“A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again” is the threat of someone simultaneously auditioning for the History Channel and the Book of Revelation. It was a threat as empty as Trump’s moral code — the very lack of which made the world watch and wait under the possibility that he might follow through purely for the infamy.

If I were a betting man, free of qualms about profiting off genocidal threats by a U.S. President, I could have retired early on my hunch that an 11th-hour “deal” would be struck. Alas, I’m a risk-averse humanist living off the modest means that come with it. Still, I spent the afternoon watching prediction markets and oil commodity trades for anomalies. Sure enough, Brent and U.S. crude futures traded a few hours before the ceasefire to the tune of $950 million.

The only promise from the president’s Truth Social mirage of omnipotence is the grift that follows. For weeks, he’s ended his posts aimed at Iran with little religious flourishes — a “God bless,” a “Praise be to Allah,” or an Easter Sunday demand to “Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell.” His blessings are not benedictions. They’re the “no offense” after a backhanded compliment, the wink after a bully’s joke about someone’s mother. His escalating rhetoric reveals something else: the man with the golden commode believes he’s as powerful as a God. The fate of civilizations rests on his whims. After all, this is his chosen war. It was the pro-life president’s decision that put 160 schoolgirls in graves instead of desks.

Subscribe now

Due to his decisions, the U.S.’s global standing has deteriorated in nearly every aspect. Thousands have been killed, billions of dollars have been wasted, and the alliances that formed the post-WWII order are collapsing. Iran and Russia are both financially strengthened. Iran controls the Strait of Hormuz and is charging a toll paid in Crypto or Chinese Yuan. Europe is learning that it can deal with an emboldened Iran directly to move its ships, reducing U.S. leverage. That hasn’t stopped Trump from expecting praise for a few ships passing through the Strait, even though more than a hundred a day passed through prior to Operation Epic Fury.

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt’s conference following the ceasefire was a sermon filled with that very praise. If she had sung “Our God is an Awesome God” while facing a banner of Trump’s mug shot, it wouldn’t have seemed out of place. As we’ve grown accustomed to the adulation of his cabinet, what was most extraordinary was her victory lap while unable to answer when asked if the Strait had been closed again due to Israel dropping 100 bombs on Beirut within 10 minutes.

In the hours before the ceasefire was announced, news networks displayed the “whole civilization” quote on their lower thirds. Pundits and politicians called it genocidal, unprecedented, and extreme. As the focus shifts to the odds of the ceasefire’s success, it would be a dereliction on my part not to address the messianic rhetoric of a man who has attached his name not only to buildings but to coercion of theological proportions.

With the rise of the religious right over the last half-century, past presidents have invoked God’s name, some believing their leadership was blessed. Though even George Bush Jr. had the decency to launder his crusade through a State of the Union speechwriter. Despite Trump’s amorality, he owes both of his terms to the same evangelical machinery that supported Reagan, Bush Sr., and Bush Jr.

Share

While there’s more evidence suggesting the president is a sexual assailant than a Christian, his administration goes to great lengths to champion him as a man of faith while maintaining their own devout images. The morning after the ceasefire, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said, “God deserves all the glory.” He continued, “Tens of thousands of sorties, refuelings, and strikes carried out under the protection of divine providence. A massive effort with miraculous protection." Hegseth has framed war and the military in religious terms ever since he was plucked from the bench of Fox and Friends. He has instituted monthly worship services at the Pentagon.

In February, Hegseth invited Doug Wilson — the Christian nationalist pastor whose self-described paleo-Confederate theology and postmillennial dominionism make him one of the most influential religious figures in the administration's orbit — to preach at one of them.

A month earlier, the Pentagon leadership invited the then-Apostolic Nuncio to the U.S., Cardinal Christophe Pierre, not for a sermon but for a “bitter lecture warning that the United States has the military power to do whatever it wants — and that the Church had better take its side,” according to published reports.

Meanwhile, the Vice President is in Budapest campaigning for Viktor Orbán’s reelection, which is what postliberal white Catholics do when they are vying for an autocratic future they expect to inherit. The common trait among Trump, Hegseth, and Vance isn’t faith; it is an understanding that the grandeur of Christian language is a veil for the pettiness of personal ambition. Trump takes this even further. He doesn’t invoke God to justify his power — he presents himself as its source.

Trump mentioned God 15 times in his public address on the war because he believes God is his opening act. If there were any doubt, for $1000, you can buy one of his God Bless the USA Bibles with his autopen signature. They retail for $60 without it, meaning his name alone is worth nearly 16 times as much as the Bible itself. The actual content of his godhood is that of a man who counts the money on the table and signals to the bettors which way to bet. This goes far beyond Bible sales.

Along with the vast corruption funding his family businesses, there have been multiple instances over the past year in which suspiciously well-timed bets preceded a Trump policy announcement, including oil futures, equity options, and Polymarket contracts. These involve hundreds of millions to over a billion dollars in total positioning. The pattern is established. Wire services have noted it. When this President speaks, his words move money before they move policy, and those positioned to profit are close enough to the house to know which slot machine will pay out and when.

In Christian theology, the incarnation, when the Word becomes flesh, is a miracle. In this case, the word is a Truth Social post, and the flesh is $950 million worth of oil futures placed hours before the post that justified them, a Polymarket contract that settled at ninety-six percent within minutes of the announcement, and six anonymous wallets that funded their positions in the hours before a U.S. military strike that killed Khamenei.

This administration selectively cites scripture. Perhaps there is no scene they’d rather avoid mentioning than that of a furious carpenter walking into the temple to find the sacred space turned into a market. Jesus overturns the tables of the money changers and drives them out with a whip of cords. It is the only act of physical violence attributed to Jesus in any of the four gospels. It is not directed at the Romans or unbelievers but at the men who turned a place of worship into a place of grift. That’s the scene the man who held a Bible upside down in front of a church for a photo op — after federal officers gassed clergy to clear his path — could see himself clearly in if he could see himself as anyone other than God. But he can’t.

No civilization died tonight. Eventually, though, every civilization has to face what it lets a demigod do with the miracles he grants.

Share

Part 2 of 2 on political linguistics

It’s a clear October night, the air hangs like a held breath. In the distance, a low orange glow stretches for several miles and melts into the horizon. It’s not a river of fire, but close. As it weaves toward Chicago, torch-lit shadows of thousands of young men— all radical Republicans— dance across apartment facades and shop windows. They hold high six-foot kerosene torches and the conviction of 70,000 brothers simultaneously marching across New England. Some clutch brass knuckles, ready if Democrat thugs attack. Along several paths, they do. A few broken bones and blood-stained sidewalks foreshadow a magnitude of violence they can’t yet comprehend, at least not in the fall of 1860.

These Republican activists were headed to a campaign rally for a frontier lawyer the establishment saw as a backwoods agitator, Abraham Lincoln. Several months earlier in Hartford, Connecticut, they provided security and a torch-lit escort for Lincoln himself. They called themselves the “Wide Awakes.”

