Resist
Audio Recording by George Hahn
My go-to historical frame of reference is World War II. At a staggering global cost of 85 million lives, the Second World War was the crucible of the 20th century — an explosion of unfathomable destruction, followed by an unparalleled period of (unevenly distributed) peace and prosperity. As I’m a catastrophist, I’m hard-wired to dwell on the first part, and take the second part for granted. Also, World War II, specifically the European theater, is personal. As a kid, my father and his friends kept tabs on people with foreign accents, believing they were tracking Nazi spies in their hometown of Glasgow.
When the war ended, Dad was 15 — three years away from being deployed to the front. My Jewish mother narrowly escaped the horrors of the Holocaust. She found relative safety sheltering in the London tube during the Blitz. Had the Allies not stood their ground, my mom’s life could have ended with a train ride, and you’d be reading something else. So many of us don’t appreciate how much of our success isn’t our fault.
Last week, I wrote that masked agents in fatigues raiding churches, schools, and workplaces and separating families without due process is not modern America, but 1930s Europe. We’ve seen this movie before — it doesn’t end well. History, however, isn’t a single-screen theater, but a multiplex of outcomes. I recently spoke with historian Heather Cox Richardson, who is remarkable. While we share a diagnosis of the present, professor Richardson is an optimist and an Americanist. Comparing the present — what I call our slow burn into fascism — to previous periods of instability in American history, Richardson says, “I’m not convinced that the outcome is going to be a dictatorship. It could just as easily be that the outcome is a renewed American democracy. But it’s going to be messy, either way.” The question isn’t whether she is correct but rather, what can we learn from American history, specifically the 1850s and 1890s?
Crisis of the 1850s
At the beginning of the 1850s, American slaveholders were undefeated. They had the political capital to expand the fugitive slave laws, requiring law enforcement throughout the U.S. to aid in the arrest of runaways. If that sounds like it rhymes with today’s battles over sanctuary cities and the federalization of the California National Guard, trust your instincts. In 1855 free-staters and pro-slavery forces, egged on by national political leaders, clashed in a Civil War sneak preview called Bleeding Kansas. A year later, a pro-slavery senator attacked an abolitionist one, Charles Sumner, with a cane, nearly beating him to death on the Senate floor. If rhetoric leading to political violence reminds you of what currently passes for presidential leadership, again, trust your instincts. And for contemporary parallels of political violence, see: January 6, Charlottesville, Gretchen Whitmer, Josh Shapiro, Paul Pelosi, Steve Scalise, the attacks on state legislators in Minnesota, and the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. As Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski recently said, “We are all afraid.” Given our history, that’s common sense.
As the 1850s neared their end, slaveholders appeared invincible. In a distant echo of today’s court battles over birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court ruled in Dred Scott that Black Americans, whether free or slaves, couldn’t be U.S. citizens. Two years later, abolitionist John Brown led a Hail Mary raid on the U.S. arsenal at Harper’s Ferry, intending to ignite a nationwide slave revolt. Federal military forces under the command of Colonel Robert E. Lee put down what contemporary accounts called an insurrection. At the time, Brown’s failed raid was a low point for abolitionists, but in retrospect it may have represented the high-water mark of pro-slave power in U.S. politics. Within a few years, a previously unthinkable coalition of unionists (many of whom held deeply racist views) and abolitionists had formed around Lincoln’s Republican Party, won a war to preserve the union, freed the slaves, launched Reconstruction, and set America on the path of industrialization.
The Gilded Age
There’s a reason many contemporary scholars are talking about a new Gilded Age. The period between 1870 and 1900, similar to our era, was defined by extreme inequality, the corporate capture of government, corruption, and widespread distrust in institutions. Today the robber barons have rebranded as tech bros. Boss Tweed and the Tammany Hall machine have been reborn as Trump’s meme coin — a pay-for-play crypto scheme operating out of the Oval Office. The fear that Congress and the courts work for corporations and the wealthy … remains a constant.
Reformers offer another parallel. The trust-busters of the Gilded Age had Teddy Roosevelt, who took on monopolies in railroads, sugar, and oil. We have Lina Kahn working to regulate digital monopolies that dictate the terms of commerce and preside over a broken information ecosystem. Leveraging distrust of Republicans and Democrats, the short-lived Populist Party of the 1890s demanded the direct election of senators, progressive taxation, and labor protections. Andrew Yang, who consistently loses elections but wins arguments, has championed reforms, notably the universal basic income and ranked choice voting. Zohran Mamdani, a progressive beneficiary of ranked choice voting, echoes William Jennings Bryan’s slogan, “Plutocracy is abhorrent to the Republic,” when he talks about “halalflation.” Reformers and their demands change throughout our history, but they share a common theme of fighting for the little guy against monied interests.
