Showing posts with label Democracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democracy. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 30, 2025

On the brink of dictatorship

As President Trump wields more and more control of the Government of the United States, some experienced political analysts have cautioned that the Great Republic may be on the brink of dictatorship.


Neighbour on the Brink?



Andrew Coyne writing for the Globe and Mail opinion column claims Donald Trump is on the brink of becoming a dictator and asks if he can be stopped?



At some point, American democracy will find it is caught, immovably, a colossus in quicksand. The question is whether it has reached that point, or, if it has not reached it yet, whether it can still avoid doing so.


The examples pile up by the day. In recent days, weeks and months, Mr. Trump and his officials have:

  • Installed National Guard troops and other military forces in the centre of major American cities, first Los Angeles, then Washington, and soon (if Mr. Trump’s threats are to be believed) Chicago, Baltimore and New York, under the guise of fighting crime. Some of the guardsmen are armed; some have been conducting arrests, for which they have neither training nor authority. The D.C. police force was likewise taken under federal control.

  • Seized thousands of suspected illegal immigrants off the streets, the snatchings carried out by masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents without badges, their victims bundled into cars without markings, to be sent in some cases to barbaric foreign prison camps, in some cases to their domestic counterparts, without trial, without even charges. ICE is increasingly seen as Mr. Trump’s personal police force.

  • Initiated criminal investigations into various of Mr. Trump’s antagonists, from Letitia James, the Attorney-General of New York who prosecuted him for fraud, to Jack Smith, the special counsel who prosecuted him for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election and for his handling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, to John Bolton, his own former national security adviser who has since become one of his severest critics, to Adam Schiff, the Democratic Senator and lead manager on his first impeachment, to Lisa Cook, the Federal Reserve governor who stands in the way of his desired takeover of the U.S. central bank.

  • Fired or demoted police officers and prosecutors responsible for bringing the Jan. 6 rioters to justice, having earlier issued a blanket pardon for the rioters themselves.

  • Threatened television networks whose programs or performers irritated him with suspension of their licences, or adverse regulatory rulings.

  • Extorted massive settlements from the same networks, or law firms who had acted for his antagonists, or universities he deemed too liberal, or even corporations, like Intel, he fancied a piece of.

  • Demanded Texas, Florida, Indiana and other states redraw their electoral maps, in a transparent attempt to gerrymander more Republican districts into being in time for the midterm elections; at the same time, Mr. Trump talks openly of banning mail-in ballots, while issuing executive orders demanding “proof of citizenship” for voting and requiring federal review of state electoral rolls.

  • Fired the head of the Bureau of Labour Statistics for issuing unemployment numbers that displeased him; fired the head of the Defence Intelligence Agency for issuing after-action reports on the U.S. bombing of Iran that likewise disagreed with Trumpian dogma.

  • Defied court orders with regard to various of the above.

  • Defied Congress with regard to the spending of money for the purposes for which it was appropriated by Congress, while imposing tariffs that must constitutionally be approved by Congress.

  • Issued a series of executive orders for which he has likewise no constitutional authority.


As if to give visible signs of his intent, Mr. Trump has been furnishing himself with various of the accoutrements of a dictator, from the giant portraits that now hang on government buildings, to the gold-encrusted palace that was once the White House, to the military parade on his birthday, to the endless public displays of sycophancy he requires of his cabinet members. Indeed, he has taken in recent days to musing about dictatorship as a possibility – “a lot of people are saying ‘Maybe we need a dictator’” – as if he were not just trying out the description with the public, but habituating them to it. (Coyne & Drolet, 2025)



Dan Vergano, a senior editor at Scientific American, comments on a May report in Politics & Policy written by political scientist Daniel Stockemer of the University of Ottawa.


Rather than a coup, Trump’s attacks on law firms, universities, immigrants and others constitute “a more incremental form of democratic erosion,” he writes, one that follows a six-step theory of incremental autocratization based on research on the democratic backsliding seen worldwide in recent decades. 


The model arose in major part from the work of political scientist Marianne Kneuer of the Dresden University of Technology. She looked at the last quarter-century’s collapse in Venezuela, examining how states turn from democratic to autocratic in stages, as opposed to a sudden coup.