It’s unclear whether “Wide Awake” meant “woke.” Most likely, it came from their nocturnal marches. Some members were white laborers affiliated with the Free Soil, Free Labor platform. They were self-preservationists, afraid of losing their jobs and businesses to a Northern embrace of slavery. Other members viewed slavery as a moral imperative. Speakers at Wide Awake rallies, such as Cassius Clay and Boston Wide Awake Club Leader Lewis Hayden, an escaped slave himself, took up Lincoln’s mantle, using religious and moral terms to condemn slavery. Many Wide Awakes went on to be Union soldiers and leaders.

In hindsight, the image of the Wide Awakes with their lamps evokes the Unite the Right rallies in Charlottesville. Two groups with the same party affiliation and similar pageantry, yet opposing ideologies. Pro-Nazi white supremacists protesting the removal of a General Robert E. Lee statue would likely view the Wide Awakes as woke. The Wide Awakes would see them as the Confederacy. Both groups would consider the other RINOs (Republicans In Name Only).

In America’s two-party system, the theater is permanent, and the names on the weathered marquee remain the same. But between acts, the players are known to swap costumes one piece at a time. If a third party auditions, it’s quickly stripped and relegated to the lighting crew.

Following the Civil War, the realignment of Democrats and Republicans was a century of calculated repositioning, punctuated by violence. With a stronghold on power, the Party of Lincoln pivoted from the rights of Black Americans to big business. The Great Depression sank their favorability. FDR and the New Deal expanded government and social services. The Republicans argued for small government, then states’ rights — each a genuine identity in its moment, each now more costume than conviction. By the late 1950s, the rise of the Civil Rights movement created a regional fault line that cut across party lines. In 1964, Barry Goldwater’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act drew the first Southern Democrats toward the Republican column. Someone took notes.

Subscribe now

Nixon’s strategist, Kevin Phillips, published the playbook. His 1969 book The Emerging Republican Majority argued openly that a permanent Republican majority could be built on white racial resentment in the South and ethnic backlash in the North. Nixon had already run the first play in his 1968 campaign with “law and order” and the “silent majority.” The aim was to win white southern voters with coded language that stirred racial resentments. When Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, he told an aide, “I think we just delivered the South to the Republican Party for a long time to come.” He was right.

The Civil Rights Act didn’t end the racial politics of the South — it drove them underground. Explicit segregationist language was a liability in national elections. A new vocabulary was needed. The Southern Strategy provided skillfully calibrated dog whistles to reach the ears of the Southern reactionary without shattering the delicate glassware of the Northern moderate. This wasn’t an organic movement; it was rebranding. Districts began flipping. Reagan’s election marked its consolidation at the presidential level — Newt Gingrich’s 1994 Contract with America and the Republican Revolution completed its sweep through Congress and state legislatures alike.

In a 1981 interview after Reagan’s victory, Lee Atwater, one of the strategy’s most candid conductors, cold-bloodedly admitted that the goal was to shift from explicit to abstract messaging:

“You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Nigger, nigger, nigger.’ By 1968, you can’t say it anymore. So you say ‘forced busing,’ ‘states’ rights.’ You’re talking about ‘cutting taxes’ — totally economic things — and a byproduct is blacks get hurt worse than whites. Race is coming on the backbone of all this.”

“Democrat” and “Republican” are more than labels; they’re identities. Yet, a keen strategist can exchange their geography, constituencies, even souls, all while people who identify as one or the other keep the nomenclature. According to the American National Election Studies (ANES), political party affiliation is one of the most stable political attitudes throughout an American’s life. Over 81% of Republicans and 89% of Democrats share their parents’ party affiliation and religion. Every five years, roughly 13% of American voters change their party. Most who do are under 30. Over the past decade, the trend among voters hasn’t been to switch parties but to vote as independents. Currently, 46% of the electorate identify as “independents.” Most still lean toward a preferred party and vote accordingly. Only about 10% are genuinely independent voters.

It’s commonplace for Republicans today to refer to themselves as the “GOP” or “Party of Lincoln.” Prominent Democrats would argue they’re the party of Lincoln’s ideals. This raises a deeper question: where do political terms like Democrat, Republican, Socialist, or Communist derive their popular meaning? How is that meaning vulnerable to deliberate attenuation?

Subscribe now

Where slang trickles up from subcultures and marginalized communities, prescriptive or specialized language trickles down from scholars and experts. Ideally, it does for specialists what good terminology should: distill complex ideas and abstract concepts within a given field into precise, efficient shorthand. It helps psychologists diagnose. It saves surgeons time, allowing them to save lives.

Specialists seek to mitigate confusion and error through explicit criteria. Consider schizophrenia. Psychologists diagnosing mental disorders are required to consult the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual). For each disorder, the DSM-5 provides a spreadsheet with two or more columns, each containing a list of possible symptoms. To be diagnosed with a psychological disorder, a person must have a particular number of symptoms from each column — but not necessarily all.

Column A: a patient with schizophrenia must exhibit two or more of the following: delusions, hallucinations, disorganized speech, catatonic behavior, diminished emotional expression.

Column B: they must exhibit one or more of… and so on. While two people may not experience all of the same symptoms, a professional can still conclude that both people are schizophrenic.

Political terminology is specialized. It’s derived from centuries of philosophy, history, and scholarship. Like psychology, it relies heavily on quantitative methods, such as data collection and statistical analysis, to categorize and condense abstract ideas. Political scholars debate and undergo peer review to test definitions and develop working agreements. These methods help political scientists better understand and describe politics. In practice, clearer language should improve how politics serves the people. But what sets political terminology apart from pure scientific fields—especially in a democracy—is that it operates in two worlds: general language and specialized language. This is where the need for an informed citizenry becomes crucial, and a politician who uses language as a weapon can create confusion.

In medicine, a specialist makes the call. In a democracy, everyone does. Where political scientists use political terms to diagnose, politicians use them to persuade. This can clarify issues for voters. It can also open the door to a linguistic chop shop where stolen words enter only to come out with new paint jobs and louder engines. Autocrats will drive them around, blowing through stop signs like a boozed-up Tiger Woods, trying to convince everyone they’re the “specialist” while slamming into anyone who is. It doesn’t take long for political discourse to become a demolition derby.

The wreckage is familiar. Confucius warned that when language loses its accuracy, justice goes with it. Plato made it structural — in the Republic, Socrates argues that free speech is simultaneously democracy’s greatest strength and its fatal weakness, the open door through which demagogues enter and then dismantle the very freedoms they build their platforms on.

George Orwell addressed political words failing to hold meaning in his 1946 essay Politics and the English Language:

“The word fascism has now no meaning except insofar as it signifies ‘something not desirable.’ The words democracy, socialism, freedom, patriotism, and justice each have several different meanings that cannot be reconciled with one another. In the case of a word like Democracy, not only is there no agreed-upon definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country “democratic,” we are praising it…”

Political terms, when we need them most, are often diluted by overuse and hyperbole, or reduced to pejoratives. Trump has a way of stringing them together in nonsensical insults. Like when he called Kamala Harris a “communist, Marxist, socialist, fascist.”

