. “U.S. Advisor Kurt Campbell Visits Solomon Islands after Nation Signed Security Deal with China.” CNBC, April 22, 2022. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/22/kurt-campbell-visits-solomon-islands-after-china-security-deal.html.
Fortinsky, Sarah. “Biden Orders Strikes on Iranian Group in Iraq after 3 US Service Members Wounded.” The Hill, December 26, 2023. https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/4376890-biden-orders-strikes-on-iranian-group-in-iraq-after-three-us-service-members-wounded/.
Garrity, Kelly. “Minnesota Supreme Court: Trump Can Remain on the Ballot — for Now.” POLITICO, November 8, 2023. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/08/minnesota-supreme-court-trump-ballot-00126210.
Hadar, Leon. “China Wants to Bring Peace to the Middle East? Good Luck with That.” The National Interest, March 15, 2023. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/lebanon-watch/china-wants-bring-peace-middle-east-good-luck-206307.
Halpert, Madeline, and Brandon Drenon. “Colorado Supreme Court Kicks Trump off Ballot, Citing ‘Insurrection.’” Www.bbc.com, December 19, 2023. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67768873.
Hedges, Chris. “The Donald Trump Problem.” scheerpost.com, March 27, 2023. https://scheerpost.com/2023/03/26/chris-hedges-the-donald-trump-problem/.
Ibrahim, Arwa. “Iraqi Parliament Calls for Expulsion of Foreign Troops.” Al Jazeera, January 5, 2020. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/1/5/iraqi-parliament-calls-for-expulsion-of-foreign-troops.
Luscombe, Richard. “Clarence Thomas Must Recuse Himself from Ruling on Trump’s 2024 Eligibility, Raskin Says.” The Guardian, December 31, 2023, sec. US news. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/31/clarence-thomas-supreme-court-trump-2024-eligibility.
Mason, Melanie, and Dustin Gardiner. “‘State of Resistance’ No More: California on Sidelines of Trump Ballot Fight.” POLITICO, December 29, 2023. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/29/california-trump-ballot-fight-00133340.
O’Neill, Brendan. “A Judicial Insurrection against Democracy.” http://www.spiked-online.com, December 20, 2023. https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/12/20/a-judicial-insurrection-against-democracy/.
Orwell, George. 1984. London: Secker & Warburg, 1949.
Panikoff, Jonathan. “Experts React: Iran and Saudi Arabia Just Agreed to Restore Relations, with Help from China. Here’s What That Means for the Middle East and the World.” Atlantic Council, March 10, 2023. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/experts-react/experts-react-iran-and-saudi-arabia-just-agreed-to-restore-relations-with-help-from-china-heres-what-that-means-for-the-middle-east-and-the-world/#Aboudouh.
Picciotto, Rebecca. “Michigan Court Rejects Appeal to Disqualify Trump from 2024 Ballot.” CNBC, December 27, 2023. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/27/michigan-court-rejects-appeal-to-disqualify-trump-from-2024-ballot.html.
Toosi, Nahal, and Phelim Kine. “U.S. Officials Project Calm as China Stuns World with Iran-Saudi Deal.” POLITICO, March 13, 2023. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/13/china-middle-east-deal-00086888.
Weissenstein, Michael. “China Presents UN with Vague Mideast Peace Plan as US Promotes Its Own Role in Easing the Gaza War.” AP News, November 29, 2023. https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-gaza-middle-east-united-nations-b66f15460296169e32e38c90286db1df.
Not Without Incident: Questioning Big Brother's Platitudes 
Leave a comment