Americans Don’t Want a Dictatorship, but They’re Creating One Anyway

Published

1 year ago

April 11, 2024

admin

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.

World

Two bridges collapse in Russia – as seven people killed and dozens injured

Published

2 hours ago

June 1, 2025

admin

Two bridges collapse in Russia - as seven people killed and dozens injured

Seven people have been killed and dozens are injured after two bridges collapsed in Russia overnight.

A train derailed after a bridge collapsed on to it in the Bryansk region, killing the driver and six others.

Some 69 people were injured in the crash, with the train travelling from Moscow to Klimov at the time.

Earlier, local authorities blamed “illegal interference” for the incident.

Later, a bridge collapsed in Russia’s Kursk region while a freight train was passing over it.

Local officials said one of the train’s drivers was injured in the crash.

Russia’s Baza Telegram channel, which often publishes information from sources in the security services and law
enforcement, reported, without providing evidence, that the bridge in Bryansk was blown up, according to initial information.

There was no immediate comment from Ukraine.

Since the start of the war that Russia launched more than three years ago, there have been continued cross-border shelling, drone strikes, and covert raids by Ukrainian forces into the Bryansk, Kursk and Belgorod regions that border Ukraine.

Bryansk regional governor Alexander Bogomaz said: “Everything is being done to provide all necessary assistance to the victims.”

Emergency workers are at the scene of the train derailment, attempting to pull survivors from the wreckage.

Russia’s federal road transportation agency said the destroyed bridge passed above the railway tracks where the train was travelling.

Images from the scene show passenger cars ripped apart and lying amid fallen concrete from the collapsed bridge.

Other footage on social media appeared to be taken from inside vehicles which narrowly avoided driving onto the bridge before it collapsed.

World

At least 21 killed in Gaza as they went to receive aid, Red Cross hospital says

Published

3 hours ago

June 1, 2025

admin

At least 21 killed in Gaza as they went to receive aid, Red Cross hospital says

At least 21 people have been killed in Gaza as they went to receive aid from an Israeli-backed foundation, according to a nearby hospital run by the Red Cross.

The hospital, which received the bodies, said another 175 people had been wounded in the incident in Rafah on Sunday morning.

The Associated Press also reports seeing dozens of people being treated at the hospital.

Witnesses have said those killed and injured were struck by gunfire which broke out at a roundabout near the distribution site.

The area is controlled by Israeli forces.

Ibrahim Abu Saoud, an eyewitness, said Israeli forces opened fire at people moving toward the aid distribution centre.

“There were many martyrs, including women,” the 40-year-old man said. “We were about 300 meters (yards) away from the military.”

Abu Saoud said he saw many people with gunshot wounds, including a young man who he said had died at the scene. “We weren’t able to help him,” he said.

The Gazans had been trying to receive aid from the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation – an American organisation backed by both the US and Israeli governments.

It operates as part of a controversial aid system which Israel and the US claims is aimed at preventing Hamas from siphoning off assistance.

Israel has not provided any evidence of systematic diversion, and the UN denies it has occurred.

Earlier, Hamas-linked media had also reported more than 20 deaths in Rafah, saying they were as a result of an Israeli strike on an aid distribution point. Israel is yet to comment.

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s distribution of aid has been marred by chaos, and multiple witnesses have said Israeli troops fired on crowds near the delivery sites.

UN agencies and major aid groups have refused to work with the new system, saying it violates humanitarian principles because it allows Israel to control who receives aid and forces people to relocate to distribution sites, risking yet more mass displacement in the territory.

Before Sunday, at least six people had been killed and more than 50 wounded, according to local health officials.

The foundation says the private security contractors guarding its sites did not fire on the crowds, while the Israeli military has acknowledged firing warning shots.

The foundation did not immediately respond to a request for comment following the hospital’s claims.

In an earlier statement, it said it distributed 16 truckloads of aid early on Sunday “without incident”. It dismissed what it referred to as “false reporting about deaths, mass injuries and chaos”.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.