Part of Trump’s America First agenda has been to stake a percentage claim in national companies such as Intel, raise taxes through tariffs, and send a masked and militarized police force into the streets to arrest without due process. His diagnosis of Harris is a projection on a level that would make Freud blush. Yet all his base heard was Harris being called four bad words in a row. That gets reduced a step further to just “bad.” The words themselves begin to lose meaning in the greater public.

Following in the wake of the Southern Strategy, the Trump administration is further redefining “Republican.” When he calls Republican Supreme Court justices, senators, generals, and governors, RINOs, he’s saying what “Republican” means — loyalty to him.

The Southern Strategy didn’t just transform the Republican Party — it fundamentally altered what it meant to be a Democrat. The Dixiecrats, who remained after Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, became Democrats In Name Only — DINOs — to the urban, multiracial coalition that would define the party going forward. George Wallace was a Democrat. So was the Solid South that built its identity on segregation. Today’s Democratic Party would be unrecognizable to them, and vice versa. Trump understands this instinctively, which is why “Democrat” functions in his vocabulary the same way “RINO” does — not as a description but as a weapon. Both words have been emptied of meaning and reloaded with contempt. In Trump’s lexicon, a “RINO” is anyone who won’t bend the knee, and a “Democrat” is anyone loyal to the ideologies and principles he’s threatened by. The actual content of either party’s platform is beside the point. The words are just ammunition.

The assault runs in both directions at once: from the bottom up, where slang and vernacular get mocked into pejoratives, and from the top down. The more words an autocrat can warp, weaponize, dilute, or ban, the more control they can have over citizens. Political terms are vulnerable because of their general use. That doesn’t mean other specialized language is safe. It has an address. It lives in universities, journals, and peer-reviewed publications — institutions with budgets, accreditation, and the persistent vulnerability of anything that depends on public funding and political goodwill. That’s what makes it precise. It’s also what makes it a target. Slang gets mocked into irrelevance — “woke” becomes a punchline. Academic language gets hit from both directions: mocked into pejoratives and starved at the institutional level. “Elite,” “academic,” “expert” — once markers of credibility, now campaign insults. Autocrats understand this. You cut social programs and elementary schools to defund the street corner where slang and poetry are born. You punish the universities to make education sound like something to be ashamed of. Trump has framed his attacks as a defense against “antisemitism.” But that’s just a further distortion of language.

I’ve heard it argued that Trump doesn’t understand many big words. Hearing him discover the word “groceries” doesn’t dissuade such assertions. That doesn’t mean he’s too dim to be dangerous. Titling his overtly dishonest social media posts “Truths” shows an intent to co-opt not just words but truth itself. As words lose their meaning, the loudest and most widely heard person effectively owns the definition.

In the fall of 1860, the Wide Awakes marched with torches and a shared vocabulary — liberty, union, republic — words they believed meant something specific enough to die for. Some of them did. But words can outlast convictions. One day, someone may pick up your torch and carry it in the opposite direction. When that happens, don’t forget who first lit it and why.

Share

If you’re interested in more video content, I’ve launched a YouTube channel!

Share

A crypto deal signed with an Abu Dhabi royal days before Trump’s inauguration, the Qatari plane gifted to Trump, Nvidia chips approved for sale to the UAE, Don Jr. and Eric Trump’s investments in an Israeli AI drone company, Kushner’s “New Gaza” and business with MBS, the TikTok U.S. sale, the Paramount/Warner Bros. merger, and now the war in Iran. Together, they tell a larger story of corruption that’s easy to overlook when it’s scattered across your feed. The infographic accompanying this piece is an extensive compilation of public records, congressional filings, SEC disclosures, Corporate disclosures, and reporting. You can download the list of citations here.

In February, Trump’s son-in-law and Steve Witkoff, his longtime real estate buddy and Special Envoy to the Middle East, were sent by the U.S. to negotiate a new nuclear deal with Iran. On February 26th, talks failed. 36 hours later, the U.S. and Israel launched a joint military strike on Iran. With no clear reason given to the American public for entering a war with Iran, nor one to get out, conjecture has filled the void.

With that in mind, this is not an argument for why the war began. This data doesn’t provide smoking gun evidence that private financial interests shaped diplomacy. The financial interests exist regardless. Members of Trump’s inner circle are profiting from war. While there is a chance this war could reshape the Middle East in a way that’s favorable to the Gulf States, the longer it continues, and the Iranian regime remains, the less likely that is. If a wider regional crisis unfolds, it could have destabilizing effects or, at a minimum, pose economic challenges. Tourism to the UAE is already taking a significant hit amid Iran’s strikes on targets across the Middle East. A regional refugee crisis, or an Iran now set on obtaining nuclear deterrence, is probably not the return on investment the UAE or Saudi Arabia were hoping for by bankrolling Affinity Partners and World Liberty Financial. Thanks to crypto and Gulf State money, approximately 50% of Trump’s $6.8 billion net worth is tied to foreign investors; there’s no indication he won’t burn them in the process. We’re galaxies away from Carter’s Peanut Farm.

INFOGRAPHIC: HOW IT WORKS

It looks kind of like a microchip. Like a subway map, it may appear overwhelming at first. That speaks more to the sheer number of relationships and transactions. As complex as it may seem, if you sit with it for a minute, it gets easier to navigate. There’s one simple thread — money. Specifically, the money funding the people making American foreign policy in the Middle East. Skimming the summary of oligarchs below is recommended.

Zoom in for details, out for the big picture. Each family or group of actors has been given a color. The gray lines descending from the White House, as well as the gray text under each country, represent U.S. government policy. Line colors indicate the group a transaction originates from. The dashed lines show family relations. Dotted lines are structural ownership and partnerships. Solid lines are deals and investments. While some solid lines denoting investments represent an ownership stake in a company, they’re not dotted if they do not include a board seat, a vote, or a documented say in the business. The dollar amounts are estimates. Some of the deals are pending, some are subject to change.

If you spot a mistake, please let me know. Also, let me know if you find this useful and would like more data visualizations. This took many hours to put together. Your subscription and shares are much appreciated.

Subscribe now

THE OLIGARCHS

JARED KUSHNER

Jared Kushner is not a U.S. government official. Neither Jared Kushner nor Steve Witkoff had experience negotiating nuclear deals before they were sent to Geneva to negotiate with Iran on behalf of America.

Shortly after leaving the White House in January 2021, Kushner founded his investment firm, Affinity Partners. A few months later, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) invested $2 billion in the firm. The Saudi Public Investment Fund’s (PIF) committee initially rejected it, citing the firm’s lack of experience and portfolio. MBS overruled their objections. Since then, Affinity Partners has collected over $112 million in management fees from Saudi Arabia alone, but has yet to return a single dollar in profit to its investors. Roughly 77% of Affinity Partners’ investor base is Gulf State money.

