Connect with us

Published

on

Whether a glass is half full or half empty is a matter of perspective. The same can be said about the half of Americans who oppose the idea of allowing presidents to rule unilaterallyan exercise of monarchical power favored by only a fifth of us. I like to look on the bright side, so I take it as a win that those opposing unrestrained executive power far outnumber those who favor it. Still, it would be better if, in a republic established two and a half centuries ago, more than half the population would commit to the proposition that turning the country into a dictatorship would be bad.

The Rattler is a weekly newsletter from J.D. Tuccille. If you care about government overreach and tangible threats to everyday liberty, this is for you. Email(Required) EmailThis field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged. Submit

Δ Opponents of Dictatorship Outnumber Supporters

“About half of the public think it would be a bad idea if the next president is able to act on important policy issues without the approval of Congress or the courts,” the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research reports of the results of a survey of 1,282 adults conducted March 21-25. “Only 21% think it would be a good thing, and about 30% think it’s neither good nor bad.”

In the poll, 48 percent overall oppose unilateral presidential rule, including 58 percent of Democrats and 45 percent of Republicans. The 21 percent favoring the idea include 17 percent of Democrats and 26 percent of Republicans. Support for unrestrained executive power rises to 39 percent among Democrats in the case of a Biden win in November, and to 57 percent of Republicans if Trump wins.

Interestingly, the AP-NORC results are nearly identical to those found by the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics in 2021. At the time, pollsters reported “roughly 2 in 10 Trump and Biden voters strongly agree it would be better if a ‘President could take needed actions without being constrained by Congress or courts.'” Among Biden voters, 22 percent strongly agreed with the idea, compared to 19 percent of Trump voters (over 40 percent of both at least “somewhat agreed” with the idea of an unrestrained presidency).

In 2020, the Democracy Fund Voter Study Group noted: “Over three annual surveys, about 24 percent of Americans say that a ‘strong leader who doesn’t have to bother with Congress and elections’ is a good way to govern a country.”

The good news here is that surveys find a pretty consistent minority of only one-fifth to one-quarter of Americans favor throwing off this whole separation of powers thing in favor of dictatorship. It’s a fraction of the population that seems firm in its batty beliefs but doesn’t appear to be growing.

The bad news is that the citizens of a 250-year-old democratic republic are so lukewarm about the country’s system of government that only about half of them can summon up opposition to the idea of unilateral rule. That almost a third of survey respondents think unilateral presidential rule is “neither good nor bad” isn’t a ringing endorsement of the system. Then again, most don’t think the system works. The System Isn’t Working if My Side Isn’t Winning

“About half of the public, regardless of party identification, say the system of checks and balances dividing power among the president, Congress, and the courts is not working well these days,” adds AP-NORC. Only around one in ten say it is working extremely or very well.

That reflects frustration with institutions that are in the hands of political opponents. Among Republicans, 46 percent say the presidency has too much power (16 percent of Democrats agree), while 58 percent say federal agencies (currently under the control of Democratic President Joe Biden) have too much power (20 percent of Democrats agree). Fifty-eight percent of Democrats think the Supreme Court, which has a conservative majority, has too much power (25 percent of Republicans agree). At 37 percent and 38 percent respectively, nearly identical numbers of Democrats and Republicans say the divided Congress is too powerful.

In January, Gallup reported that “a new low of 28% of U.S. adults are satisfied with the way democracy is working in the country.”

That matches a separate AP-NORC report, published April 3, that “only 3 in 10 think democracy in the United States is functioning well, while about half believe it is a poorly functioning democracy.”

“Typically, partisans have been more satisfied with the way democracy is working when a president from their preferred party has been in office,” Gallup added.

