posted February 01, 2017 12:15 PM            

Whenever a reactionary populist regime takes power and begins doing illiberal things, the same question arises among its critics: How much of this is part of a master plan and how much is just flailing? What is the exact mix of incompetence and ill intent?

That argument is already taking shape around Trump, as he ham-handedly issues executive orders poorly understood by his own bureaucracy and fires members of his administration. It is aptly captured in two recent essays.

The first is by Yonatan Zunger, a Google privacy engineer. It’s called “Trial Balloon for a Coup?” and it reviews the news of the past day or two through the lens of a unifying theory: By putting confidant Steve Bannon on the National Security Council, cutting agencies out of rule-making, and defying a court order, Trump is systematically attempting to reduce any checks on his power. He’s trying to concentrate power in a small counsel of trusted advisers (the “coup”) and avoid legal review.

The second essay is by political scientist Tom Pepinsky, in response. It’s called “Weak and Incompetent Leaders act like Strong Leaders,” and it makes a simple point: The very same actions Zunger interprets as a devious, coordinated plan can also be interpreted as the bumbling, defensive moves of a weak leader who doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing.

The problem, Pepinsky says, is that we only have the outputs to go on — the appointments, the executive orders. We don’t see the inputs or deliberations, which is what we’d need to be able to properly discern the intent behind the outputs. This leaves us with “observational equivalence,” i.e., a set of observations that underdetermines an explanatory theory.

Multiple theories fit the facts. Pepinsky calls it the “qualitative equivalent of curve-fitting.” He offers an example:

President Trump may have brought Steve Bannon into the NSC because he is consolidating power and intends to sideline all regular establishment players in the formulation of American foreign policy. Or he might have brought Bannon into the NSC because he is so isolated that he needs someone who he believes he can trust, and everyone in the foreign policy establishment is dragging feet and dissembling. The former is a sign of strength. The latter is a sign of weakness. Both have the same observable implication.

Parallel pictures of Donald Trump and Steve Bannon Kirk Irwin and Jonathan Bachman / Getty

It is observational equivalence, especially in regard to opaque, secretive, authoritarian regimes, that leads to so much “Kremlinology,” so many attempts to divine the intent behind erratic actions.
An authoritarian’s success is determined by circumstance, not intent

Most Kremlinology isn’t very useful. My theory is that authoritarian demagogues are more alike than they are different. Most of them are narcissists. They are, at root, fearful, paranoid, and tribal, which drives the macho posturing and obsession with loyalty. They have a kind of animal cunning for how to manipulate people, dominate, and accrue power.

But for the most part they aren’t evil geniuses. (One of Russian journalist Masha Gessen’s recurring themes about Putin is what a “grey, ordinary man” he is.) Indeed, evil geniuses are pretty rare — or, to put it more precisely, narcissistic, paranoid tribalists are rarely geniuses, because genius requires a certain detached perspective, an ability to step outside oneself, which is precisely what narcissists lack.

What authoritarian regimes do is blunder forward, grasping and grabbing power whenever and wherever they can, building secretive inner circles, surrounding themselves with supplicant state media, demonizing dissenting voices, and punishing enemies. They do this not because of some 12-dimensional chess analysis of the political landscape, but because that’s what narcissism and zero-sum thinking does. They are more like animals driven by instinct than chess masters driven by strategy, though of course there’s a range (with Trump being on the far blinded-by-narcissism end).

If we’re looking to understand the course an authoritarian takes through a country and its history — what’s he’s accomplished, what’s likely to happen next — the place to look is not his intent, but the institutions and norms of the country he seeks to dominate. They, not his ultimate goals and desires, are what most determine the ultimate shape and consequences of a regime.

Think of a bull loose in a china shop. How much damage will it do? The relevant variable is not the bull’s intent. A bull’s gonna bull. The relevant variable is how equipped the china shop is to stop the bull. How many tranquilizer darts does it have, or, I don’t know, nets? (I didn’t think this analogy all the way through.)

The point is, how far an authoritarian can blunder forward, violating norms and degrading institutions, is determined by the strength of the norms and institutions he encounters. They determine when, or whether, he is constrained.