False Prophets
American history is a competition between two visions of governance, according to professor Richardson. Either we’re a society where people are equal under the law and have a say in their government, or we’re a society where elites have the right to rule and concentrate wealth, as they’re simply better than everyone else. At this moment, I’d argue that the 1% are protected by the law but not bound by it, and the bottom 99% are bound by the law but not protected by it.
In the Gilded Age, Andrew Carnegie personified the elite. An immigrant who made his fortune in steel during the early years of American industrialization, Carnegie initially credited his adopted country with his success. Later, however, Carnegie argued he was self-made, insisting he had a right to concentrate wealth in his hands, as he was the best steward for society. Elon Musk, also an immigrant, built his first fortune on internet infrastructure financed by American taxpayers. He built his second fortune jump-starting the electric car industry, financed once again by billions in subsidies.
Somewhere along the way, he became convinced he was humanity’s savior. For Musk, anyone who stands in the way of anointing him First Friend and/or (unelected) president is an enemy of the state. The most fortunate among us have replaced patriotism with techno-karenism. Daniel Kahneman found that, above a certain threshold, money offers no incremental increase in one’s happiness. However, there’s evidence everywhere that men who aggregate billions from technology firms become infected by an inexplicable sense of aggrievance.
Our idolatry of wealth makes Americans vulnerable to men like Carnegie and Musk. As the citizens of a country predicated on the dream of economic prosperity, Americans conflate wealth with leadership. The bottom 90% tolerate — even celebrate — a Hunger Games economy, where the rich live long, remarkable lives and everyone else dies a slow death. Why? Because each of us believes we’ll eventually reach the top. That belief isn’t optimism but opium, and it keeps the bottom 90% from realizing they’re essentially nutrition for the top 10%. Private jet owners can now accelerate the depreciation on their plane(s), but we’re stripping healthcare from millions of people. Does that make any fucking sense?
Antidote
One common protest slogan in the Trump era is “This is not who we are.” I agree, but as a student of history I know that’s incomplete. A more accurate slogan: “This isn’t who we want to be.” Richardson says our model should be Abraham Lincoln, who navigated through a period of political instability and violence and renewed American democracy by appealing to the values expressed in the Declaration of Independence. This Independence Day, Richardson wrote about the men who signed America’s founding document. They risked everything they had to defend the idea of human equality — an idea that’s been America’s work in progress since 1776.
“Ever since then, Americans have sacrificed their own fortunes, honor, and even their lives, for that principle. Lincoln reminded Civil War Americans of those sacrifices when he urged the people of his era to ‘take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth.’”
I find it difficult to see optimism in Lincoln’s story (see catastrophist). After he won the bloodiest war in American history, an assassin’s bullet robbed him of the opportunity to shape the peace. But at Gettysburg, just a few months after a pivotal battle where tens of thousands of Americans gave the last full measure of devotion, Lincoln appealed to American values as well as the American people. Then as now, the ball is in our court. “I’m not ready to give up on America,” Richardson told me. “We’ve renewed our democracy in the past, and we have the tools to do it again.”
The Hard Part
None of us knows how this moment will turn out.
Perhaps that’s the point. But previous generations of reformers who renewed American democracy didn’t have the luxury of hindsight or guarantees, either. They had only the present moment and a choice: retreat into cynicism or push forward into the messy, uncertain work of democracy. Susan B. Anthony faced decades of ridicule and arrest. Martin Luther King’s dream must’ve seemed impossible from his Birmingham jail cell. Dolores Huerta and Cesar Chavez organized immigrant farmworkers who had every reason to believe the system would never change. Harvey Milk knew visibility meant vulnerability in a hostile world. What they shared wasn’t optimism, but the willingness to act as if democracy could be renewed even when the evidence suggested otherwise.
My mother survived the Blitz because the Allies refused to give fascists the satisfaction of her fear; my father spent his youth tracking imaginary Nazi spies and joined the Royal Navy as freedom felt worth protecting. Democracy survives the same way it always has — not because the outcome is guaranteed, but because ordinary people decide it’s worth the risk. Resist.
