Thanks for this researched-based approach, Paul, and even more the attention to "leadership." Leaders are elected by the people and for the people, but that does not mean that they have to be blind puppets of the people, especially during times of crisis-induced or demagoguery-induced desperation and paranoia. My view is that today's crisis of democracy can be explained by a failure of ethical leadership. I think I explain it best in the below piece, in case you are interested in further short reading (-: Best, Eli
A day of ignominy in the U.S. Senate, one year later: Remembering Trump’s impeachment acquittal
Yes, plenty of colorful words! Thanks for reading, Peter, and for your encouragement. Really, the truth is that I am using my doctor skills and trying to figure out the "diagnosis" and, with that in hand, the cure or future preventive strategy.
Thanks, Wendi. The audience is reform-minded citizens, political leaders, and lawmakers from either party. In particular, it is political parties that hold the greatest responsibility for preventing the rise of demagogues within their ranks.
Eli, I am not sure finding the “right” word for whatever Trump “is” will mean that much. Whatever the word, it’s what he has done and could do that chills. I find “gatekeepers” to be the key word to your ongoing project. Who are they in history? Our history? Any apt analogies to today? Do we, can we, have gatekeepers in an our here and now atomized world of “identity and its associated grievances” politics and press? Are gatekeepers anachronisms? What can we do, if needed, in lieu of functioning gatekeepers? What might be enough to stave off the demagogue’s return? Get to work! We need your passionate intelligence forging ahead.
Sep 29, 2022·edited Sep 29, 2022Liked by Eli Merritt
Eli, I really appreciate your thinking, writing and putting together this resource. On the "Demagogue" piece, I don't disagree with anything you write there. Democracy requires constant renewal to keep strong, but that constant renewal creates ongoing openings for demagoguery to infect the system; thus the paradox. The higher the rate cell reproduction, the more opportunities for a mutation; and the Trump mutation seems to be metastasizing! Agree that precise terminology is important - but mostly as a tool to find solutions. How to combat demagoguery - certainly one key is to maintain the rule of law. But longer term, a more fundamental approach is needed: how to treat the underlying conditions that are making so many Americans vulnerable to the demagogue? I hope your essays will begin to engage with that difficult enterprise. Cheers cousin.
I think what is missing from the lexicon is a word that combines authoritarian with democratically elected. The threat is within the political system it is not some extra-constitutional power grab but the gradual chipping away at norms until we are left with nothing that resembles a standard democracy. Examples of this are Erdogan in Turkey, Orban in Hungary, Putin in Russia, Bolsonaro in Brazil, Duterte in the Philippines. There were no revolutions in these countries just the slow dismantling of safeguards and the stuffing of courts with cronies and loyalists to allow for largely unconstrained one man / one party rule.
Good post. The first time I heard "demagogue" used to describe Trump as a danger was about a week before the 2016 Iowa Caucuses. It was whispered by a high-up operative in the O'Malley campaign, with the full weight of the threat coming across in the moment; and clearly whispered out of fear that others in that same room were not ready yet to take the threat seriously. I had already been watching Trump more closely since the fall of 2015, as a friend in homeland security at the time had warned me of the support and excitement he was getting from the Boogaloo Boys and from other white supremacists and domestic violent extremists (DVEs). After hearing the whispered "demagogue" comment in February of 2016, I started digging further into the meaning of that and the deeper threat. That is part of what led to our nonprofit to help shift the country (https://www.shiftthecountry.com/). Appreciate the perspective on this.
Great piece, Eli. I particularly like the way you parse these important words/labels that are often bandied about a bit too freely (and imprecisely). I can think of a lot of other specific (and colorful) words for Trump, but I probably shouldn't write them here. Keep up the terrific work you're doing. I'm really enjoying these pieces.
I appreciate your thinking and writing and while I'm hopeful for the trajectory you're aiming for, I'm also a bit scared which redoubles my gratitude for your efforts. Reading this piece I noticed the similarity between the words demagogue and democracy, so searched for their etymology which I assumed would be related. I was not disappointed and think you might want to have a look. https://www.etymonline.com/word/democracy
In particular, note that the original and denotative meaning of demagogue discussed by Loren Samons in his 2004 "What's Wrong With Democracy" is quite opposite to our use of the word today, and consistent with democratic values. The way he puts it expresses the need for the many voices to be heard and integrated by "appropriate" leadership. The word itself, like the legitimate leadership it hopes to name, has been appropriated.