Kushner’s most recent deal was to broker a $55 billion buyout of Electronic Arts, in which the Saudi PIF acquired a 93% stake in the California-based video game company. Kushner invested ~$400 million in the deal, owning 1-2% when the deal closes in June. The private equity company Silver Lake, which cites David Ellison as a founding investor and is now an owner of TikTok U.S., invested ~$2 billion to own a 4-5% stake of EA.

As the largest shareholder in Israel’s Phoenix Insurance and Finance and a partner in Shlomo Holdings, Kushner integrated Gulf capital into the core of Israel’s economy. Two weeks before his first round of negotiations with Iran, at Davos, Kushner made a $100 billion proposal to transform Gaza into a “Middle Eastern Riviera “ through a U.S.-led trusteeship that trades Palestinian land titles for blockchain tokens and luxury housing.

STEVE WITKOFF

Steve Witkoff is Trump’s Special Envoy to the Middle East. Envoys are appointed by the executive without congressional approval. He has no diplomatic experience, though, as with Kushner, much of his livelihood depends on Gulf State riches.

Witkoff spent nearly three decades building the Witkoff Group into one of New York’s more prominent real estate firms — 75 projects, 18 million square feet, a portfolio spanning Manhattan, Miami, Las Vegas, and Hawaii. In 2013, he acquired the Park Lane Hotel on Central Park South for $654 million, partnering with Malaysian financier Jho Low, who held an 85% stake. The deal became a liability almost immediately. Low was accused of stealing billions in the 1MDB international fraud scandal, and the DOJ filed suit to seize the hotel. In 2019, as Witkoff was faced with a $480 million debt on the property coming due, Abu Dhabi’s sovereign wealth fund, Mubadala, stepped in and bought out Low’s stake for $140 million. That same year, Witkoff refinanced the property with a $615 million loan. Unable to find a buyer at his $1 billion asking price, he sold to Qatar’s Investment Authority (QIA) in 2023 for $623 million with the aid of Mubadala. Two Gulf State sovereign wealth funds, one lucky guy.

In 2024, Witkoff co-founded World Liberty Financial with the Trump family (Donald Trump, Baron, Eric, and Don Jr.), serving as a co-founder emeritus alongside his sons. When Trump appointed him Special Envoy to the Middle East in November 2024, he retained a minority ownership stake in the Witkoff Group. His son, Alex, assumed the CEO position while the White House maintained that he was “finalizing” a divestment. Days before Trump’s inauguration, UAE royal Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan’s Aryam Investment purchased a 49% stake in World Liberty Financial for $500 million. The Witkoff family received $31 million from that transaction. The same Sheikh Tahnoon’s MGX fund later used WLF’s USD1 stablecoin to close a $2 billion investment in Binance — a deal that positions World Liberty to earn an estimated $80 million annually in stablecoin revenue, of which the Witkoff family receives 12.5%. World Liberty Financial made Trump a billionaire.

ZACH AND ALEX WITKOFF

Zach Witkoff is a co-founder and one of three managers running World Liberty Financial's daily operations along with co-founders Barron, Eric, and Donald Trump Jr. At Token2049, the world’s largest crupto conference held in Dubai, he announced the $2 billion MGX-Binance stablecoin deal from a stage alongside Eric Trump, as and moderator crypto billionaire Justin Sun, who had recently invested $75 million in WLF. Changpeng Zhao was also present. He had submitted a pardon request to Trump one month prior to the event. He got one in October 2025, after Binance bought $2 billion in USD1. World Liberty Financial has filed for a national banking license, with Zach listed as president and chairman of World Liberty Trust. In 16 months, the venture generated at least $200 million for the Witkoff family.

Subscribe now

Alex Witkoff became CEO of the Witkoff Group after his father’s government appointment. He’s also a co-founder of WLF. In 2024, while his father was actively negotiating with Qatari officials on the Gaza ceasefire, he pitched Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund QIA on a $4 billion real estate credit fund — expected to earn $80 million annually in management fees. Qatar confirmed the pitch and declined. Alex has separately claimed to have secured funding pledges from sovereign wealth funds in Qatar, the UAE, and Kuwait, though no confirmed transactions from those claims are publicly documented. The Witkoff Group has received at least $200 million in Qatar-linked investment through Apollo Trust, a fund partly owned by the Qatari government, entirely separate from the WLF dealings.

Eric and Don Trump Jr.

While their father is in the Oval Office, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. run the Trump Organization — the family’s legacy real estate and licensing business, now expanding rapidly across the Gulf, as co-executive vice presidents. Don Jr. acquires and develops, and Eric operates and manages. They do not hold formal roles in the administration, but their business activities since January 2025 have been extensive and largely conducted in the same countries where their father happens to be negotiating. The relationship with Hussain Sajwani, the Emirati billionaire founder of DAMAC Properties, illustrates how personal these ties run. Sajwani has been a Trump partner since 2013, when DAMAC built the first Trump-branded golf course in Dubai. Eric and Don Jr. attended Sajwani’s daughter’s wedding in 2018. In January 2025, Sajwani stood beside Trump at Mar-a-Lago to announce a $20 billion DAMAC investment in U.S. AI data centers — an announcement that generated over $6 million in fees for the Trump Organization between January 2024 and June 2025. From the stage, Sajwani let it be known that “For the last four years, we’ve been waiting for this moment.”

The Trump Organization has an extensive partnership with luxury real estate developers Dar Global — a subsidiary of Saudi Arabia’s Dar Al Arkan — on a $531 million Trump Tower in Jeddah, two additional Riyadh projects, a luxury golf resort in Qatar built on land owned by the Qatari government, and a $500 million resort in Oman developed alongside Omran, a government-owned Omani group — the same country that hosted the Iran nuclear talks. In May 2025, weeks before their father’s Gulf tour, both brothers were already in the region. Don Jr.’s originally titled talk at the Qatar Economic Forum was called “Monetizing MAGA.” Eric recently announced an 80-story Trump Tower in Dubai. Both brothers are also actively involved in World Liberty Financial’s daily operations.

Drones are a more recent and unsettling thread. Through American Ventures, a Texas-based investment vehicle, Eric and Don Jr. have assembled a drone portfolio Bloomberg values at nearly $750 million — across three companies all pursuing Defense Department contracts under the Pentagon’s Drone Dominance initiative. Eric is a strategic investor in Xtend, an Israeli AI drone company whose systems are being used by the Israeli military in Gaza and Iran. On February 17, 2026 — eleven days before the U.S. and Israel struck Iran — Xtend and JFB Construction Holdings announced a $1.5 billion merger, with Eric named as a strategic investor. The deal was signed while Witkoff and Kushner were still at the negotiating table in Geneva. In early March, as the conflict widened, Xtend announced it had mobilized its global XFAB operator network to support allied defense missions at the request of Israel’s Ministry of Defense.

