You are pointing toward something real in how power operates. How it rests not only on force, but on legitimacy, and how public judgment can constrain even those who hold the greater strength. That is an important truth to name.
Yet, some of the patterns you describe feel less settled than your conclusion suggests. The comparison to Europe in the 1930s is not quite clean, for those nations were shaped by collapse, fear, and the sudden rise of a new political order. The United States moves more slowly, with deeper institutional roots, and stronger counterweights. But slower does not mean immune.
For there are signs worth watching: the shaping of narrative and memory, the stretching of executive reach, and the use of enforcement power in ways that increasingly strain constitutional limits. The recent actions of federal immigration authorities, particularly in places like Minneapolis, raise serious concerns about due process, proportionality, and accountability under the law. In many instances, the use of force appears difficult to justify within established legal standards, and the lack of transparency only deepens that concern. These are not isolated questions. They point to a pattern where the boundaries of lawful authority are being tested in practice. These are not the end of a thing, but they are often the beginning of one.
At the same time, there is a need for precision in how such concerns are named. Orwell warned of the danger in allowing political language to become so broad that it loses its meaning. When words like “fascism” are used too loosely, they cease to clarify and instead begin to obscure. That does not make the underlying concerns less real, but it does make them harder to see clearly.
We now live in an age where such moments cannot easily be hidden. Nearly everyone carries a smartphone. What once might have taken days to emerge is now seen within minutes. Yet even this brings a new challenge, for it is no longer only events that are contested, but their meaning. The same footage is watched by many, and understood in very different ways.
So the task is not to name everything as tyranny, nor to dismiss concern as exaggeration, but to remain disciplined enough to see clearly. For it is in the early patterns, not the final form, that the course of things is most often decided.
Well said and I agree. Implicit in all this is that the actions undertaken by Trump are exceedingly worrisome...I certainly hope no one understood my piece to mean otherwise. In fact, my worry over Trump is exactly why I felt compelled to write the piece in the first place! But inflating the language helps no one and undermines the validity of the cause. And Orwell was a genius...
I appreciate that clarification, and it comes through more clearly hearing it from you directly.
That tension you’re naming is an important one. The patterns are serious enough to warrant concern, but if the language used to describe them loses precision it weakens the very effort made to address them.
That balance, between clarity and restraint, feels like the real work right now. And yes… Orwell called that problem out early and with rare clarity. We’re still catching up to it.
You make a good point, but our current environment of monetized mendacity and "alternative facts" spewed by Fox "News" and other right wing media outlets makes it hard for ordinary Americans to know what's real and what isn't. Countless millions still believe that tRump actually won in 2020, and they buy the BS that global warming is a "hoax."
It's abundantly clear that if left to his own devices, tRump certainly would impose his version of fascism on America. As you point out, the courts have stymied some of his agenda thus far, and it's possible that his constant overreach will ultimately doom his agenda, but so much damage has already been done. To ignore what the tRump regime -- and his billionaire backers who generated Project 2025 -- are up to by assuming that "the people" and "the courts" will reign him in seems dangerously optimistic.
When Paul Revere made his midnight ride to alert the colonies that "the British are coming!", his was a warning, because if the Brits weren't quite there yet, they were on their way. Now, 250 odd years later, fascism might not be here yet, but it's on the way. To me, the alarm over that is entirely justified.
I do genuinely appreciate the historical receipts of times when things were worse in the country, how we can act with our own power to correct course, and the hope that yields. And over the last two years, professors on the subject of Fascism have left the United States if they had the ability to.
Friends I have known for over a decade are now gone. Some I know made it to safety, but a few are simply gone. I have seen with my own eyes the cages DHS locks human beings behind.
Just because it happened before, does not make it acceptable now.
If Americans want to believe in American Exceptionalism, they need to act exceptional.
Well I would say that most people dont have the means to move to another country like college professors might, and that an argument can be made for staying and fighting fascism rather than leaving and accepting it. I think the political Ponzi scheme that is the Trump phenomenon is steadily heading towards political collapse.
"Human terrain" evokes the timeless truths of books like 'The Accidental Guerrilla" by David Kilcullen. America has an undeniable history of state violence, and the immediate or long term effectiveness of civic reactions to that violence. Overwrought reactions obscure the real issues.
Your long form work (e.g. Perfect Storm) is excellent but your "small batch" writing consistently explores (whether readers always agree with you is beside the point) and reminds us of timeless themes. I hope that your audience grows.
You are pointing toward something real in how power operates. How it rests not only on force, but on legitimacy, and how public judgment can constrain even those who hold the greater strength. That is an important truth to name.
Yet, some of the patterns you describe feel less settled than your conclusion suggests. The comparison to Europe in the 1930s is not quite clean, for those nations were shaped by collapse, fear, and the sudden rise of a new political order. The United States moves more slowly, with deeper institutional roots, and stronger counterweights. But slower does not mean immune.
