Is a Revenge Revolution still likely? The fall 2013 was the first entry in this blog. About every six or so months thereafter I’ve written a “sense check“ whether a 5th US revolution was possible, or just a statistical aberration.
One needs to be careful about believing everything one writes is somehow automatically true. Doing so might make one feel better, but a peer review and some objective measures are good guardrails.
The last sense-check was Entry #400, published January 1, 2021. The entry preceded the attack on the US Capitol January 6 and preceded numerous (and on-going) attempts by Trump to overturn the results of the presidential election. From a historical perspective, I think the attack on the Capitol will mark the beginning of the 5th US revolution, the Revenge Revolution.
While Trump has continued to make noise, file frivolous lawsuits, and bilk supporters out of hard-earned cash by claiming he’s going to run again (fat chance), there have been other events recently that suggest the 5th US revolution is accelerating rather than slowing down as one might expect under a new, more rational Biden administration.
For example, in 2021 the Supreme Court seems to have decided to let the highly conservative Fifth Circuit do its dirty work by allowing the seemingly unconstitutional restrictive abortion law in Texas stand, thereby effectively overturning Roe v. Wade.
And yes, SCOTUS has decided that it supports those who question why the Federal government should have jurisdiction over states to protect its citizens against the pandemic. Apparently the majority of SCOTUS thinks the current governors of such states as Florida and Texas are much more qualified than the world-class immunologist and virologist at CDC to make medical decisions. Like SCOTUS, surely everyone knows that the Florida and Texas governors are the smartest people on the planet.
What may intensify the 5th Revolution, however, is the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Aside from a clearly biased judge, the verdict now allows someone to carry an assault weapon to an event, initiate trouble, kill people, and then claim he (or she) was being threatened by the people that he intimidated with the assault weapon. As demonstrated in Kenosha, the killer in that situation can walk away without penalty.
Unfortunately, Republicans and the talking heads on Fox apparently are too stupid to understand the consequences of the Rittenhouse verdict. To demonstrate even more of their stupidity, Senators Cruz of Texas and Representative Matt Gaetz of Florida (under FBI investigation for sex trafficking) offered Rittenhouse an internship in their respective offices. Doubtless Rittenhouse is as qualified for the position as Cruz and Gaetz are for Congress.
An equally large contributor to the 5th Revolution, although the effect will not be apparent until after the November 2022 mid-term election, is the effect of voter suppression, resulting from changes in state law and extensive gerrymandering. Once the Democrats and Independent voters realize how worthless their votes have become, they likely will become incensed. But then it will be too late to change any outcome of the election.
How have Republicans been able to run roughshod over voting rights? Again the US citizenry can thank Chief Justice John Roberts and, to a degree, Mitch McConnell for packing the Supreme Court with lackeys. Roberts led the charge to change the law when he wrote the majority opinion gutting the Voting Rights Act.
Roberts’ method was subtle. Rather than continuing to force proposed changes to voting rights in certain southern states to be approved by the Federal government before taking affect, Roberts allowed the states to make a law as restrictive as they wanted without Federal review. Then, after the law took effect, aggrieved parties would need to sue and prove damages.
While the voting-rights cases were slowly winding tgheir way through the courts, the restrictive laws would remain in effect and any elections would proceed. Of course, if the restrictive laws were ever overturned, the plaintiffs had no method to rectify other laws implemented after the rigged elections.
How will Roberts new “Rules of Order” for elections play out in 2022? Republicans in such states North Carolina can gerrymander to their hearts content. North Carolina’s about evenly split between Democrats and Republicans. With recent changes to the redistricting maps, 10 of the 14 House seats are so gerrymandered as to guarantee a Republican victory. Why wouldn’t anyone think that it’s fair for a state split about evenly between Republicans and Democrats, with Democrats holding a slight edge, to have 70% of the Federal House members guaranteed Republican?
One other event that is a positive for justice but may accelerate the Revenge Revolution is verdict in the Ahmaud Arbery case in Brunswick, GA. Three men were convicted of murdering Mr. Arbery, who was unarmed and posed no threat. The unfortunate aspect of the investigation is nothing was done to investigate the murder until a video was released, likely accidentally, of the three men chasing Mr. Arbery and murdering him. Only after a public outcry was an investigation started.