Don Jr.’s drone interests run through additional channels: an advisory board seat at Unusual Machines, whose largest Pentagon contract came after his appointment, and a major stake in Anduril through his venture firm, 1789 Capital. Both brothers are invested in Powerus, a newly formed manufacturer pursuing production of more than 10,000 drones per month, taken public through a reverse merger with a Florida golf course company — a structure one defense analyst called “essentially a front.” The Pentagon wants 340,000 drones. The Trump family is positioned to supply them.

Larry Ellison, David Ellison & Egon Durban

Larry Ellison co-founded Oracle in 1977 with a CIA contract. One of the richest men in the world, he briefly surpassed Elon Musk on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index in 2025. He currently lives twenty minutes from Mar-a-Lago and is a frequent White House guest. In January 2025, he stood beside Trump to announce Stargate, a $500 billion AI infrastructure initiative for which Oracle is a cornerstone investor. To fast-track the process, Trump declared a “National Energy Emergency,” thereby bypassing the standard 5-10-year federal approval process.

Oracle’s Gulf State exposure is substantial and growing. The company is the lead managing investor and data security overseer of TikTok’s restructured U.S. joint venture — a $14 billion deal in which Abu Dhabi’s MGX holds a 15% stake alongside Oracle’s 15%, structured to keep the transaction out of CFIUS review. Analysts estimated TikTok’s U.S. operations were worth $30–35 billion at the time — meaning the consortium acquired it at roughly half its market value. Oracle is also the backbone of Stargate’s AI data center buildout, which is being funded in part by UAE sovereign capital. Through it all, Ellison has operated with a lower profile than Musk or Zuckerberg, letting the deals speak.

Trump also fast-tracked regulatory approval for David Ellison’s $8 billion acquisition of Paramount Skydance — a deal that required Paramount to settle Trump’s $16 million lawsuit against CBS’s 60 Minutes as a condition of regulatory approval. David then immediately pursued Warner Bros. Discovery, assembling a financing consortium that included $24 billion from the sovereign wealth funds of Saudi Arabia ($12B via PIF), Qatar ($7B via QIA), and Abu Dhabi ($7B via L’imad Holding) — the largest proposed foreign-backed investment in U.S. media history, structured to avoid CFIUS by stripping the Gulf funds of governance rights and board representation. The Warner Bros. board ultimately chose Netflix’s competing bid, which carried no foreign financing. Paramount then launched a hostile takeover, with Larry Ellison personally guaranteeing $40.4 billion. It worked. Paramount acquired Warner Bros. Discovery in February 2026 for $31 per share — $111 billion total.

One family, backed by Gulf sovereign capital, is now set to control CBS, CNN, HBO, Warner Bros. Studios, Paramount+, and TikTok. CNN has not yet adjusted its editorial direction. Time will tell whether ownership is destiny.

Silver Lake’s Egon Durban is the thread that stitches this group together. The connection between Silver Lake and the Ellison family goes back to the firm’s founding. Silver Lake was co-founded in 1999 by David Roux, the former Executive Vice President of Oracle, who described Larry Ellison as a defining influence. Ellison was one of Silver Lake’s first and most significant investors, lending his name to the firm’s fundraising when it launched its debut fund.

Egon Durban sits on the board of TikTok’s U.S. joint venture alongside Oracle, holds a 15% stake in the new entity, and has been described as having close business ties to Jared Kushner. Silver Lake was also a co-investor alongside Saudi Arabia’s PIF in the $55 billion EA buyout — the largest leveraged buyout on record — which Kushner personally brokered. In deal after deal — TikTok, EA, Paramount — the Ellison family and Silver Lake are together, often alongside the same Gulf sovereign wealth fund.

Subscribe now

Gulf State Royals and Leaders

These are the counterparties. The sovereigns and their wealth funds whose names appear throughout every deal on this map.

Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) — Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. He’s the architect of Vision 2030, Saudi Arabia’s plan to diversify its economy beyond oil. The sovereign wealth fund he controls, the Public Investment Fund (PIA), has pledged $600 billion in U.S. investments over four years. That fund is the lead buyer in the EA deal, a primary backer of the Paramount/Warner bid, and the source of the $2 billion that seeded Kushner’s Affinity Partners six months after he left the White House. The CIA concluded MBS ordered the killing of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018. Trump dismissed his own government’s conclusion.

Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan — UAE is the UAE’s national security advisor, manager of its largest sovereign wealth fund, and the man behind Aryam Investment — the entity that purchased a 49% stake in World Liberty Financial for $500 million days before Trump’s inauguration. His state-backed MGX fund used WLF’s USD1 stablecoin to close a $2 billion investment in Binance, holds a 15% stake in TikTok’s U.S. joint venture, and has committed $1.4 trillion in U.S. investments over the next decade. Shortly after the Aryam deal, the Trump administration approved the sale of hundreds of thousands of advanced Nvidia AI chips to the UAE — chips that had previously been restricted on national security grounds.

The Emir of Qatar — Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani leads the country that served as the primary mediator in the Gaza ceasefire negotiations, hosted multiple rounds of Iran nuclear talks, purchased the Park Lane Hotel from Witkoff for $623 million, invested $200 million in Witkoff Group real estate through Apollo Trust, committed $1.2 trillion in U.S. investments, and gifted Trump a $400 million Boeing 747-8. Qatar’s Investment Authority is also a financing partner in the Paramount/Warner bid. The Emir of Qatar attended Alex Witkoff’s wedding in Palm Beach in early 2024. Later that year, he sat with Steve Witkoff in Doha as ceasefire negotiations with Hamas continued.

Sultan Haitham bin Tariq — Oman is the absolute monarch of a country that has quietly become indispensable to American diplomacy in the region. Oman hosted every round of the Iran nuclear talks, brokered a 2025 Houthi ceasefire, and maintains open channels with both Saudi Arabia and Iran simultaneously. The Trump Organization has made a 30-year deal with Sultan Tariq to design, build, and manage a $500 million luxury resort on government-owned land, with Oman taking a cut of the profits. The NYT’s Eric Lipton, who has investigated Trump family international deals since 2016, said he had never seen a conflict of interest potential like the Oman deal. Oman has also signed agreements to develop the Duqm port into a U.S. Navy hub and to bypass the Strait of Hormuz — the same waterway Iran has currently shut down.

The Intermediaries

These are the deal mechanics — the developers, asset managers, and energy traders through whom Gulf capital and Trump family interests move into physical form.

Ziad El Chaar’s — Dar Global is the most consequential. A subsidiary of Saudi Arabia’s Dar Al Arkan, it is the primary vehicle through which the Trump Organization is expanding across the Gulf — licensing the Trump name, collecting management fees, and developing luxury real estate in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Oman without the Trump family investing a dollar of their own money. Six active projects at last count, with more announced. El Chaar has said publicly that there is more to come.