So if we want to know what’s next with Trumpism, it’s not necessary to determine exactly how self-aware he is, the precise admixture of evil genius and rage addled amateur. An authoritarian-minded regime will continue trampling norms and accruing power as long as it can. It will blunder forward until restrained.

posted February 01, 2017 12:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlueRoamer:

What will happen next depends not on Trump, but on America’s institutions and norms — the courts, the military, Congress, civil society, journalism. It is their strength, not his, that will determine how this story ends.

---

I also want to add that imo Mr Trump is a particular case of an intellectually challenged narcissist. He displays minimal vocabulary, word saladding and blatant ignorance about the world. I am sure he gets bored within 5 min of any briefing/official duty because of self-focus, disinterest in otherness and lack of knowledge and understanding of what it is all about. This compulsive self-focus also makes him self-reference with any occasion, which is obvious in his public discourse. No matter the genes, many narcissists don't develop their intellect due to constant self-focus, a consequential form of ADHD and in his case, the "no-need-to-do-that" (very rich individual with no challenge to prove himself or fight for survival, but surrounded by fakely congratulatory staff his entire life).

The article you posted reminded me of an exchange in Red Dragon:

Hannibal Lecter: Then how did you catch me?

Will Graham: You had... disadvantages.

Hannibal Lecter: What disadvantages?

Will Graham: You're insane.

------------------
I seem to have loved you in numberless forms...

posted February 01, 2017 12:48 PM            

It seems an important question is how far the destruction is going to go, is it going to be like Chavez with a complete economic collapse, or can we stop it before that? Or will it be like Hitler and results in the death of millions and the complete collapse of a nation.

posted February 03, 2017 06:57 AM            

------------------
I seem to have loved you in numberless forms...

posted February 03, 2017 10:18 AM            

at the ego shame of that statement and those who think he is the golden child able (much less willing)to create paradise on earth..

posted February 04, 2017 09:46 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
It's impossible for America to become a dictatorship.

---

posted February 04, 2017 01:58 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
It's impossible for America to become a dictatorship.

---

posted February 04, 2017 03:07 PM            

Not a single deadly terror attack has occurred from people of these banned countries.
Timothy McVeigh was not from Iran. He killed hundreds of Americans. The 9-11 hijackers were almost totally Saudi Arabs. Why were they given Visas? 1000s of more inimical Saudis can enter while hardworking Iraqis and intellectual, atheistic Iranians are kept out.

posted February 04, 2017 11:30 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeeLoo2014:
Don't worry, American democracy is very strong which will be seen now.

---

You must have a different definition of democracy than I do. The reality is quite different.

posted February 05, 2017 12:10 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
Trump is a man of his word and a man of action. This bloated government has been choking on its own sewage for far too long. Trump is draining this cesspool of filth, so we can be a strong nation again. The world is royally messed up due to a weak America--Obama's America of hope and change, which translated on the international stage as weakness.

---

posted February 05, 2017 12:40 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by iQ:
I do not think the USA can become a dictatorship. Trump's Executive Orders have already been trashed by courts. 100,000 immigrants from the banned countries will enter the USA now. By being rash and graceless, the present dispensation could end up creating even more immigration than ever before.

---

IQ, given the current climate of hysteria, I appreciate your voice of calm and impartiality.

quote:

---

All that was needed was a better vetting process to keep miscreants from any country at bay. US Courts and Civil Society would have welcomed such plans.

---

I agree.

quote:

---

Not a single deadly terror attack has occurred from people of these banned countries.

---

Right. So I wonder why Obama placed a ban on these "countries of concern" in 2015, which are the same seven countries in the current ban.

quote:

---

Trump should pick battles wisely, the focus should be more on the economy. Like big plans for job creation in the Rust Belt States and so on. I think he is being totally misled by the inner coterie.

---

posted February 05, 2017 11:25 AM            

Saudi is the country that spread the ideology of ISIL in the 1980s, Trump should have focused on their Administration for tackling the bogey of Global Terror.