The defense in the Arbery case used a defense similar to Rittenhouse. It is OK to kill someone else, even if they are unarmed and pose no real threat. Just claim the other person poses a threat. The far right loves this logic and many Republicans seem to support or at least condone it. Few, if any top Republicans commented publicly about the Arbery verdict, which was announced the day before Thanksgiving. Must have been Republicans were more concerned about cooking the Thanksgiving turkey.
When the Revenge Revolution ratchets up remains a question. How does anyone predict the point when a bubbling revolution boils over?
What does seem almost assured, however, is when it boils over, the revolution will include a significant use of firearms and the killings of numerous higher-profile people. I wish the conclusion of the “sense check” were less onerous but I need to be honest about my assessment. Let’s hope I’m wrong.
Other Topics. Interested in more info about climate change, what’s required to electrify a fleet of cars/trucks, what it was like to work day-to-day with Lee Iacocca and an array of other topics? Visit another page of this website, https://usrevolution5.com/jrd-thought-comments/
As noted in #310, my reference point is a Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln, Everett Dirksen and Jacob Javits. The attitude of that Republican Party could best be described using a slogan from Bush 43’s 2000 presidential campaign, “compassionate conservatism.”
In our particular town – population approaching 50,000 – the public school system was top-notch with quality teachers in all grades. High-school students had a choice of three tracks and could switch between tracks for a limited number of classes – college prep, general education, technical training. The town produced a disproportionate number of famous and successful people in a wide range of occupations – education, entertainment, medicine, military (early astronaut), science and industry.
So that’s a description of the Republican Party I grew up with and use as a reference point for those running for political office. Such a Republican Party no longer exists. When I hear a Republican call it the party of Lincoln, I shake my head and want to scream. Most of today’s Republicans have no clue about the values of the party of Lincoln.
I share the view of many economists that a very good way to assess the potential impact of debt for a country is to measure outstanding debt as a percent of GDP (gross domestic product). Think of it this way. Pretend you’re a banker. Two people walk into a bank and want to borrow $25,000,000. One of them is someone like you…and the other is Warren Buffet. The bank decides on loans based on income and assets. For someone like you, the $25,000,000 is likely to be multiples higher than your income and assets. For Warren Buffet, the $25,000,000 is considered chump change. Thus, a large amount of debt isn’t necessarily bad if you have a large income and/or large asset base, which the US does. The US government owns lots of land and buildings.
Following WWII and up to the Reagan Administration, debt as a percent of GDP declined. During the Reagan Administration debt as a percent of GDP increased from about 30% to about 50% — a relative increase of 60%. Under Reagan, the relative increase in debt was only somewhat less than experienced during the New Deal under FDR. Under Bush 41 relative debt percent increased over 25% beyond Reagan. Under Bush 43, relative debt increased over 40% from the Clinton years. Under Trump, despite a very strong economy the Federal debt for FY2018 was the highest in 6 years. The deficit under Trump is expected to balloon to over $1,000,000,000,000 annually because of the gigantic tax cut that reduced taxes primarily for the wealthy.
What about debt increases under Democrats? They were even worse, right? Well, no. Throughout the Clinton Administration, debt as a percent of GDP decreased a little over 12%. During some years under Clinton, the US ran a surplus. Under Obama, relative debt climbed about 35%, even with the combination of fiscal stimulus required to avoid another Great Depression and the introduction of the Affordable Care Act. Debt under Obama, despite all the cries from Republicans increased less than under either Regan or Bush 43. So, which party is more fiscally conservative? If you look at fiscal policies under Republicans, one term comes to mind – red ink.
Further, Republican have resisted increasing the minimum wage. When Reagan was inaugurated, the minimum wage in real terms (adjusted for inflation) was about $10.00 per hour. Today’s minim wage is $7.75 per hour, a decrease in real terms of more than 20%. The decrease reduces further the ability of lower-skilled, entry-level workers to earn enough to exceed the poverty line. What happened to the “compassion” of the Republican Party?
