Is there a cost to opposing the government?

My Sunday movie was Two 4 One. Miriam and Melanie used to be lovers. Melanie has now transitioned to Adam. He is still working to establish himself as Adam in an industry that knew Melanie, so he is short of cash and hasn’t completed all the surgeries. Miriam is desperate to have a child, though her current lover Julia doesn’t want one. So while Julia is on a cruise with her mother Miriam orders an at-home insemination kit and asks Adam to help. Both get pregnant – that’s not a spoiler because the movie’s advertising poster says as much. The movie explores Adam’s conflict of still working to be a man yet having this big feminine thing barge into his life. I enjoyed it and the actors did a fine job. It’s a good view into an aspect of a trans life. And the Victoria, Canada scenery is pretty good too. This is perhaps a spoiler: Missing from the film is what happens when Adam begins to show. Daily Kos community member annieli posted a poll by YouGov that asked “Did you participate in the No Kings protest on October 18?” This is another way of getting an estimate of the size of the crowds. Out of all US adult citizens 8% said yes. If I’ve done the math right that means the attendance wasn’t 7 million, but ... over 25 million. Of course, polls depend on the honesty of those polled. When people are asked what they ate they are quite bad at accuracy, frequently replying with what they should have eaten or what they think the questioner wants to hear. Even so, this shows attendance was likely significantly higher than the 3.5% threshold that can cause governments to topple. In addition to the percentage of all adult citizens the report also shows percentages of categories of liberal leaning groups. For example, the poll shows 25% of those 65 and older say they attended the rallies. I had discussed an article that compared the proposed size of the nasty guy’s ballroom to the size of the building it is to be placed in. The building appears to be 50,000 square feet bigger than the ballroom and support services. What’s with all that extra space? RETIII of the Kos community quoted an article in the Washington Post:

The East Wing will be replaced by the ballroom, offices for the first lady and her staff, and new “guest suites” for the “President’s White House Guests,” according to a project description on the résumé of lead architect James McCrery II. The White House would not confirm whether the new guest suites and offices were included in the 90,000-square foot estimate.

RETIII notes this may be for billionaire donors who want to stay or live in the White House. There is no info on the number of suites, their size, and who these guests might be. There is also no info on why the Blair House and the many hotels in the city aren’t good enough. Maybe the suites are the story and the ballroom is a distraction. Thom Hartmann of the Kos community and independent pundit posed the question: Is the nasty guy a lot less powerful than he seems? Yeah, we’ve been seeing Republicans, especially Mike Johnson, groveling and doing all they can to protect him. But Hartmann has also noticed that scams, even with the power of a corrupted government behind them, usually don’t last. See presidents Harding, Nixon, and Clinton. A few House Republicans are demanding details about the Epstein scandal. A few voted to block is tariffs against Brazil. A few Republican senators have spoken their concerns about the murder of “drug traffickers” in the Caribbean. Tariffs have caused inflation to rise. His policies are making groceries and housing prices rise. Because of AI centers electricity prices are way up. He is making relations with the rest of the world – especially Canada – worse. His deportations are wreaking havoc on the economy. His base is turning against him. Republicans are busy gerrymandering because they know how unpopular he is. The nasty guys downfall may be just a matter of time, though Hartmann wisely doesn’t say how much time. In Sunday’s pundit roundup for Kos Chitown Kev quoted Christopher Armitage of The Existentialist Republic Substack.

[Steven] Levitsky’s test is simple and measurable: is there a cost to opposing the government? When the answer becomes yes, democracy ends. The playing field must be level enough that opposition can realistically win. Loss of power must be accepted as legitimate by incumbents. And two informal norms must operate: mutual toleration (treating rivals as legitimate, not enemies) and institutional forbearance (not using legal powers to their maximum to entrench advantage). When these conditions disappear, formal institutions remain but democracy dies. So have we crossed that line? Levitsky thinks so. ... Competitive authoritarianism has a known definition with precise boundaries. It means formal democratic institutions remain “the primary means of gaining power” but rules get violated so systematically that the regime fails minimum democratic standards. Elections still happen. Opposition parties exist. Courts function. Media operates. But all of these operate on a playing field tilted so severely that calling it democratic becomes inaccurate.

Adam Gopnik of The New Yorker explains the stated justification for demolishing the White House East Wing:

This, of course, is the standard line of Trump apologetics: some obvious outrage is identified, and defenders immediately scour history for an earlier, vaguely similar act by a President who actually respected the Constitution. It’s a form of mismatched matching. If Trump blows up boats with unknown men aboard—well, didn’t Obama use drones against alleged terrorists? (Yes, but within a process designed, however imperfectly, to preserve a chain of command and a vestige of due process.)

Kellie Carter Jackson and Nicole Hemmer writing for The Guardian describe the teach-in the Smithsonian held as a way of resisting the nasty guy’s edicts against museums.

In an authoritarian regime, one of the first things that is taken from the public is honest and credible information. The past itself becomes treacherous terrain: authoritarians attempt to seize control of the country’s history, reworking it into a vision of a glorious, powerful, patriotic – and largely fictional – past. The people and events may be real, but the stories they’re used to tell are false. In such a moment, telling the truth, and teaching the truth, about the country’s history is an act of both defiance and solidarity. [...] A teach-in represents a different kind of activism than the No Kings rallies held last weekend. Such rallies show mass opposition to the regime; but a teach-in represents a step toward deeper organizing and activism.

In Monday’s roundup Greg Dworkin quoted Sarah Stein Lubrano of Zeteo. In an article titled, “You Don’t Argue With Extremists. You Organize Against Them” she wrote:

Studies show debate doesn’t work as a tool of persuasion, and we can’t use it to affect political change in that way. Organizing and action can. ... This might be surprising to hear. As I write in my newest book, the “West” is steeped in debate culture, where debate is prized as part of how everything works – school, the news, parliaments, and social media. It’s even worked into the algorithm that structures what we see on the internet. My Instagram reels never do so well as when people fight furiously in the comments. It makes sense that debates do not change minds once one considers psychology. Psychological research shows political beliefs are not very alterable through argument, evidence, or information – especially compared to other beliefs.

Max Burns, through Threadreader:

In the last 9 days, Trump: - Demolished the East Wing without approval - Told Congress he won't seek approval for boat airstrikes - Said the US is considering land strikes in Venezuela - Threatened war with Colombia - Accepted $130 million in military funding from a billionaire - Threatened Argentine voters with consequences if they didn't support Javier Milei - Said he doesn't care if Congress stays out of session for the rest of the year - Refused to distribute legally required SNAP benefits to 40 million kids and families

Dworkin didn’t quote the complete list. In the comments exlrrp posted a meme showing Princess Diana dancing with a guy I don’t recognize and in the background are men in tuxes and women in gowns. The caption says:

This iconic moment took place in 1985, in the East Wing of the White House. We already HAD a ballroom.

In Wednesday’s roundup Dworkin quoted John Stoehr and his Editorial Board discussing the state of the government shutdown and the heat Republicans are feeling because of it. The article is as expected, so I’ll only mention the article’s title and the subheading (which I think Dworkin added).

The Republicans are used to burning their own people as leverage They are not used to the Democrats saying, “let them burn.”

David Graham of The Atlantic wrote a scenario showing how the midterm election could be stolen. I won’t go into the details because this is just one way it might happen. Just know scenarios like this are being gamed out and planned for by Republicans. They’ll be ready. Ted Littleford posted a cartoon showing a dog gazing upward because his sparkly bowl is empty. The voice says, “Of course there’s no food. But look – it’s gold!” The caption, “The Trump Doctrine.”