It’s not unreasonable to interpret such polling results as evidence that too many Americans think the system is working well only when it’s under the control of their political faction. Unless they can jam their preferred laws and policies down the throats of neighbors with different ideas, they call the system a failure and look for alternatives. Fortunately, only a small minority are willing to go so far as to support dumping the whole system in favor of an actual dictatorship by their chosen el jefe. Unfortunately, the presidency is creeping in the direction of satisfying that minority. The Presidency Is Already Almost an Elective Monarchy

“Over the past several decades, as our politics took on a quasi-?religious fervor, we’ve been running a dangerous experiment: concentrating vast new powers in the executive branch, making ‘the most powerful office in the world’ even more powerful,” Gene Healy, a vice president at the Cato Institute and author of The Cult of the Presidency, wrote for Reason’s May issue. “Fundamental questions of governance that used to be left to Congress, the states, or the people are now settled, winner-take-all, by whichever party manages to seize the presidency.”

Only a small minority of Americans actually favor turning the presidency into an elective monarchy, but we’re all getting it anyway. That’s because many people ask far too much of a government that was originally designed to be limited in its role and hobbled by checks and balances. As the most recognizable face of that government, they expect the president to fulfill unreasonable expectationsand grant ever-greater power to the position so current officeholders can try.

“Recent presidents have deployed their enhanced powers to impose forced settlements on highly contested, morally charged issues on which Americans should be free to disagree,” notes Healy.

A lot of our political discourse focuses on the specific flaws of the individuals who vie for high office, as if ridding ourselves of Orange Mussolini or Bumbling Brandon will resolve America’s political problems. But the danger lies less in the candidates than in voters who use politicians as vehicles for their awful expectations and frankly authoritarian agendas.

It’s encouraging that a majority of Americans don’t want to live under a dictatorship. If only they’d stop acting in ways that are bound to bring one about.

Continue Reading

UK

King leads nation in two-minute silence during Remembrance Sunday service at the Cenotaph

Published

on

By

King leads nation in two-minute silence during Remembrance Sunday service at the Cenotaph

The King has led the nation in a two-minute silence during a Remembrance Sunday service at the Cenotaph.

He was joined by other members of the Royal Family and senior politicians, who laid wreaths to the fallen.

The Queen and the Princess of Wales took their places on Foreign Office balconies overlooking Whitehall.

The Duke of Kent and the Duchess of Edinburgh were also on the balconies, along with the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester.

King Charles. Pic: PA
Image:
King Charles. Pic: PA

The Prince of Wales. Pic: PA
Image:
The Prince of Wales. Pic: PA

Three D-Day veterans were among those attending the ceremony.

In total, about 20 veterans who served in the Second World War were there, receiving applause as they took their positions close to the Cenotaph.

About a dozen people wearing military uniforms and poppies were pushed in wheelchairs.

The Princess of Wales. Pic: Reuters
Image:
The Princess of Wales. Pic: Reuters

Queen Camilla. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Queen Camilla. Pic: Reuters

Henry Rice, a former signalman who arrived off Juno Beach five days after D-Day, and Mervyn Kersh who arrived in Normandy aged 19, three days after the start of the D-Day invasion, were there.

Sid Machin, one of six 101-year-olds registered to march was also present and is one of the last surviving “Chindit” soldiers from the Second World War Burma campaign.

As a young man of about 19, Mr Machin landed behind enemy lines in a glider at night in the jungle, as part of a special forces unit in Burma (now Myanmar), which wreaked havoc on Japanese supply lines and infrastructure.

Veterans on Whitehall. Pic: PA
Image:
Veterans on Whitehall. Pic: PA

The Prince of Wales lays a wreath. Pic: PA
Image:
The Prince of Wales lays a wreath. Pic: PA

The veterans' parade. Pic: Reuters
Image:
The veterans’ parade. Pic: Reuters

Donald Poole, 101, was a Royal Army Ordnance Corps technician who handled defective explosives or enemy ammunition.

He was serving in India in 1945 when the surrender of Japan was announced.

“It is a great honour to be able to pay tribute to the poor souls who have died in all conflicts and I know how lucky I am to still be here thanks to all those who have fought and served, past and present,” he said.

“I also want to pay tribute to the civilian services who suffered during the Second World War, particularly the fire service, who saved so many lives during the Blitz – many of whom lost their own.”