I appreciated your words and the substantive nature of your topic. I would need to know more about your intended audience to give more specific feedback.
100% with you, Angus. In fact a demagogue is such a person, but folks don't know that. They think demagogues are harmless loudmouths. This is one reason some political scientists call all those figures you mentioned "elected autocrats." I think we should stick with "demagogue," because if you ever want to do a search to learn about the problem we have today "demagogue" is the world to choose. History explodes with commentary, warnings, and advisories if you search that word.
I have also called Trump an authoritarian demagogue. That's the most accurate, perhaps.
But what really separated Trump from Nixon? Lack of charisma? Did Nixon stay close enough to the standard playback, with just enough morals and insufficient enablers ?
You are very right. Using the right term to identify something is extremely important. Without figuring out what something or someone truly is, you can never start to work on fixing it.
I feel that laws can act as amazing gatekeepers against demagogues. However, I have two questions about human gatekeepers. Who do you believe they are? Every day citizens, government officials, or something else? Also, if there are these gatekeepers, what can they truly do against a person who has the minds of millions swayed to believe them?
If any people in our world are “gatekeepers,” I would say that congresspeople are. This is because they have the ability to take these demagogues out of office. However, there are two problems to these gatekeepers. First, many of them are scared to take them out of office because of the power demagogues hold with millions of people. My belief is this could be solved with laws that force votes in Congress to be anonymous. Second, I don't think that taking a demagogue out of office truly takes away their power, since their power lies in the people who follow them. So my question is, is there any way for these gatekeepers to truly take away the power of demagogues, and if so, how?
Thanks for this researched-based approach, Paul, and even more the attention to "leadership." Leaders are elected by the people and for the people, but that does not mean that they have to be blind puppets of the people, especially during times of crisis-induced or demagoguery-induced desperation and paranoia. My view is that today's crisis of democracy can be explained by a failure of ethical leadership. I think I explain it best in the below piece, in case you are interested in further short reading (-: Best, Eli
A day of ignominy in the U.S. Senate, one year later: Remembering Trump’s impeachment acquittal
https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-day-ignominy-senate-20220213-6z2xoxzc4na4laed5vqbpnepoy-story.html
Yes, plenty of colorful words! Thanks for reading, Peter, and for your encouragement. Really, the truth is that I am using my doctor skills and trying to figure out the "diagnosis" and, with that in hand, the cure or future preventive strategy.
Thanks, Wendi. The audience is reform-minded citizens, political leaders, and lawmakers from either party. In particular, it is political parties that hold the greatest responsibility for preventing the rise of demagogues within their ranks.
Eli, I am not sure finding the “right” word for whatever Trump “is” will mean that much. Whatever the word, it’s what he has done and could do that chills. I find “gatekeepers” to be the key word to your ongoing project. Who are they in history? Our history? Any apt analogies to today? Do we, can we, have gatekeepers in an our here and now atomized world of “identity and its associated grievances” politics and press? Are gatekeepers anachronisms? What can we do, if needed, in lieu of functioning gatekeepers? What might be enough to stave off the demagogue’s return? Get to work! We need your passionate intelligence forging ahead.
Eli, I really appreciate your thinking, writing and putting together this resource. On the "Demagogue" piece, I don't disagree with anything you write there. Democracy requires constant renewal to keep strong, but that constant renewal creates ongoing openings for demagoguery to infect the system; thus the paradox. The higher the rate cell reproduction, the more opportunities for a mutation; and the Trump mutation seems to be metastasizing! Agree that precise terminology is important - but mostly as a tool to find solutions. How to combat demagoguery - certainly one key is to maintain the rule of law. But longer term, a more fundamental approach is needed: how to treat the underlying conditions that are making so many Americans vulnerable to the demagogue? I hope your essays will begin to engage with that difficult enterprise. Cheers cousin.