Just in case today’s Republicans have not read the Constitution, as is abundantly clear from listening to President Trump, the First Amendment reads as follows, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press (see the press is not your enemy but protected!), or the right of people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
At the time the Constitution was written…for all the “Constitutionalists in the crowd” that was 225+ years ago…the United States had a very small “standing army.” The defense of the country relied on “well-regulated” state militia – think National Guard. Members of the well-regulated militia were “citizen soldiers” and expected to provide firearms, as implied in the Second Amendment. Over time the US created a permanent military for “the security of the free state,” thus the standing army eliminated the need for citizen soldiers.
As a result actions during the confirmation process, I increased the chances of a 5th US revolution to “highly likely.” However, my reasons for changing to “highly likely” may be different from what many others have stated or written about the Kavanaugh nomination/confirmation process.
Further, there is no requirement that the president nominate, or the Senate confirm, candidates to ensure a balance of opinion on SCOTUS. While the situation unlikely, say if all liberal-leaning justices left the Court during the term of one president, the president could nominate and the Senate could approve, justices so the entire Court supported rulings considered far right.
Over the decades, what has allowed SCOTUS rulings to be recognized as law of the land by the populace? Obviously not everyone has supported every decision but why have even controversial decisions become the law of the land? Trust by the people in the objectivity of the justices. In parallel, the Court’s decisions likely have been moderated to a degree by public opinion. Justices have recognized the need to create trust and acknowledge public opinion so the vast majority of SCOTUS rulings have not been too far left or right.
Let’s take a closer look at McConnell’s greatest achievement. The initial phase of this latest “great achievement” was McConnell denying president Obama the right to have the Senate consider a nominee to fill an open seat on SCOTUS. According to McConnell the vacancy should be filled “after the people vote.” Forget the Constitution, forget precedent, McConnell alone should decide when a vacancy on SCOTUS should be filled.
To further build public trust…or maybe that’s distrust…in Kavanaugh, McConnell (this time thru Grassley and Trump), stonewalled efforts to dig deeper into Kavanaugh’s past. Charges ranged from sexual assault to excessive gambling. Rather than let the FBI explore a series of allegations fully, the Judiciary Committee allowed only one key witness to testify – yes, only one – Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. Kavanaugh followed Dr. Ford and managed to create even more concern about his truthfulness and demeanor as publicly insulted Senators seeking answers to some basic questions and even lied about what he should have dismissed as youthful indiscretions.
While those on the political right might view with great satisfaction McConnell’s tactics of attempting to hide the truth about Kavanaugh, thereby giving the finger to the left, how would the right react if a nominee from a Democratic president had the same questionable background and exhibited the same rude behavior as Kavanaugh? I can hear the cries now, “Lock him up! Lock him up!”
Senator Susan Collins is among the brainwashed or brain-dead. Collins gave a 45-minute talk justifying support of Kavanaugh. Her remarks included some truly nonsensical statements. For example, she claimed that as a sitting judge, Kavanaugh has consistently supported legal precedent…unless he considered the precedent wrong. Huh, Susan? In real speak that means precedent plays no part in Kavanaugh’s decisions. Why would anyone ever make such an inane claim? Collins was also interviewed on “60 Minutes” the day after the confirmation. Based on her comments during “60 Minutes,” no one would ever accuse her of being a deep thinker. Enough about Collins.
Then we have Senator Lindsey Graham. Graham’s behavior of late could be compared to that of Stormy Daniels in one of her movies – constantly taking on new positions and new partners, including cuddling up to president Trump. At least Stormy Daniels has been straightforward with the public about her beliefs. No so for Graham. Say Lindsey, do you not remember any lessons from John McCain?
Among people who have principles, there is an adage that most learned early in life. Mitch you must have missed the class…again and again and again. The adage is, “What goes around, comes around.” The follow-on part of that adage is when it comes back, the intensity is usually much greater. My suggestion Mitch? Be on the lookout because your life is about to begin heading down a very steep hill.
Is there any hope? Yes, there’s some. While we probably can’t avoid the Revenge Revolution, the intensity could be moderated by one person – Chief Justice John Roberts. Roberts is a smart guy. Roberts knows his legacy will be determined by how credible the public views decisions of SCOTUS. Roberts also knows he’s got two justices who are considered illegitimate by many people – Thomas and Kavanaugh.
mafia. The Russians, like the mafia, play serious hardball when it comes to collecting debts. Trump and Manafort seem to be aware of the dirt bath they might get if they don’t cooperate with the Russians.
