Ms. Martinchek, you have really gone off the deep end this time.
“In regards to the rise of fascism for instance, we’re forced to come to terms with how complicity on the part of “moderates” plays an incredibly important role in allowing fascists to take hold of power.”
Obviously you are unaware of the role played by far leftists such as you in the rise of Mr. Hitler. The German government suffered from huge instabilities between the end of World War I and the election of Mr. Hitler. Inflation was devastatingly high. There were running street battles between communists and fascists of various stripes. The violence terrified most Germans; they wanted a peaceful civil society. Mr. Hitler promised to put an end to the violence; that played a major role in his electoral success. It wasn’t moderation that catapulted Mr. Hitler into power; it was the violence triggered by people like you. Sure, you’re not endorsing violence, but you ARE walking down a path that inevitably leads to violence.
“the threat of the rise of the far right continues to grow.”
My impression is that the excesses of Mr. Trump have driven a counterreaction on the part of a majority of Americans against the far right. The polls show that a clear majority of Americans oppose Mr. Trump. Roughly half want him impeached and removed from office. His support may seem high at 40%, but a goodly portion of that support is just Republican loyalty that will evaporate the minute that the Republican Party decides to throw Mr. Trump under the bus in order to save itself.
“a noticeable number of people in positions of power willing to look the other way as it happens.”
Names, please. Can you cite ANY of the Democratic candidates for the nomination who are looking the other way? Certainly Ms. Pelosi is not looking the other way. The majority of Democratic politicians aren’t looking the other way. So please list some of the Democrats who are looking the other way.
“the feeble if any attempts by the democratic leadership to take action when members of the Trump administration refuse to comply with their subpoenas”
Yes, I know: you want to send in the Marines, shoot up the White House and get results NOW. But we civilized people believe in something called “the rule of law”. That requires us to pursue our goals by legal means. In this case, it means that we must go through the courts. Yes, the courts are too slow for hotheads like you. But the alternative is a civil war; I much prefer the courts. The Democrats have filed their lawsuits in the courts and the cases are slowly oozing their way upwards through the appeals process. Mr. Trump is losing most of those cases.
What you don’t understand is that this slow process is ultimately to Mr. Trump’s detriment. The final results won’t begin to appear for a few more months. Then we’ll see a steady stream of legal defeats for Mr. Trump. We’ll see a continuing dribble of damning evidence; every week will bring a new headline about criminal behavior on Mr. Trump’s part. The steady drumbeat of such revelations will destroy the last vestiges of genuine support for Mr. Trump in Congress; they’ll mouth insincere statements of weak support, but inside they’ll be seething at the way he is destroying the Republican brand. More and more members of the Trump administration will abandon the sinking ship, hoping to preserve some semblance of a future for themselves. Mr. Trump will take to ever more desperate measures. There exists the real possibility of a mental breakdown; his secret visit to the hospital last month may have been an early sign of this.
The mounting evidence will even chip away at his support among voters. I don’t think that they’ll abandon him en masse, but I believe that his numbers will slip.
And you want to block this process with precipitate action.
“Democracies do not always die in a dramatic, obvious manner.”
Well, that’s certainly what you’re pushing for.
“Like so much else, of course it comes down to money.”
Yes, that is absolutely, positively true! Money plays far too large a role in American politics. This is not due to evil ploys by fat plutocrats rubbing their hands together joyously. It’s due to the First Amendment, which made perfect sense 200 years ago and is now undermining our democracy because money is the most powerful way to get votes in the modern era of mass media.
So rather than fecklessly bitching about it, what do you propose to do? The closest thing I can divine to a proposal in your story is the suggestion that politicians should eschew money from corporations and wealthy people. That’s very noble and sure to fail. The only result will be the victory of the most craven politicians.
Unlike you, I actually DO have a proposal, and while it is flawed, it might actually improve matters. That proposal is a Constitutional amendment declaring that corporations of any type have no political rights — only individual citizens have political rights. I think that there’s a decent chance that we could get such an amendment into the Constitution, although corporate interests will spend billions in their efforts to stop it.
The longer-term solution is to replace the justices of the Supreme Court with more liberal justices who will support restrictions on corporate money in politics. That, however, will take decades.