I think what is missing from the lexicon is a word that combines authoritarian with democratically elected. The threat is within the political system it is not some extra-constitutional power grab but the gradual chipping away at norms until we are left with nothing that resembles a standard democracy. Examples of this are Erdogan in Turkey, Orban in Hungary, Putin in Russia, Bolsonaro in Brazil, Duterte in the Philippines. There were no revolutions in these countries just the slow dismantling of safeguards and the stuffing of courts with cronies and loyalists to allow for largely unconstrained one man / one party rule.
I would also suggest "con man" and "grifter", particularly since 1/6/21.
Good post. The first time I heard "demagogue" used to describe Trump as a danger was about a week before the 2016 Iowa Caucuses. It was whispered by a high-up operative in the O'Malley campaign, with the full weight of the threat coming across in the moment; and clearly whispered out of fear that others in that same room were not ready yet to take the threat seriously. I had already been watching Trump more closely since the fall of 2015, as a friend in homeland security at the time had warned me of the support and excitement he was getting from the Boogaloo Boys and from other white supremacists and domestic violent extremists (DVEs). After hearing the whispered "demagogue" comment in February of 2016, I started digging further into the meaning of that and the deeper threat. That is part of what led to our nonprofit to help shift the country (https://www.shiftthecountry.com/). Appreciate the perspective on this.
Great piece! The study of civics and the presence of "gatekeepers" in society are paramount in maintaining a fair and stable democracy!
Great piece, Eli. I particularly like the way you parse these important words/labels that are often bandied about a bit too freely (and imprecisely). I can think of a lot of other specific (and colorful) words for Trump, but I probably shouldn't write them here. Keep up the terrific work you're doing. I'm really enjoying these pieces.
I appreciate your thinking and writing and while I'm hopeful for the trajectory you're aiming for, I'm also a bit scared which redoubles my gratitude for your efforts. Reading this piece I noticed the similarity between the words demagogue and democracy, so searched for their etymology which I assumed would be related. I was not disappointed and think you might want to have a look. https://www.etymonline.com/word/democracy
and
https://www.etymonline.com/word/demagogue?ref=etymonline_crossreference#etymonline_v_5553
In particular, note that the original and denotative meaning of demagogue discussed by Loren Samons in his 2004 "What's Wrong With Democracy" is quite opposite to our use of the word today, and consistent with democratic values. The way he puts it expresses the need for the many voices to be heard and integrated by "appropriate" leadership. The word itself, like the legitimate leadership it hopes to name, has been appropriated.
I appreciated your words and the substantive nature of your topic. I would need to know more about your intended audience to give more specific feedback.
100% with you, Angus. In fact a demagogue is such a person, but folks don't know that. They think demagogues are harmless loudmouths. This is one reason some political scientists call all those figures you mentioned "elected autocrats." I think we should stick with "demagogue," because if you ever want to do a search to learn about the problem we have today "demagogue" is the world to choose. History explodes with commentary, warnings, and advisories if you search that word.
I have also called Trump an authoritarian demagogue. That's the most accurate, perhaps.
LOL. Someone said to me the other that "A-hole" is definitely the single best word . . .
But what really separated Trump from Nixon? Lack of charisma? Did Nixon stay close enough to the standard playback, with just enough morals and insufficient enablers ?
Great piece of writing!
You are very right. Using the right term to identify something is extremely important. Without figuring out what something or someone truly is, you can never start to work on fixing it.
I feel that laws can act as amazing gatekeepers against demagogues. However, I have two questions about human gatekeepers. Who do you believe they are? Every day citizens, government officials, or something else? Also, if there are these gatekeepers, what can they truly do against a person who has the minds of millions swayed to believe them?
If any people in our world are “gatekeepers,” I would say that congresspeople are. This is because they have the ability to take these demagogues out of office. However, there are two problems to these gatekeepers. First, many of them are scared to take them out of office because of the power demagogues hold with millions of people. My belief is this could be solved with laws that force votes in Congress to be anonymous. Second, I don't think that taking a demagogue out of office truly takes away their power, since their power lies in the people who follow them. So my question is, is there any way for these gatekeepers to truly take away the power of demagogues, and if so, how?
Again, AMAZING article!