El Chaar told Reuters in January 2026 that the Trump-Dar Global projects together are valued at around $10 billion. The Trump Organization collects licensing and management fees on all of it without investing a dollar of its own capital. Dar Global's purchase of Trump name rights alone generated $21.9 million for the Trump family in 2024.

Hussain Sajwani’s — DAMAC is where the Trump-Gulf relationship began. The first Trump-branded golf course in the Middle East opened in Dubai under DAMAC in 2017. Eric and Don Jr. attended Sajwani’s daughter’s wedding. He announced a $20 billion U.S. data center investment from Mar-a-Lago in January 2025, standing beside Trump onstage. The Trump Organization has earned more than $6 million in DAMAC-related fees since 2024 alone.

Connor Teskey’s — Brookfield is the quietest entry but carries the most historically loaded thread. In 2018, Brookfield paid $1.28 billion for a 99-year lease on 666 Fifth Avenue — rescuing Kushner Companies from debt that was coming due. Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund was Brookfield’s second-largest investor at the time. Brookfield told Congress Qatari representatives had no involvement in the deal. Congress investigated. The Saudi blockade of Qatar was lifted shortly after the transaction closed. Brookfield has stonewalled Senate inquiries ever since.

Ruya Bayegan’s BGN International rounds out this group and connects directly to the Boulos section below — a Libyan oil trader whose yacht hosted Tiffany Trump and Michael Boulos while Massad Boulos was negotiating Libyan energy deals in Tripoli.

Share

Massad and Michael Boulos

Libya is not the Middle East. It’s North Africa, and this inclusion is a footnote to the main story rather than a central thread. But the structural parallel is worth noting: Massad Boulos is Trump’s Senior Advisor for Arab Affairs and Africa, and his son Michael is married to Tiffany Trump — the same architecture as Kushner. A family member becomes an envoy, the envoy conducts diplomacy, and diplomacy overlaps with business.

In July 2025, while Massad was in Tripoli announcing deals to increase Libyan oil and gas production, Tiffany Trump and Michael Boulos were cruising the French Riviera aboard the Phoenix 2 — a 300-foot superyacht owned by Turkish oil traders Ercument and Ruya Bayegan. Ruya Bayegan’s energy company, BGN International, stands to directly benefit from any increase in Libyan oil production. The family did not pay for the trip. Libyan officials have taken to calling Massad “Abu Tiffany” — Tiffany’s father. The Trump administration has separately discussed unlocking tens of billions in Libyan assets frozen since the 2011 NATO-backed uprising and channeling a portion back to U.S. companies — an arrangement that could violate UN Security Council sanctions.

The morning after Ayatollah Khamenei was killed, thousands of mourners gathered in Tehran’s Enghelab Square and towns throughout Iran, Iraq, India, and Lebanon. In Pakistan, protesters stormed the U.S. consulate, leaving at least 21 people dead. There’s a peculiar sadness in public tears for a theocratic tyrant. A conditioned lamentation on which decades of survival rely. It’s the role-playing that ratifies the cyclical dependency of subjects to the brutality of their strongman.

Others welcomed Khamenei’s final breath. I am one of them. He was the kind of man who gives the word “evil” its weight. It’s moving to watch Iranians dancing in the streets, uncertain of the future, hoping it’s better than the past. I’m inspired by the young women, taking a moment to let their hair down, knowing thousands have been killed for subtle acts of defiance. A couple of months ago, the Iranian teens on the sidewalk, playing a cover of the White Stripes’ “Seven Nation Army,” reminded me of my own rebellious youth, though the stakes for us were nowhere near as high. While much is uncertain, it’s clear there is more than one Iran.

My thoughts are also divided. Early into the Syrian War, I assisted a U.S.-Syrian advocacy group in verifying photos from the Homs countryside, where Hezbollah death squads — funded and armed by Iran — massacred villagers of all ages and left piles of bodies to rot under the summer sun. Similar campaigns were carried out in rural towns such as Nubl and al-Zahraa, the Qalamoun Mountains, and the countryside of Daraa and Quneitra. This tipped the war in Assad’s favor. When the Free Syrian Army began to tip the balance back, Iran supplied the Assad regime with ground troops. Iran’s ally, Putin, provided the air force.

Subscribe now

Khamenei’s record of terrorism and war crimes is extensive. The regime’s repression is renowned. Over 7,000 protesters have been killed since December, with independent reporting suggesting the toll may be exponentially higher. Iran executed over 2,000 people in 2025 — the highest count since the late 1980s.

The Iranian regime is at its weakest point since its inception. Pushed out of Syria, and with Hamas and Hezbollah significantly reduced, their grip on the region is arthritic. Tehran’s sporadic retaliation against the Gulf States has only united them against Iran. Iran is a large country with a population of 92 million. Its regime is a vast bureaucracy with a powerful military and state police apparatus for which the 86-year-old cleric, in ill health, had become a mere figurehead.

Taking out the top brass doesn’t guarantee regime change. The I.R.G.C. is close to appointing another to succeed Khamenei's black amama, with his son Mojtaba Khamenei as a main contender. Many civilians will lose their lives in this conflict. Without foreign military intervention, Iranian suffering will likely persist. However, war remains unpredictable. There’s no guarantee of a positive result even with the sharpest minds in charge, and they’ve been replaced by TV personalities.

As easy as it is to assert an argument for regime change, the administration has failed to. Trump’s aptly named operation, “Epic Fury,” was launched without Congressional authorization, a UN mandate, or a plan for what follows. It was ordered by a president who governs by executive decree, rolls out the red carpet for Putin, and expresses open admiration for the kind of strongmen Iranians have spent decades trying to escape. In urging Iranians to rise up, he’s given them a spark with no oxygen. That Trump is the instrument of their possible liberation is one of this moment’s less subtle ironies. By most legal definitions, the man who killed a war criminal is one himself.

A week before the U.S. and Israel embarked on a war against a theocratic regime, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth claimed we’re part of one. At the National Religious Broadcasters convention in Nashville, he stood before thousands of Christian leaders and media outlets and declared that protecting America’s religion from godless ideologies was not political; it was biblical. The U.S. is a Christian nation.

On Tucker Carlson’s show, Mike Huckabee, U.S. Ambassador to Israel, said Israel has a biblical right to the land stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates. They have a right to “take it all.” This echoed his earlier statements, implying Trump had biblical authority to nuke Iran. Khamenei spent his career making similar claims under divine authority.

As the administration spins the wheel of possible justifications for U.S. intervention, in the first 48 hours of the assault, the watchdog group Military Religious Freedom Foundation received over 110 reports from U.S. military personnel stationed in the Middle East that leadership is calling this a holy war. One officer reported their commander had been “urged to tell our troops that this was ‘all part of God’s divine plan’ and he specifically referenced numerous citations out of the Book of Revelation referring to Armageddon and the imminent return of Jesus Christ.”