The U.S. has already breached the first three steps of Stockemer’s theory. The first step is one of social turmoil; this originated with the Tea Party movement during the Obama administration. Marked by angry politics, backlash against minorities and immigrants, and distrust in institutions, the U.S. has in the last two decades changed from a “full” to a “flawed” democracy, according to the Economist’s global democracy index.


The second step requires a “project of radical change,” like the populist movement of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez in the 1990s, or in the U.S. case Trump’s MAGA movement, which defends white, male privileges and holds prime loyalty for many Republicans.


The third step is a “decisive electoral victory,” applicable to Chavez in 1999 or Trump in 2024, the latter a vote that also brought Trump control of a subservient Congress.


That leaves us at the edge of the fourth step, the dismantling of checks and balances on executive power. (Vergano, 2025)



“If my theory is correct, the U.S. is still in this transition phase between democracy and autocracy,” says Stockemer, by e-mail. 


“If they move more in the direction of autocracy, we would see that the administration tries to defy more court orders.” One key part of the fourth step is the declaration of fabricated emergencies, such as the “red scare” of the McCarthy era, to trample checks and balances, such as the judiciary’s control of the legal system. In May, for example, the White House deputy chief of staff suggested Trump could unilaterally suspend habeas corpus, a legal remedy for unlawful detention that dates at least to the Magna Carta and is in the U.S. Constitution, to summarily round up immigrants. He cited an imaginary “invasion”—even though border crossings are at their lowest point in U.S, history, according to Trump’s U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency—as a reason. (Vergano, 2025)



Sara Dorn, a Forbes news reporter who covers politics, reports on Trump addressing Generals and Top Military about an ‘Invasion From Within’ that necessitates military response to ‘Straighten Out’ major cities. 



  • Trump said “we are under invasion from within” that’s "no different than a foreign enemy, but more difficult in many ways because they don’t wear uniforms,” as he said he wants the military to focus more on domestic security, including tamping down on crime in major cities and illegal immigration.

  • The president made the comments as he addressed top military generals gathered at Quantico for a last-minute meeting called by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (who separately blasted what he described as “fat generals” and an out-of-shape military).

  • Trump said previous presidents “used the armed forces to keep domestic order and peace,” lamenting “now they say you aren’t allowed to use the military.”

  • The remarks build on Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to cities including Memphis, Portland and Washington, D.C., in what he says is an effort to reduce crime there. (Dorn, n.d.)




Observers of politics in the western democracies are raising alarms about the descent of the Great Republic into dictatorship. The public actions and plans of the figurehead of this movement, when analysed scientifically, support our need for concern and collective opposition to dictatorship that will make “the land of the free” a footnote in history.



References

Coyne, A., & Drolet, G. (2025, August 29). Opinion: Donald Trump is on the brink of becoming a dictator. Can he be stopped? The Globe and Mail. Retrieved September 30, 2025, from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-donald-trump-brink-of-dictatorship-can-he-be-stopped/? 

Dorn, S. (n.d.). Invasion From Within. Forbes. Retrieved September 30, 2025, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2025/09/30/invasion-from-within-trump-tells-generals-military-needed-to-straighten-out-major-cities/ 

Vergano, D. (2025, May 14). Science Tells Us the U.S. Is Heading toward a Dictatorship. Scientific American. Retrieved September 30, 2025, from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/science-tells-us-the-u-s-is-heading-toward-a-dictatorship/ 


Sunday, September 14, 2025

Polarization Populism and Plenty of Guns

The murder of Charlie Kirk has generated many comments from across the political spectrum in the United States and around the world.

Good Government avoids Polarization and Populism




Perhaps we need to examine the danger of polarization in the messages of the people who draw large audiences for their political speech. Populism is a technique to gather crowds by telling them what they want to hear and affirming misconceptions and misinformation while avoiding truthful analysis and explanation of reality. When access to a Plenty of Firearms is added to Polarization and Populism, we create the conditions for violence as a response to politicians with whom we disagree. Canada needs to consider how we will deal with these anti democratic dangers as the next election cycle approaches.



Saturday, July 19, 2025

When “Democratic” is cast as “Bad”

An article by Rebecca Lau of Global News, posted July 17, 2025, leads with a headline indicating that Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston threatens to overrule Halifax city council on downtown bike lane. She reports that Halifax Mayor Andy Fillmore said he wasn’t surprised the premier asked the municipality to reverse its decision on Morris Street.