An estimated 10,000 armed forces veterans are taking part in the Royal British Legion’s marchpast.

Members of the Royal Navy. Pic: PA
Image:
Members of the Royal Navy. Pic: PA

The Band of the Royal Marines. Pic: PA
Image:
The Band of the Royal Marines. Pic: PA

Former prime ministers Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Former prime ministers Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson. Pic: Reuters

Sir Ed Davey, Kemi Badenoch and Sir Keir Starmer. Pic: PA
Image:
Sir Ed Davey, Kemi Badenoch and Sir Keir Starmer. Pic: PA

John Swinney, the first minister of Scotland, lays a wreath. Pic: PA
Image:
John Swinney, the first minister of Scotland, lays a wreath. Pic: PA

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said: “This Remembrance Sunday, we pause as a nation to honour all those who have served our country.

“We reflect on the extraordinary courage of our Armed Forces in the world wars and subsequent conflicts, whose service secured the freedoms we cherish today.”

Reflecting on the 80th anniversary of WWII, Sir Keir spoke of “a generation who stood against tyranny and shaped our future”.

He added: “Such sacrifice deserves more than silence, which is why this government remains committed to supporting veterans, their families and those who serve.

“Today, we remember, and we renew our promise to uphold the values they fought for.”

The two-minute silence began at 11am on Sunday, with the march starting at 11.25am.

Thousands of people were expected to line Whitehall to pay tribute.

Chief of the Defence Staff Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton said: “From the Cenotaph in London to memorials in towns and villages across the United Kingdom, and wherever our Armed Forces serve around the world, we pause to remember their courage, their sacrifice and their enduring legacy.

“We shall remember them.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

King attends Festival of Remembrance

Last night, Sir Keir joined members of the Royal Family at the Royal British Legion’s Festival of Remembrance.

Sir Rod Stewart, Sam Ryder and Keala Settle were on the bill – along with performances by the Central Band of the RAF, the RAF Squadronaires and the Band of HM Royal Marines – during the event at London’s Royal Albert Hall.

Ted Lasso star Hannah Waddingham hosted the festival and sang We’ll Meet Again – telling the audience of the courage of her granddad, who is a veteran.

Harry Waddingham is 109 years old, and one of the oldest living men in the United Kingdom.

The Princess of Wales was seen wearing a black dress adorned with a handmade poppy created out of silk, glass and other natural materials, along with earrings belonging to the late Queen.

The Prince of Wales was absent as he travelled back from Brazil where he attended the COP30 climate summit.

Prince George attended for the first time – and watched intently as emotional videos of veterans speaking about their experiences were played.

The King was announced as a patron of the Royal British Legion last year.

Continue Reading

Science

China and NASA Coordinate to Avoid Satellite Collision for the First Time

Published

on

By

China’s CNSA made history by alerting NASA to a possible satellite collision—marking the first instance of Beijing warning Washington in orbit. With Earth’s orbits growing crowded from megaconstellations like Starlink and Guowang, the event signals a new phase of cooperation in global space traffic control and shared responsibility for orbital safety.

Continue Reading

Politics

Regulators must catch up to the new privacy paradigm

Published

on

By

Regulators must catch up to the new privacy paradigm

Opinion by: Agata Ferreira, assistant professor at the Warsaw University of Technology

A new consensus is forming across the Web3 world. For years, privacy was treated as a compliance problem, liability for developers and at best, a niche concern. Now it is becoming clear that privacy is actually what digital freedom is built on. 

The Ethereum Foundation’s announcement of the Privacy Cluster — a cross-team effort focused on private reads and writes, confidential identities and zero-knowledge proofs — is a sign of a philosophical redefinition of what trust, consensus and truth mean in the digital age and a more profound realization that privacy must be built into infrastructure.

Regulators should pay attention. Privacy-preserving designs are no longer just experimental; they are now a standard approach. They are becoming the way forward for decentralized systems. The question is whether law and regulation will adopt this shift or remain stuck in an outdated logic that equates visibility with safety.