Years ago, I accompanied a group of U.S. Syrians to meet with Congressman Alan Lowenthal, then a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The discussion covered a wide range of issues affecting the Syrian diaspora, American Muslims, and U.S. policy on Syria. A couple of attendees had lost family in the chemical weapons attacks in which the Obama Red Line was crossed. They were disheartened that Congress voted against taking action. That frustration grew over the years with countless meetings and demonstrations where they were told help was on its way, only to find them as effective as thoughts and prayers.

When we left, I was in the elevator with a Syrian dentist who became a U.S. citizen shortly after the Arab Spring. As we descended to the parking garage, he began to shake. I asked if he was alright, and tears welled up. In the confines of a windowless box, he told me he’s never shared his political opinions with anyone outside his closest friends and family, let alone with a government official. He knows this is America, and he has freedom of speech. It’s why he came here. But he couldn’t escape the feeling that if what he said in that office was viewed as disagreeing with the government, he and his family could pay in blood for what he had just done.

Share

Autocracy is abusive. The PTSD lingers. Facing it makes democracy a courageous act. It’s inspiring to witness. Though when Syrian Americans I stood with advocating for democracy on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial used their vote to elect Trump in 2024, I understood that survival doesn’t mean escape. From the assassination of Qassem Soleimani to supporting Ahmed al-Sharaa’s new Syrian government, they’ve come to view Trump as a man of action in the Middle East, while Democrats sit on their soft hands.

Trump’s raid in Venezuela and now Operation Epic Fury only solidified that. They know it’s illegal; they don’t care. America has a militarized police force patrolling the streets, free to racially profile or kill without due process. But troubles at home have yet to rise to the frequency they’ve seen elsewhere. I would be remiss to equate the Arab and Persian experience, and would be rightly and quickly corrected by both diasporas. Though there’s a cross-section who share a growing admiration for the Trump regime. Their life in Trump’s America is significantly better than it would be under Assad or Khamenei. When the slow process of democracy appears to suppress action rather than be a means of it, some will vote to make the enemy of their enemy their strongman.

Authoritarian leaders have long used foreign wars to suppress the vote and consolidate power at home. They frame it as protecting voters from fraud, foreign intervention, and terrorism. Considering the response to ICE, I’m hopeful Americans will stand up to such overreach. Though there will be scapegoats greasing the administration’s gears before votes are cast.

The war in Iraq spread a fear of Muslims throughout America that Trump leveraged in his 1st term to court his base with the Muslim ban. In his second term, he’s empowering Christian nationalists and their message of moral superiority in the lead-up to a new Middle East war. Middle Eastern Americans and Muslims cheering Epic Fury today should not forget how the autocratic pendulum swings.

Trump courted Latino voters in 2024, which helped him win the election. He then sent ICE into their neighborhoods. The longer this war goes on, the more likely Middle Eastern Americans find they’re not outside that pattern. They make up roughly 1% percent of the U.S. electorate, a third of whom voted for Trump in 2024 — not enough to compensate for his declining approval. If a pivot to frame them as a terrorist threat could land Trump more votes, or is useful in suppressing votes, he may do so. Cheers and tears won’t help. A strongman who fights your enemy has a history of deciding, when it’s useful, that you are one too. Like America, the kids rocking in the streets of Tehran deserve better than that calculation.

If in the early 2000s you found yourself in Arcata, California, when collegiate dreads bounced along to hacky sacks and drum circles made every hangover feel like your first—I may have poured your coffee at Sacred Grounds.

Our custom La San Marco espresso machine was built to the mid-1940s spring-lever specs that popularized espresso across Europe after Mussolini’s fall. Getting the most out of this Italian beauty required a skilled barista, preferably one who had not spent the previous night indulging in college town shenanigans. This was never a guarantee. The grind had to be precisely measured, leveled, tamped, and loaded. No circuit boards, buttons, or digital displays. To pull a shot, baristas muscled down a nearly foot-long lever and counted the seconds it took to rise, ensuring a creamy, golden crema. If done correctly, the finest, award-winning espresso on the Lost Coast was served. If not, uneven pressure could cause the portafilter to fly across the room as the machine spat molten espresso like a demonic llama.

The cafe’s menu was traditional. A macchiato was exactly that—a shot of espresso topped with a “mark” of foam. The Italian word contains the literal meaning. For years, people loved our macchiatos. Then, nearly overnight, it changed: ”This is NOT a macchiato!” “Why is it so small?” “Do you even know what a macchiato is?!” Customers were peeved. The staff was bewildered. Eventually, we figured it out — a Starbucks had opened nearby.

During the 1990s, Starbucks spread like 16th-century Catholicism. Outside major cities, it was the only espresso in town. In some areas, it still is. During Starbucks’ rapid expansion, the Caramel Macchiato was its most popular drink. Created in fall 1996 to celebrate Starbucks’ 25th anniversary, the Caramel Macchiato is a gussied-up vanilla latte made of espresso, steamed milk, vanilla syrup, whipped cream, and a caramel drizzle. It comes in sizes up to a 20-ounce “venti.” The sweet drink was a hit for the Seattle-based chain. So much so that, through sheer marketing power, it stripped the word macchiato of its meaning and replaced it with a brand identity.

Like the Big Mac and Whopper, the Caramel Macchiato became a household name. Some independent cafes resisted. To stay in business, many relented and adopted the new terminology. Eventually, those who knew what a macchiato was became the ones who didn’t know what they were talking about.

Words change meaning. Semantics drift, slang comes and goes, and misunderstandings set new linguistic rules. Social media, memes, and hashtags quickly spread new language from online to off. Sometimes, meaning changes naturally; other times, it’s deliberately modified by marketing and public figures. Words can get laundered through propaganda and punditry. They can go viral only to be weaponized or quickly disregarded.

In some cases, who is saying what and to whom can be more meaningful than the words themselves. Calling a presidential candidate “fascist” or “Hitler” may be hyperbolic and lead to losing your job, or it may be so innocuous that you’re chosen to be the candidate’s running mate. A paradox of fascism is that the more prevalent it is in a society, the less “fascism” means.

I’m not a linguist. If you are, aspects of this series may be familiar. But I hope it’s helpful for those attempting to articulate the political challenges of our time or simply to communicate clearly. In the decade after World War II, authors such as Hannah Arendt, Victor Klemperer, George Orwell, Kenneth Burke, Irving Howe, and James Baldwin, among many others, examined the role of language in politics. This isn’t new territory. Though the internet and social media have ushered in new dynamics and challenges. At the very least, there are patterns to be recognized. Finding the right language for the moment can help us get through it.

Subscribe now

SEMANTIC DRIFT

Trends come and go. Look at the width of your pants, lapels, and neckties. If they aren’t sufficiently wide or narrow, the zeitgeist will sideline you. Words also come in and out of fashion. Your great-grandmother didn’t use “gay” the same way you do, nor did your uncle in the 90s. Saying, “My moots are blowing up my phone with that viral TikTok — it’s fire!” would surely have been confusing a couple of decades ago and may still be for elders today. How many men over 35 know what “Brat” Girl Summer is?