Please refresh the page for the full version.

You can receive breaking news alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News app. You can also follow us on WhatsApp and subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news.

UK

UK to build weapons factories and buy thousands of missiles in £1.5bn push to rearm

Published

5 hours ago

June 1, 2025

admin

UK to build weapons factories and buy thousands of missiles in £1.5bn push to rearm

The UK will buy up to 7,000 long-range missiles, rockets and drones and build at least six weapons factories in a £1.5bn push to rearm at a time of growing threats.

The plan, announced by the government over the weekend, will form part of Sir Keir Starmer’s long-awaited Strategic Defence Review, which will be published on Monday.

However, it lacks key details, including when the first arms plant will be built, when the first missile will be made, or even what kind of missiles, drones and rockets will be purchased.

The government is yet to appoint a new senior leader to take on the job of “national armaments director”, who will oversee the whole effort.

Andy Start, the incumbent head of Defence Equipment and Support – the branch of defence charged with buying kit – is still doing the beefed-up role of national armaments director as a sluggish process to recruit someone externally rumbles on.

Revealing some of its content ahead of time, the Ministry of Defence said the defence review will recommend an “always on” production capacity for munitions, drawing on lessons learned from Ukraine, which has demonstrated the vital importance of large production lines.

It will also call for an increase in stockpiles of munitions – something that is vitally needed for the army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force to be able to keep fighting beyond a few days.

Sky News will launch a new podcast series on 10 June based around a wargame that simulates an attack by Russia against the UK to test Britain’s defences

“The hard-fought lessons from [Vladimir] Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine show a military is only as strong as the industry that stands behind them,” John Healey, the defence secretary, said in a statement released on Saturday night.

“We are strengthening the UK’s industrial base to better deter our adversaries and make the UK secure at home and strong abroad.”

The UK used to have a far more resilient defence industry during the Cold War, with the capacity to manufacture missiles and other weapons and ammunition at speed and at scale.

However, much of that depth, which costs money to sustain, was lost following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, when successive governments switched funding priorities away from defence and into areas such as health, welfare and economic growth.

Even after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and a huge increase in demand from Kyiv for munitions from its allies, production lines at UK factories were slow to expand.

Sky News visited a plant run by the defence company Thales in Belfast last year that makes N-LAW anti-tank missiles used in Ukraine. Its staff at the time only worked weekday shifts between 7am and 4pm.

Under this new initiative, the government said the UK will build at least six new “munitions and energetics” factories.

Energetic materials include explosives, propellants and pyrotechnics, which are required in the manufacturing of weapons.

There were no details, however, on whether these will be national factories or built in partnership with defence companies, or a timeline for this to happen.

There was also no information on where they would be located or what kind of weapons they would make.

In addition, it was announced that the UK will buy “up to 7,000 UK-built long-range weapons for the UK Armed Forces”, though again without specifying what.

It is understood these weapons will include a mix of missiles, rockets and drones.

Sources within the defence industry criticised the lack of detail, which is so often the case with announcements by the Ministry of Defence.

The sources said small and medium-sized companies in particular are struggling to survive as they await clarity from the Ministry of Defence over a range of different contracts.

One source described a sense of “paralysis”.

The prime minister launched the defence review last July, almost a year ago. But there had been a sense of drift within the Ministry of Defence beforehand, in the run-up to last year’s general election.

The source said: “While the government’s intentions are laudable, the lack of detail in this announcement is indicative of how we treat defence in this country.

“Headline figures, unmatched by clear intent and delivery timelines which ultimately leave industry no closer to knowing what, or when, the MOD want their bombs and bullets.

“After nearly 18 months of decision and spending paralysis, what we need now is a clear demand signal from the Ministry of Defence that allows industry to start scaling production, not grand gestures with nothing to back it up.”

As well as rearming the nation, the government said the £1.5bn investment in new factories and weapons would create around 1,800 jobs across the UK.