Life is so rich,
P.S. My co-host Jessica Tarlov and I discuss Trump’s Epstein problem on this week’s Raging Moderates podcast. Listen here on Spotify or here on Apple, or watch on YouTube.
78 Comments
Need more Scott in your life?
The Prof G Markets Pod now has a newsletter edition. Sign up here to receive it every Monday. What a thrill.
I wonder how people are going to react when Obama gets indicted.
Remember when Steve Jobs died and people started crying and acting like it was their Dad that just died?
I have a feeling it’s going to like that x 100 for a lot of people on the Left
I remember you said once that Democrats don’t speak in a language that ‘the people’ can understand. I think you’re right. When you say “I’m not convinced that the outcome is going to be a dictatorship. It could just as easily be that the outcome is a renewed American democracy. But it’s going to be messy, either way.” Don’t expect people understand these over used words: “dictatorship” and “democracy” and how these simple words will have a huge impact their daily lives. Thanks for all your efforts.
Wow, Scott. Such an amazing coincidence: my father also survived the Blitz on London and enlisted in the Royal Navy. Great to hear you continuing to tell these worthwhile stories. I heard so much about those events growing up that they still seem current to me today. It really wasn’t that long ago, and the current events in the U.S. are so closely related. Thanks again for telling this story and keeping these important principles alive.
What pathetic drivel. There is no rational parallel between depoting U.S. illegal aliens in 2025 and the fugitive slave act in 1850 or actions of the nazis in 1930.
Really? Unidentified, masked-thugs rolling in to a Home Depot parking lot, AR15s in hand, rounding up day laborers because they have brown skin? Sounds like a rational parallel to me! Lmao
So old. So tired. A marketing man talking to an eco chamber is going to save democracy. What a joke and a waste of a weekly email. Go back to what you actually know vs the false appeal to authority.
What is triggering you here?
You know you have the free will to just not read this, right?
Wise words from someone who can’t spell “echo”…
Wow, PS. What does it take to make an impact on you? What do you find important to talk about in our current cultural situation? Is there anything right now you are concerned about, proud of, interested in when it comes to how the country is functioning right now? Do you see any parallels with other events in history? Which ones? Have you thought about it? What would compel you to share details of any of that? Very interested in your thoughts.
When I first started listening to Scott just prior to COVID, I loved him. I listened religiously to his pod 2022-2024. Loved his guests and insight. By Jan. 2025, too much Kara Swisher, who is quite possibly the most angry, depressed person on the planet and TDS has forever altered Prof. G.
But really, what I learned is what an arrogant, elitist Scott is. His jokes about getting off on the fact that he has an AMEX black card, flying private while he cries about the climate and rich party after rich party just became too much. I have to say, though, the episode shortly after the election, where Scott and Ed literally cried about Trump, was just too good. Trump or no Trump, none of it REALLY matters to Scott. And that’s his problem.
And yet here you are still spending your valuable time reading his work and commenting on it. Oh, the irony…
The reason many of continue to read this Scott’s pathetic drivel is to stay in touch and monitor the “thinking” patterns and “reasoning” of TDS infected lunatics.
Good lord you have too much free time lmao
This might be one of the most pathetic comments I’ve seen in quite a while – and that’s really saying something these days
Is this meant to be crappy satire?
Nah. I’m rich like Scott. I’ve got time.
I found you a couple of months ago on YouTube with Kara Swisher. I am really impressed with your knowledge, experience and your background. I really liked your video with Heather Cox Richardson. She is fantastic – and your interaction and interchange was great!
Saw your interview with HCR on YouTube last week- one of the best interviews you’ve ever done! One two punch from two of my favorite voices.
Thank you as always for the simple clarity you often provide to complex moments. The Hunger Games is the perfect, simple metaphor. Resist!
Catastrophic? Whatever catastrophe happened to you? Think about what you’re telling yourself.
What fear does to people, or is it envy? Or perhaps you have to be with the NYU culture-
Why dont you tell us next, this fake smiling radical No Manandami is right for NY?
I’m not you’re therapist, but doom and gloom is not the prescription pills to be taking.
This woman professor is spot on.
Trump has done more to protect the integrity of the immigration system than anyone since Clinton.
The comparison of Masked Ice agents to Nazi Germany is absurd.
These people dont want their identities known.
Anything bad that could have happened already happened.
Noting but good things happened to you.