HRM Council Jurisdiction 




“Bike lane concerns have been raised by the Halifax Port Authority, the container terminal operator PSA Halifax, Emera, Ambassatours, and local residents. Most recently, Emergency Health Services said that pre-hospital care delivery and public safety could be compromised if Morris Street proceeded as planned,” 


“These types of interventions should not be ignored. They’re data-driven warnings about operational impacts and public risk. As mayor, I will not ignore threats to our economic competitiveness, risks to public safety, or alarm bells about dramatic cost escalations.”(Lau, n.d.)


Coun. Kathryn Morse, who represents District 10, says the premier’s letter and stance is “disappointing” and appears to be part of a “political spat” rather than an actual effort to improve traffic.


“I think it’s not so much about the Morris Street bike lane as (it is) about strong mayor powers. I think it is more an excuse to go after council and to strengthen a position for strong mayor powers,”



So-called strong mayor powers are passed through provincial legislation, giving mayors certain powers to accelerate the implementation of some shared municipal-provincial actions, such as housing and infrastructure. Morse reminds us of a democratic process that could review the decision and reduce the threat of non municipal authorities not “staying in their lane”.


“If there’s new evidence that this bike lane would interfere with port traffic or EHS in any way, then council needs to reconsider and look at that evidence. Our staff, when they made the recommendation, consulted with EHS, consulted with the port, and there were no red flags,” 


“We have congestion issues in HRM; we’re all concerned about it. I think we could do more to work together. There’s a Link Nova Scotia plan, for example, that’s been sitting on the shelf for months. It would be great to see that so we could start to move forward together.”(Lau, n.d.)


Official Opposition Leader Claudia Chender said Houston should “stay in his lane” when it comes to interfering with municipal politics.


“For decades our province’s cities and towns have listened to residents and made decisions based on what was best for their communities,”


“If residents are concerned about traffic congestion, the lack of safe bike lanes or any number of other issues, they can make their voices heard through their city councillor. "(Lau, n.d.)


There is no need for Premier Tim Houston to interfere in municipal decisions. If the decision to review the traffic routing on Morris St. is necessary, the best path is for the citizens of the government closest to the residents and employers impacted to maintain our democratic tradition and avoid creating unhealthy precedent where authoritarian decisions are accepted from layers of government that are not “staying in their lane”.



References

Lau, R. (n.d.). Nova Scotia premier threatens to overrule Halifax city council on downtown bike lane. Global News. Retrieved July 19, 2025, from https://globalnews.ca/news/11292301/nova-scotia-premier-threatens-overrule-halifax-council-bike-lane-morris/

Tuesday, July 15, 2025

Strong Mayor and Weak Democracy

In a recent Facebook reel, Premier Tim Houston spoke above the tag line that he will always stand up for Nova Scotians and fight for what matters most. He cites the displeasure of those who travel to Halifax with the traffic situation in the Capital city. He speaks of a serious disconnect between serving the needs and aspirations of the citizens of HRM and the actions of HRM council with regard to traffic management on a particular street in central Halifax. 


2024 Nova Scotia General Election results


A review of the 2024 Nova Scotia General Election results shows the success of Houston’s PC’s in most of the Province. Urban Areas of HRM and CBRM voted for parties in opposition to the government. The claim of the Premier to speak with more concern for the people than their elected HRM councillors in these areas is less credible when the election results are considered. When the legitimacy of elected representatives is questioned, particularly in those in high population areas, the threat to democracy is salient.


The threat that a mechanism to overrule decisions by elected representatives through establishment of a “strong mayor” with power to overrule and hire or fire municipal employees may create a scenario where political support or connections of the “strong mayor” to other layers of provincial or federal administrations may be an anti-democratic path to realise political objectives impacting urban citizens in a manner not approved by their elected councillors.


An article by Lyndsay Armstrong of the The Canadian Press suggests that some Halifax councillors are worried about “strong-mayor” powers that may be coming. Tom Urbaniak, a political scientist at Cape Breton University, comments that the province would be wise to wait and see how stronger mayoral authority plays out in Ontario municipalities before following suit.


“In our world today, where democracy is very much at risk, I’m going to respectfully advise caution about major (government) restructuring that was not on the agenda when people last voted,” (Armstrong, n.d.)