From shared observation to shared verification

For a long time, digital governance has been built on a logic of visibility. Systems were trustworthy because they could be observed by regulators, auditors or the public. This “shared observation” model is behind everything from financial reporting to blockchain explorers. Transparency was the means of ensuring integrity.

In cryptographic systems, however, a more powerful paradigm is emerging: shared verification. Instead of every actor seeing everything, zero-knowledge proofs and privacy-preserving designs enable verifying that a rule was followed without revealing the underlying data. Truth becomes something you can prove, not something you must expose.

This shift might seem technical, but it has profound consequences. It means we no longer need to pick between privacy and accountability. Both can coexist, embedded directly into the systems we rely on. Regulators, too, must adapt to this logic rather than battle against it.

Privacy as infrastructure

The industry is realizing the same thing: Privacy is not a niche. It’s infrastructure. Without it, the Web3 openness becomes its weakness, and transparency collapses into surveillance.

Emerging architectures across ecosystems demonstrate that privacy and modularity are finally converging. Ethereum’s Privacy Cluster focuses on confidential computation and selective disclosure at the smart-contract level. 

Others are going deeper, integrating privacy into the network consensus itself: sender-unlinkable messaging, validator anonymity, private proof-of-stake and self-healing data persistence. These designs are rebuilding the digital stack from the ground up, aligning privacy, verifiability and decentralization as mutually reinforcing properties.

This is not an incremental improvement. It is a new way of thinking about freedom in the digital network age.

Policy is lagging behind the technology

Current regulatory approaches still reflect the logic of shared observation. Privacy-preserving technologies are scrutinized or restricted, while visibility is mistaken for safety and compliance. Developers of privacy protocols face regulatory pressure, and policymakers continue to think that encryption is an obstacle to observability.

This perspective is outdated and dangerous. In a world where everyone is being watched, and where data is harvested on an unprecedented scale, bought, sold, leaked and exploited, the absence of privacy is the actual systemic risk. It undermines trust, puts people at risk and makes democracies weaker. By contrast, privacy-preserving designs make integrity provable and enable accountability without exposure. 

Lawmakers must begin to view privacy as an ally, not an adversary — a tool for enforcing fundamental rights and restoring confidence in digital environments.

Stewardship, not just scrutiny

The next phase of digital regulation must move from scrutiny to support. Legal and policy frameworks should protect privacy-preserving open source systems as critical public goods. Stewardship stance is a duty, not a policy choice.

Related: Compliance isn’t supposed to cost you your privacy

It means providing legal clarity for developers and distinguishing between acts and architecture. Laws should punish misconduct, not the existence of technologies that enable privacy. The right to maintain private digital communication, association and economic exchange must be treated as a fundamental right, enforced by both law and infrastructure.

Such an approach would demonstrate regulatory maturity, recognizing that resilient democracies and legitimate governance rely on privacy-preserving infrastructure.

The architecture of freedom

The Ethereum Foundation’s privacy initiative and other new privacy-first network designs share the idea that freedom in the digital age is an architectural principle. It cannot depend solely on promises of good governance or oversight; it must be built into protocols that shape our lives.

These new systems, private rollups, state-separated architectures and sovereign zones represent the practical synthesis of privacy and modularity. They enable communities to build independently while remaining verifiably connected, thereby combining autonomy with accountability.

Policymakers should view this as an opportunity to support the direct embedding of fundamental rights into the technical foundation of the internet. Privacy-by-design should be embraced as legality-by-design, a way to enforce fundamental rights through code, not just through constitutions, charters and conventions.

The blockchain industry is redefining what “consensus” and “truth” mean, replacing shared observation with shared verification, visibility with verifiability, and surveillance with sovereignty. As this new dawn for privacy takes shape, regulators face a choice: Limit it under the old frameworks of control, or support it as the foundation of digital freedom and a more resilient digital order.

The tech is getting ready. The laws need to catch up.

Opinion by: Agata Ferreira, assistant professor at the Warsaw University of Technology.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.