While you might ignore all the shenanigans and secrecy with the Russians, claiming the “Trump haters” just don’t understand and are overreacting as usual, I’ll bet you begin to pause when Trump’s so-called “economic policies” hit your pocketbook hard. Without getting into a wonkish discussion about economics, several of Trump’s so-called economic policies – tariffs, even on countries even where we have a trade surplus, massive tax cuts for business and the wealthy, promoting a weak dollar, promoting low interest rates and a couple of others – are at cross purposes. First and maybe most important is the tariffs will raise prices and reduce employment – and your pocketbook will be affected.
There’s more to discuss but enough for now. The final thought of this “sense check” entry. When all the lower-income Trump supporters finally realize they’ve been had, we will see the tipping point for the revolution. Remember, hell hath no fury like a (former Trump supporter) scorned. So Republicans, be prepared and make sure to enjoy the ride to the Revenge Revolution.
Since today is part of a long weekend celebrating July 4 and the nation’s declaration of independence, what better time to step back and assess the premise of this blog. I’ve been writing the blog for about five (5) years with a few months between starting writing and publishing the initial entry. What has surprised me the most the past five years is not that a revolution seems likely…but the path to the 5th revolution.
Five years ago (2013), Barack Obama was in the second term of this presidency. Some key points of that time: (i) the economy was slowly but steadily recovering from the Great Recession of 2008; (ii) even with the economic recovery median household income was flat (not unexpected given the depth of the recession); (iii) the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, was just beginning to be fully implemented; (iv) Republicans were making every effort to thwart legislation of nearly any action proposed by president Obama. Recall Mitch McConnell declared about two years into Obama’s term that his job and the job of Republicans in Congress 
was to make Obama a one-term president. In addition to attempting to thwart any legislative action, Republicans were holding what became endless hearings on Benghazi. The pattern of these type hearings continued throughout Obama’s presidency. None of the hearings produced any substantive evidence of intentional wrongdoing.
As noted in 
The unexpected catalyst for the 5th revolution, at least what seems to be so far, was the unexpected and unlikely 2016 Republican presidential nominee – Donald Trump. Trump ran a very unconventional campaign, capitalizing on what seems to be his major strength – being a highly effective bully. But a bully not in the tradition of the presidency, which is often referred to as having a “bully pulpit,” but a bully that one might have experienced in say grammar school or middle school.
During the campaign for the Republican nomination Trump was relentless in taunting fellow Republican candidates. After earning the nomination, he was relentless in taunting the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton. While in “normal times” one would expect such school-yard tactics to result in a resounding defeat,” Trump won the Electoral College vote even though losing the popular vote by more than three (3) million votes.
Why expect the hard-core right to revolt? Aren’t they Trump’s biggest supporters? Yes, but the hard right will be the most negatively affected by Trump’s policies. Believe what you will but the coal industry is never coming back. Use of other fossil fuels is going to drop sharply. Two of Trump’s favorite industries – steel and aluminum – are highly automated and don’t need many more workers to increase output.
The other group likely to revolt is farmers, who also were big Trump supporters. Exports have become a huge money-maker for family and corporate farms. Retaliatory tariffs on farm products by China and other nations will decrease demand for soybeans, corn and wheat. The US produces far more foodstuff than it can possibly consume. A decrease in farm production translates into a decrease in farm income.
One day in the next five years or so, the hard-core Trumpsters will wake up and realize not only are the promised jobs not coming back but Trump and Congressional Republicans are on a determined path to cut Social Security and Medicare. Why? Because the Federal deficit is too high. Why is the deficit too high? Because the Trump tax cuts benefitted the rich and the promised “trickle-down” effect never occurred. Raising taxes on the rich is out of the question, of course, so these “entitlement” programs must be cut.
theory “voodoo economics.” Trump’s tax cuts were pure voodoo economics.
As noted in the early entries to this blog, the scorned (hard right Trumpsters) begin to exact revenge on the more affluent. How widespread is such an armed revolt? Hard to predict. But what I do know is there are not enough police and not enough military personnel to stop geographically dispersed guerilla raids on single homes and/or neighborhoods, especially if invaders are armed with AR15’s and the like.
usrevolution5 