“It’s sort of like a mini American presidency, but actually with less congressional oversight. So we need to be very, very careful,” (Armstrong, n.d.)


Armstrong reports that Premier Houston said Thursday he is both “looking at” the possibility of strong-mayor powers and considering using a bill that has passed — but not yet entered into force — to overrule Halifax council’s recent decision to move ahead with a bike lane on a south-end city street.  Armstrong notes that Councillor Sam Austin presented the motion and told council that a move toward strong-mayor powers would undermine councillors’ ability to adequately represent their constituents. Austin said putting so much power into one person’s hands is “deeply problematic,” and Councillor Janet Steele said strong-mayor powers could mute the other voices on council. Steele is reported as saying during the meeting on Thursday”



“It’s moving towards almost authoritarianism, it’s not the way we want to go. These are slippery slopes. I for one don’t want to be sliding down that slope,” Steele said during the meeting on Thursday. (Armstrong, n.d.)




We need only look to the republic to the south to see the negative consequences when political leaders refuse to “stay in their lane” and attempt to enforce their political agenda in areas that are the democratic responsibility of other components of our democracy.



References

Armstrong, L. (n.d.). Strong-mayor powers and why some Halifax councillors are worried it could be coming. Global News | Breaking, Latest News and Video for Canada. Retrieved July 15, 2025, from https://globalnews.ca/news/11287363/halifax-strong-mayor-powers/ 


Tuesday, February 15, 2022

Temporary and Fulfilled

The decision of the Government to use the Emergencies Act as a temporary measure to control the illegal aspects of the “Freedom Convoy” occupation of areas of the country may become a permanent example to anarchists of extreme government overreach.
A man waves a flag while taking part in the convoy protest against vaccine mandates in Ottawa. (CBC / Radio-Canada)


John Paul Tasker, of CBC News, explains what the Emergencies Act means.

In this instance, the act is being invoked to deal with a public order emergency. This means the cabinet has the power to prohibit "public assembly that may reasonably be expected to lead to a breach of the peace," to prohibit travel to, from or within any specified area, to forbid the use of a "specified property" and to secure "protected places." The cabinet can also direct any person or class of person to "render essential services" and gives the government the power to regulate the "distribution and availability of essential goods."... Trudeau said the federal powers will be used to prohibit people from illegally gathering in the city's downtown core and to order tow truck companies in the area to help remove big rigs used in the protests… The cabinet is also directing banks and financial institutions to halt the flow of funds to protest organizers through amendments to the Proceeds of Crime and Terrorist Financing Act.1
 

On the other hand, the predictable, controlled, and monitored lifting of temporary COVID restrictions by provincial public health authorities was an opportunity for anarchist elements who know frustration with these measures might be both a rallying point and an opportunity to claim a win. Being mindful of the TEMPORARY nature of the Emergencies Act and the Covid restrictions is extremely important to avoid overreaction to these events.
Monitor the trends

 

Steve Scherer and Nichola Saminather report, for Reuters, on how the Emergencies Act can squeeze funding for the trucker protests.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Monday invoked rarely-used special measures to end protests that have shut some border crossings and paralyzed downtown Ottawa. He said he would invoke the Emergencies Act to deal with the "Freedom Convoy" protests, started on Jan. 28 by Canadian truckers opposing a vaccinate-or-quarantine mandate for cross-border drivers. They have turned into a rallying point for people opposed to a range of Trudeau's policies, including COVID-19 pandemic restrictions and a carbon tax. The demonstrations shut a main economic corridor between Canada and the United States for six days before it was reopened on Sunday2
 

The majority in Canada respect the value of enjoying an environment of peace, order, and good government where they live and the respect the rights of people to demonstrate for change through the democratic processes that protect us all. This is not a right respected by anarchists who act by denying freedom to fellow citizens and seek replacement of democracy with autocracy.

 

References

1

(2022, February 14). The federal government has invoked the Emergencies Act ... - CBC. Retrieved February 15, 2022, from https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/emergencies-act-explainer-1.6351504 

2

(2022, February 14). Factbox: Canada's Emergencies Act: how will it squeeze funding of .... Retrieved February 15, 2022, from https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canadas-emergencies-act-what-it-would-allow-quell-protests-against-pandemic-2022-02-14/