If you lived through traumatic events most of your life, like I did, that’s the way you should feel.
Now I’ll go read this Richardson woman.
Of course it all goes on- for the best of the majority.
Drink a glass of red wine it relaxes not vodka or scotch or whatever your favorite go to is.
They’re rounding up people with brown skin, some of them U.S. citizens, because they’ve got a mass deportation quota from Stephen Miller. They illegally deported *legal* U.S. residents to CECOT because they don’t give a shit shout the rule of law. “Laws for thee, but not for me” should be the slogan for the current administration.
Really nice post. I found hope in your message. And my condolences on the passing of your father. As you’ve said, grief is the price we pay for love. Take care of yourself.
Love the collaboration- Richardson and Galloway.
They are both powerful reminders of the work of Ida Tarbell and the “muckrakers” who were the champions of RESISTANCE through watchdog journalism during the Gilded Age.
You guys are totally doing what needs to be done.
I know tech bros deserve plenty of blame for what they’ve done and are doing with their wealth. Let’s be sure to include execs of fossil fuel companies and even the Walton family for their ungenerous natures. They profit from doing damage and they don’t give back.
Scott –
A powerful message for our times and for all of us to internalize and find common ground to come together and organize to have a meaningful path of resistance. Keep it coming!
Shelley Nandkeolyar
Scott, your voice resonates sharply and powerfully. Keep inspiring all of us to resist ignorance and cruelty
Thanks for your weekly “Trump is Hitler and Elon Musk is not a genius- really”! As someone who is not in the top 1% as you are I agree the wealthy need to be constrained and that health care for everyone is a laudable goal but the weekly “raging moderate” diatribes read like AI generated pieces. Maybe next week you can brag about your F1 parties and football fandom.
It is possible to be financially successful and also lean towards socialism…
Scott,
Should the socialist win the NYC mayoral election, will you sell all of your homes, donating the proceeds to charity (not an NGO please) and relocate to enjoy the benefits of city provided housing? I bet not. You are predictably hypocritical.
Right again, Scot. Keep speaking. I’m loving your observations.
Subject: A Thought on Responsibility in Calls to Resistance
Dear Professor Galloway,
Thank you for your powerful piece on resistance and the importance of defending democracy. I deeply appreciate your historical perspective and the urgency of your message.
One concern I’d like to share is about the potential gap between the risks faced by public figures and those faced by ordinary citizens when calls to action are made. Influential voices—yourself included—are often better protected from the consequences of resistance, while your audience may be more exposed to real-world risks such as legal trouble, job loss, or even violence.
I wonder if public commentators might help by more clearly acknowledging these differences, or by providing guidance on navigating risk responsibly. This could empower your readers and reinforce the sense of solidarity and care that underpins genuine democratic renewal.
Thank you for sparking this vital conversation.
Best regards,
Erkan
Is it completely ridiculous to fantasise about Prof Richardson as POTUS after a short bloodless revolutionary war. She is the kind of leader that’s sorely missing in US politics.
Thank you Scott for an accurate, fact and history filled description of the current state of our country. 👍🏻
nice article
Another great read. You’re a treasure.
Your tribute to your Dad in yesterday’s podcast was so perfect it’s hard to put into words. Sweet, sublime, passionate, and loving come to mind, but they all seem inadequate. Thank you so much sharing that.
I thought that in later years Andrew Carnegie became a philanthropist who funded libraries and did other good works. Our city has one of the few Carnegie libraries still existing in Canada. Mr. Carnegie also established the Carnegie medal for bravery.
Excellent comparison of current chaos to the temperature of the country prior to the Civil War. If you haven’t read it, Neil Howe & William Strauss make a compelling argument in their book “The Fourth Turning” that this cycle of four, twenty-year quarters repeats itself every 80-ish years, the fourth and final quarter of the cycle (Crisis) ending in a war. They suggest the war is required to kick off the next cycle, whose first “turning” is re-growth and renewal. They suggest we’re in Crisis now, with the next “turning” likely to happen around 2030, when some spark will set off a catastrophic chain of events leading war, and then rebirth. Similar points in history were the 1920’s (before the depression & WW2) as well as the 1760’s just before the American revolution. Fascinating stuff, but so scary in it’s unpredictability!
Just wow, so well written! I don’t know how you write so prolifically and with such quality and in your unique tone of voice. Sure, AI is helping but these thoughts are clearly your thoughts and this energy is your energy. Love your work!