For there are signs worth watching: the shaping of narrative and memory, the stretching of executive reach, and the use of enforcement power in ways that increasingly strain constitutional limits. The recent actions of federal immigration authorities, particularly in places like Minneapolis, raise serious concerns about due process, proportionality, and accountability under the law. In many instances, the use of force appears difficult to justify within established legal standards, and the lack of transparency only deepens that concern. These are not isolated questions. They point to a pattern where the boundaries of lawful authority are being tested in practice. These are not the end of a thing, but they are often the beginning of one.
At the same time, there is a need for precision in how such concerns are named. Orwell warned of the danger in allowing political language to become so broad that it loses its meaning. When words like “fascism” are used too loosely, they cease to clarify and instead begin to obscure. That does not make the underlying concerns less real, but it does make them harder to see clearly.
We now live in an age where such moments cannot easily be hidden. Nearly everyone carries a smartphone. What once might have taken days to emerge is now seen within minutes. Yet even this brings a new challenge, for it is no longer only events that are contested, but their meaning. The same footage is watched by many, and understood in very different ways.
So the task is not to name everything as tyranny, nor to dismiss concern as exaggeration, but to remain disciplined enough to see clearly. For it is in the early patterns, not the final form, that the course of things is most often decided.
Well said and I agree. Implicit in all this is that the actions undertaken by Trump are exceedingly worrisome...I certainly hope no one understood my piece to mean otherwise. In fact, my worry over Trump is exactly why I felt compelled to write the piece in the first place! But inflating the language helps no one and undermines the validity of the cause. And Orwell was a genius...
I appreciate that clarification, and it comes through more clearly hearing it from you directly.
That tension you’re naming is an important one. The patterns are serious enough to warrant concern, but if the language used to describe them loses precision it weakens the very effort made to address them.
That balance, between clarity and restraint, feels like the real work right now. And yes… Orwell called that problem out early and with rare clarity. We’re still catching up to it.
whoever you are, grey pilgrim, you’re awesome…
I am a retired Army Colonel. Hegseth is undermining our military and is acting as a loose cannon...might does not make right.
You make a good point, but our current environment of monetized mendacity and "alternative facts" spewed by Fox "News" and other right wing media outlets makes it hard for ordinary Americans to know what's real and what isn't. Countless millions still believe that tRump actually won in 2020, and they buy the BS that global warming is a "hoax."
It's abundantly clear that if left to his own devices, tRump certainly would impose his version of fascism on America. As you point out, the courts have stymied some of his agenda thus far, and it's possible that his constant overreach will ultimately doom his agenda, but so much damage has already been done. To ignore what the tRump regime -- and his billionaire backers who generated Project 2025 -- are up to by assuming that "the people" and "the courts" will reign him in seems dangerously optimistic.
When Paul Revere made his midnight ride to alert the colonies that "the British are coming!", his was a warning, because if the Brits weren't quite there yet, they were on their way. Now, 250 odd years later, fascism might not be here yet, but it's on the way. To me, the alarm over that is entirely justified.
I do genuinely appreciate the historical receipts of times when things were worse in the country, how we can act with our own power to correct course, and the hope that yields. And over the last two years, professors on the subject of Fascism have left the United States if they had the ability to.
Friends I have known for over a decade are now gone. Some I know made it to safety, but a few are simply gone. I have seen with my own eyes the cages DHS locks human beings behind.
Just because it happened before, does not make it acceptable now.
If Americans want to believe in American Exceptionalism, they need to act exceptional.
Well I would say that most people dont have the means to move to another country like college professors might, and that an argument can be made for staying and fighting fascism rather than leaving and accepting it. I think the political Ponzi scheme that is the Trump phenomenon is steadily heading towards political collapse.
I completely agree that we crossed a line in the sand requiring action.
There are things worth fighting for. There are things worth killing for. There are things worth dying for.
After grey pilgrims discourse, I know we are all on the same page.
Given the successful implementation of project 2025, assuming free and fair elections in our future is a very large step from my view.
My assertion is no one is coming to save the United States people. It's break glass in case of emergency time right the hell now.
"Human terrain" evokes the timeless truths of books like 'The Accidental Guerrilla" by David Kilcullen. America has an undeniable history of state violence, and the immediate or long term effectiveness of civic reactions to that violence. Overwrought reactions obscure the real issues.
Your long form work (e.g. Perfect Storm) is excellent but your "small batch" writing consistently explores (whether readers always agree with you is beside the point) and reminds us of timeless themes. I hope that your audience grows.
Hear, hear, and well said. Relentless devotion to accuracy and truth is the answer, even if it's a slow roll.