|
Democrats Need to Make Republicans Fear the Consequences of Attempting a Dictatorship
The threat of prosecution must hang over those who break the law in the second Trump administration.
by David Atkins
Imagine that you were a high-ranking official in Donald Trump’s administration. Imagine that you believed in the Dark Enlightenment dream of dismantling liberal democracy itself—of “killing the woke mind virus,” ending birthright citizenship, and using federal power to suppress dissent. Now imagine you’re openly defying the Supreme Court, declaring that protest aids and abets terrorism, directing the FBI and IRS to target political enemies, and seriously considering invoking the Insurrection Act on flimsy pretexts. What would stop you?
Certainly
not impeachment. Not with a compliant Republican Congress. Not with a
conservative media ecosystem ready to justify any abuse of power as a
patriotic necessity. The only thing that might give you pause is the
possibility that Democrats would regain control and then do to you what
you’ve done to them.
That
fear of reciprocal power and legal accountability was once enough to
preserve American political norms. It was the logic of mutually assured
destruction: if you break democracy now, they’ll break you later. That’s
how informal guardrails were enforced, even through dark chapters like
Watergate or Iran-Contra. But those norms no longer hold because no one
believes Democrats will retaliate.
This is the context for the quiet battle raging within the Democratic Party leadership.
A few anonymous but influential centrists are urging party leaders to
soft-pedal Trump’s detention of legal residents in foreign internment
camps and pivot to kitchen-table economics instead. Even as constituents
demand action and donors grow restless, Senate Majority Leader Chuck
Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries still signal caution,
urging patience and restraint.
Meanwhile,
the rhetorical vacuum is being filled by some of the most unlikely
voices in Washington. Old-school conservatives like Bill Kristol and
Jonathan Last are wondering aloud where
the “Abolish ICE” movement goes for its apology. David Brooks is
quoting Assata Shakur and calling for a civic uprising. The Washington Monthly’s own Bill Scher, hardly a radical, has offered a blistering rebuke to the timidity of the party’s more cautious voices.
There
have been some bright spots. Senator Cory Booker broke Strom Thurmond’s
filibuster record in a marathon floor speech denouncing Trump’s abuses.
Senator Chris Van Hollen forced a meeting with abducted U.S. resident
Abrego Garcia in El Salvador, delivering proof of life and drawing
global attention. Senator Chris Murphy’s rhetoric has been sharp and
effective. House Democrats like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (along with her
“anti-oligarchy tour” partner Senator Bernie Sanders), Jasmine
Crockett, and Robert Garcia have been doing excellent work. Their energy
and determination carry the tacit message that those who broke the law
and tried to impose an authoritarian regime on the U.S. will face
appropriate justice at the end of the day. Representative Jamie Raskin
was explicit about warning El Salvador’s leader: “Look, President
Bukele—who’s declared himself a dictator—and the other tyrants,
dictators, autocrats of the world have to understand that the Trump
administration is not going to last forever,” Raskin said. “We’re going
to restore strong democracy to America, and we will remember who stood
up for democracy in America and who tried to drive us down towards
dictatorship and autocracy.”
But
these have been exceptions rather than the rule. Most Democrats in
leadership and positions of power have stayed quiet—avoiding press
conferences, shunning symbolic actions, and allowing business to
continue as if the country weren’t barreling toward authoritarianism.
When
pressed, party leaders often respond that they can do little
substantively. That protests are performative. That voters are tired of
drama. But that’s not the point. The point isn’t what Democrats can do
today. It’s what they’re signaling they’re willing to do when they
return to power.
If
Trump and his allies face no meaningful consequences, they have no
reason to stop. If Republicans don’t believe that Democrats will act
with equal force to protect democracy—legally, aggressively,
unapologetically—then there’s no deterrent to further escalation.
As Illinois Governor JB Pritzker put it,
“Bullies respond to one thing only: a punch in the face.” Democrats
don’t need to mimic MAGA’s tactics. But they must prove they have the
spine to make authoritarians pay. Otherwise, they’re not a political
opposition but a speed bump.
Republicans
have spent decades learning that they can get away with it. Nixon
resigned but was pardoned. Reagan’s team sabotaged Carter and lied about
Iran-Contra with no consequences. Bush officials misled the country
into war, then walked into cushy think tank jobs. Trump’s first wave of
cronies—Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, Steve Bannon—faced slaps on the
wrist. Trump himself walked free after legal institutions dragged their
feet for four years. Why should this time be any different?
MAGA
doesn’t fear Democrats because history tells them they need not. They
don’t believe that future Democratic presidents will use the IRS to
crack down on Project 2025 architects, the DOJ to investigate Christian
nationalist groups, or the FBI to follow foreign influence trails back
to their political donors. But they should.
Democrats
don’t need to become liberal authoritarians. But they need to show
they’re not afraid to use the levers of power to defend democracy, not
just in lofty speeches but in institutional terms: subpoenas, audits,
investigations, regulation, and prosecution.
The
stakes aren’t just moral. They’re strategic. If MAGA believes it can
consolidate power without consequence, then why not roll the dice on
permanent minority rule? Why not bet the farm on the Curtis Yarvin/Peter Thiel fantasy of a post-constitutional state run by decree?
That’s the bet they’re making. The only way to stop it is to convince them it’s too risky to attempt.
Democrats
can’t wait for economic conditions to shift or for voters to come to
their senses 20 months from now. They need to act like a party that
intends to govern and govern with force when it’s their turn again. The
message has to be clear, consistent, and credible: if you break
democracy, you don’t get a quiet retirement. You get consequences. |