Sadly, most Americans are politically stupid because most Americans still haven’t figured out that they lost their democracy when the Roberts Republican Supreme Court, with Citizens United, gave billionaires the legal right to secretly buy elections and to own politicians and then ruled that presidents have immunity from prosecution – period. It’s over folks; Trump and a few other billionaires now OWN THE USA, and they are not going to just give it back because a few pathologically polite Democrats asked for it.
To put Andrew Carnegie and Musk in the same category is grossly unfair to Carnegie, a man you ultimately gave away his huge fortune to the benefit of others.
Yep. And Carnegie was a proponent of the estate tax to prevent the creation of an uber-wealthy class of Americans who hog capital and stifle American innovation.
I wish I was more optimistic but I fear that it’s too late for our country. We allowed for a shift of the wealth to the top 1% for too long and now Trump is expediting it while trying to destroy our best institutions to fix it. The Dept of Education can not simply be rebuilt when Trump is gone. Our reputation around the world cannot be restored as long as there is a threat of another Trump coming along in four years. Trump is the final nail in the coffin of the US as a great nation. We will continue to exist and be economically relevant but we will continue to be less healthy, less educated and more prone to corruption for at least another generation.
Thanks for the wonderful post. Heather Cox Richardson is a national treasure, and one of my favorite reads every day. To see the two of you connect made my day!
Resist? Easy to say but hard to do. You didn’t get where you are today by resisting the system.
Wonderful outline with advocacy of optimism if not hope. Thanks for providing context. I see little room for optimism. The is no effective counter for the fascism that as we speak is dismantling the US. It’s not to beginning but is reaching to point of being irreversible. Regarding Civil War time there was effective opposition to the fascistic Confederacy, those states which today rule the US, This is not who we are. Of course it is. And if 75% of people think their kids will be better off well I think that’s delusional. The public in general are uneducated, ill informed and apathetic.
Well said Scott! Please enjoy Aspen. I’m down in Castle Rock, another great Colorado town if you can stop by.
Best,
Glenn
Thank you, Scott. I did not realize I needed this today until I read it.
There is a big difference between the rounding up of slaves in the 1850’s and the current illegal immigrant deportations. Those slaves pre-civil war were NOT here in the US voluntarily. They were harvested by African (Black) slave hunters in Africa and sold to slave traders who transferred them to the Western Hemisphere for indentured sale as slaves. They had no choice. The current situation is the opposite: The illegals Biden welcomed into the US came here voluntarily, violating US immigration law (And stepping over those who applied for legal immigration according to US law). They have always had the option of voluntarily returning to their country of origin, an opportunity not afforded the US slaves. The ICE agents are arresting for deportation those who are illegal while especially targeting those who violated other laws beyond illegal immigration. Your comparison of the two periods of our history insults the lack of agency of the slaves while diminishing the agency of the illegal aliens currently in the US. Dread Scott was overturned. The US allows more immigrants to emigrate here LEGALLY than any other country. The US immigration laws are not likely to be reversed by either court or voters. It’s a wonder that you, who has benefited so much from what this country offers can’t see the forest for the trees through your dislike of the current administration policies.
Your perspective here, Stan, is both grossly misleading and self-destructive to the US. To say that most undocumented immigrants came here voluntarily makes it sounds like they just decided one day to walk away from their otherwise productive lives and jaunt over the US. Most were faced with the choice of starvation, poverty or death as their alternative. For the vast majority, that life-altering (or life-saving) decision is the only unlawful thing they’ve done (and is a misdemeanor in our lgeel system). I also see no evidence that Trump’s regime (apparently led by Steven Miller with Trump’s distracted acquiesence) is prioritizing deportation of actual criminals. In fact, most of those criminal were already in custody and being deported (standard process under both Biden and Obama).
More to the point, we need these immigrants in order to grow and prosper. A nations wealth is nothing more than the sum product of its people and their productivity. Those who have risked their lives to come to the US have exhibited courage and ambition. The best way to grow our GDP and wealth would be to actively train them and put them to work in a legal and official manner. By instead trying to round them up and deport them, we’re shooting ourselves in the foot.
Nick- I have to take issue with your comment on several levels. 1. Any immigrant who entered the US illegally has the opportunity to leave. US slaves NEVER had that choice. That difference of agency is my central point. Your description of the mitigating factors pushing them to make the dangerous trip to the US border does not change that agency. 2. Any person unhappy with their difficult or even dangerous situation elsewhere has the option of applying for legal immigration to the US. As I pointed out, the US allows more legal immigration than any other country in the world. Entering the US illegally undermines the legal immigration process, it does not complement it. 3. Our history of immigration is based on vetted, legal immigration. When the masses of immigrants entered through Ellis Island they were questioned about their ability to sustain themselves and checked for infectious diseases. Those that failed, were put back on the boat back to Europe. Yes, they added mightily to the development of the US as do the millions who have legally emigrated here since then. Many of the illegal immigrants entering over the last 20 years are contributors to the US economy and culture as well. But that does not make their entry legal, nor does it change their status to legal. There are many US citizens who are upstanding members of their community that intentionally or otherwise commit crimes. Their standing may help their defense but does not wipe away the crime. (More…)
(…Continued) 4. The sanctuary cities failure to cooperate with ICE detainer orders to remove known criminals does two things: A. It concentrates the illegals in those locations which naturally attract more ICE attention. B. It forces ICE to attempt arrest of those criminals in the midst of the immigrant community resulting in other illegal immigrants to be swept up with the criminals. 5. Your description of the illegal immigrants as those with courage and ambition is apt but does not include all of them. Many are opportunistic intruders who are only here to exploit the leniency of the sanctuary cities and victimize other immigrants who may not have the legal protections of a citizen. Also there are illegal, unvetted border crossers from many remote countries who’s motives to do mischief on behalf of foreign governments or gangs pose a real threat to the US. 6. The Biden open border policy has resulted in millions of untested immigrants potentially carrying infectious diseases. It is small wonder why there is an increase in Tuberculosis, Measles and other diseases in the US. Bottom line: as spoken by many liberal democrats from Pelosi, Schumer, Obama and Clinton (before they were infected with TDS): “If you don’t have borders, you don’t have a country.”
ur delusional
Why?
I’d encourage everyone to spend a few minutes searching for news stories about ‘ICE agents raiding churches’. Appears to be ‘mostly false’, with a vague, hearsay allegation of ICE knocking on a church door during services, a report of congregants escorting someone outside to be detained by ICE, and some detentions on church grounds. Not at all what I suspect most people envision from the idea of ‘raiding churches’, given Scott’s invocation of Nazis. This isn’t to say whether overturning the policy of ICE avoiding ‘sensitive areas’ is a good idea or not – but let’s try to recognize hyperbole when we hear it. Godwin’s law applies here.
see los angeles
I live in LA. Multiple good people who are in my daily life have been rounded up and disappeared. People that have worked their whole lives in this country and have given far more to us than we have to them. Yes, most of them were undocumented but, whether you choose to believe it or not, undocumented people have been a vital part of our culture and economy since the beginning of this country. They pay a wide range of taxes for a fraction of the services. They’re less likely to commit violent or property crime than natural born citizens. Targeting them with a budget that is bigger than Israel’s entire defense budget is absurd and morally reprehensible. We should do a better job of creating intelligent immigration law that allows the amount of immigration we need to support our industry and make up for the dwindling birth rate. However, the singling out of this group as a major problem in this country is based in absolutely nothing but racism. You can’t support a felon king and pretend like you’re a stickler for the rule of law.
please get ur facts right….they HAVE raided churches and continue to do so….ur defending fascism so good luck with that
yeah but….. while I attend any and all protests, and they are fabulous for the most part, but there is just apathy. Too many reality shows, not enough common sense, and absolutely no education anymore.
May you both and your children live long enough to see the days of Gaza…at behest of your own technology.
What a ridiculously childish and mean-spirited comment. Pathetic.
Make no mistake, @SCOTUS has always provided stealth cover for corporations since inception. It is especially inclined now given Citizens United and the Federalist Society. For the conservatives it really isn’t about philosophy but being comped by billionaires.
Why didn’t Scott resist when Biden went against SCOTUS to put student debt on everyone else? Where was the “resist” talk when he used OSHA to force vaccinations? Or when the DNC spied on the 2017 Trump campaign? Where was the fascism talk when the Biden administration conspired with social media companies to censor “misinformation”? Or the Russia collusion hoax?
oh that’s right…it’s TDS
Guy pulls 3 random things he didn’t like from the Biden administration to find some moral equivalence to he flood of illegal things Trump is doing.
Literally, on a daily basis, I hear “Biden’s fascist regime” from some dink like you. It never stops with you people even when confronted with the fact that you voted for someone who has a serious disdain for law, order, or responsibility. Dude. Your guy lives on another planet. One where he believes that he is the last word for the planet but also for EVERY PERSON that he allows to live here. Citizen or not. So stop your crying and deal with the fact that you voted for a delusional loser and it upsets you that most of the country thinks you’re an idiot for doing so. More and more every day.
Because crippling generations with student debt doesn’t help the country at all. Vaccinations are required in many industries where they can’t afford to have viruses take out a portion of the workforce. The feds “spied” on Trump because there were meetings with known Russian spies at Trump Tower that were clearly referenced in the Mueller Report. There was pressure on social media companies not to allow the spread of false information about covid. “Russian collusion” was Trump’s term and the focus the Mueller investigation was on election interference, and quite a bit of it was proven.
ur also delusional
Scott – You are such a classic liberal and socialist. And more liberal now then 5 years ago. Goodness!
Scott – where is the CTA here? You lay out the argument and then it just ends. 99.5% delete the email or close the tab, and maybe 0.5% forward with the angry face emoji. You have the voice and the podium. Tell people what you are doing and encourage them to do the same.
The untied states as you have traced has had periods of discord,extreme discord and has an underlying division of wealth and poverty and in between, isolationism or not .These divisions have never been fully resolved .So we reemerge during periods of our history .Since we are in such a period what will happen at some point what the division existing now is will force an extreme polarization ,which requires much more than rhetoric,or a passing of a law.It will lead to some confrontation.I believe many more people need to feel the pain directly in their lives and that has to be a very substantial part. of the population .That is when we can start to rebalance .we are not there yet.Acts like devastating Medicaid ,rising unemployment,inflation thru tariffs ,move in that direction lit will need to be a combination of them and social issues combining .Until then we slowly meander to this direction
I like you. I like your unwavering identification of the signal in the noise. Your honesty about being rich is harder to process. Not the fact that you’re honest but the fact that you’re protected from all the chaos and inequality and fear that you teach us the history of.
I know you’re a generous person. I sense you’re a good person. I would have you as my mentor, but I didn’t realize how the world works in time, like you did. So now I’ve run out of time. And I would imagine that other people’s…. envy… of your comfort is one of the things you’re least bothered by. I’m a 64yr old loser, who’s done nothing but try to win my whole life. And never broken a law in my life. Now I have a 20yr old son who doesn’t know where to even start thinking about money or effort. I guess I’m just trying to say that it’s hard to hear how poorly I did, from someone who did so well. It smarts.
Well written, lucid. The question is how do we resist? So many are anti-Trump, Miller & Holman, and are tired of the screeds of Curtis Yarvin and Marc Andreessen. The world news seems bi-furcated into tribes with AI, Gaza, Crypto and bond market news each offering their own vision. Whew. And so we stand with a sign, post something on social mediums, lose friends and avoid the topic until we can vote. Keep up the good work.
Ida Tarbell
Your worship for Lincoln is misguided. Lincoln considered sending freed slaves back to Africa because they would not adapt. Just like Muslims and other societies. USA isn’t for everyone. It’s for those who adapt.
This is the United States of America, not the State of America. Each state is it’s own entity. You don’t like the laws of your state? MOVE. You didn’t like Trump? MOVE, and leave your passport on the way out. MAGA is emptying the swamp. Resistance IS futile.
Ah. Yes, Lincoln did temporarily like the concept of colonization but walked away from that.
It’s a UNITED states – an intricate bond /relationship – where states have their role as does the Federal government.
Lincoln is considered our greatest president, but actually he was the worst. Not that he had bought land in Guatemala for the blacks (believing they could never be integrated into the American free population) and was only disabused when his generals said that the deportation of so many was impossible. His irredeemable act was his demand that the nation not be rendered asunder. Douglas or just about any other choice for president (Lincoln barely won) would have cut the South loose, saving a whole generation of young Americans and Confederates, 780,000 lives lost for Lincoln’s obsession. The South would have ended slavery on its own, Brazil did it 30 years later with no bloodshed. The South would have probably taken Mexico and Central America, leading to a confederacy able to compete with the US. Lincoln’s obsession was probably psychotic because of his syphilis. Other than that, Scott’s view of Trump is so valuable and genuine it made me cry.
True, it was awful when Lincoln coerced Beauregard to attack the union at Fort Sumter sparking the Civil War. I readed it on Facebook.