The evolution of a word’s meaning over time is called semantic drift. It occurs in several ways:

If one isn’t aware of a word’s latest use, they’re ripe to misunderstand it. Clarity is lost. Abbott and Costello hilarity ensues. And if a reference is outdated…

SLANG

From cool to salty, popular slang in America often originates in African American Vernacular English (AAVE). The LGBTQ+ community is also a key source. Bear, Otter, and Silver Fox aren’t merely forest creatures. Ball culture, through Paris Is Burning and later RuPaul’s Drag Race, introduced terms now commonly used by Gen Z: slay (to perform well), read (to deliver sharp, witty, and often playful insults), and tea (gossip), among others. In-group slang fosters strong bonds and a shared identity. Some slang enters the broader vernacular, usually through the arts and media. This can be positive, encouraging acceptance and better understanding of minority communities. But increased visibility also increases the risk of slang becoming a slur.

Share

In 1938, Lead Belly recorded his song “Scottsboro Boys.” It tells the true story of nine black teens falsely accused in 1931 of raping two white women in Alabama. Narrowly escaping lynching, and despite flimsy evidence and later retractions by the accusers, all but the youngest, 14-year-old Roy Wright, were sentenced to death. After seven years of appeals and court battles, including a Supreme Court hearing, the four youngest had their charges dropped. The five oldest received sentences ranging from 75 years to life. Despite exoneration, they served sentences ranging from six to nineteen years. At the end of the recording, Lead Belly stops singing and speaks:

“I advise everybody, be a little careful when they go along through there [Alabama] — best stay woke, keep their eyes open.”

For Lead Belly, “stay woke” was a literal instruction for survival in the Jim Crow South.

In 1962, novelist William Melvin Kelly wrote an essay for the New York Times about the appropriation of black jazz slang called “If You’re Woke You Dig It,” writing:

“A few Negroes guard the idiom (AAVE) so fervently they will consciously invent a new term as soon as they hear the existing one coming from a white’s lips.”

“The Negro knows that part of his code is being broken. When, once again, I make a run, I will probably find that ‘to vine’ no longer means to ‘dress magnificently’, but rather to dress badly, and ‘the man’ is no longer the ‘po- lice.’ It will not be long before they are blowing out of an altogether different linguistic bag.”

In 1971, “stay woke” took on a more political meaning in Barry Beckham’s play Garvey Lives! about Marcus Garvey. (who in 1923 wrote, “Wake up, Ethiopia! Wake up, Africa!”). With the line:

”I been sleeping all my life. And now that Mr. Garvey done woke me up, I’m gon’ stay woke. And I’m gon help him wake up other black folk.”

Erykah Badu may have sparked the latest use of the term “woke” with her song “Master Teacher” (I Stay Woke). In 2012, after the murder of Trayvon Martin, #staywoke began appearing on Black Twitter. When the Russian feminist rock group Pussy Riot was imprisoned for “hooliganism motivated by religious hatred” for their song “Punk Prayer,” which criticized Putin and the Orthodox Church’s support of him, Badu posted in solidarity using the hashtag #staywoke.

New slang spreads quickly, especially online. To bypass algorithmic censorship, it can take the form of “algospeak.” “Gun” becomes “pew pew,” “sex” becomes “segg.” In such cases, it’s a form of resistance. At other times, when a trending term goes viral, people leverage algorithms to amplify their reach, driving the term’s adoption online and offline. Influencer Adam Aleksic, aka @etymologynerd, argues in his NY Times bestselling book Algospeak that social media not only speeds up the creation of new language but also appears to be the primary source of new words entering our daily speech.

Subscribe now

During the Ferguson protests in 2014, Black Lives Matter used #staywoke to promote awareness regarding police violence against their community. In 2016, social media feeds shifted from a chronological to an algorithmic order. Around the same time, a wave of terminology emerged from the political left: gaslighting, Latinx, cisgender (Cis), trigger warning, cultural appropriation, they/them pronouns, etc. BLM allies outside of the black community began applying woke to all forms of social inequality. #staywoke became #woke and #wokeAF. “Woke” became synonymous with progressive politics and social justice. Interestingly, this broader use of woke was embraced by many on the left who were the first to call out others for “cultural appropriation” and saying “All Lives Matter.”

In the 20th century, the dominant marketing idea was that sex sells. By the 21st century, fear, anger, and tribalism had proven more effective at grabbing people’s attention. As a segment of the left began policing language, often illiberally, the right aimed to “own the libs” with its own rage-driven vocabulary: snowflake, social justice warriors, red-pilled, virtue signaling, cancel culture, based, NPC, and Woke. Anything from the left that the right didn’t like, whether it was a fair critique or not, was labeled “woke.” While perhaps not as broadly damning, people on the left began pointing out the hypocrisy when those on the right act like “snowflakes” or engage in cancel culture. Eventually, the left and the right had their own fighting words. And if one is seeking engagement online, the algorithms made it clear they’d better choose theirs.

As linguist John McWhorter wrote in the New York Times, “Woke” wasn’t a new idea. The word replaced “politically correct.” Eventually, politically correct became the pejorative “PC,” and it fell out of fashion. "Woke" carries a negative connotation today. When people on the left use it to refer to themselves, it’s often a reclamation. I can’t predict if “woke” will ever lose the pejorative connotation. It seems unlikely. This cycle is what linguist Steven Pinker calls the Euphemism Treadmill. The ideas don’t go away. But their branding falls out of favor until it reemerges, updated to fit the times.

Politicians perpetually burn calories on the euphemism treadmill, painting language with their partisan brushes: The Estate Tax becomes the Death Tax; Homeless becomes houseless; undocumented rather than illegal alien; torture turns into enhanced interrogation; killing is officer-involved shooting, friendly fire, or collateral damage; prisons are camps or detention centers; displacement is resettlement; lies become alternative facts.

It’s one thing when semantic drift ruins your coffee order; it’s another when it undermines reality and divides us. In part 2, we’ll look at academic and political terminology to see how complex and technical words are created, used to persuade, and diluted. What happens to democracy when we run out of shared words? Can our understanding of the process help us regain our shared language and communicate the struggles of our time?

The concern that what we’re witnessing may also be a spark that could ignite something worse remains very real. In these moments, hope can feel reduced to a wish that habituation isn’t inevitable. Who will we be when normalization itself becomes normalized? Like many things we think will never happen to us, it does. Conversations about Alex Pretti are replacing those about Renee Good. Not because she matters less, but because the news cycle rolls on and carries our attention with it. The Columbine shooting dominated cable news for nearly two weeks. Over the years, as mass shootings became more prevalent, coverage shrank to a day, then hours. Unless it’s a slow news day, they’re just a blip now. Likewise, in the last year alone, we’ve gone from masked, militarized agents in the streets assaulting and detaining without due process, to citizens being gunned down with executive-sanctioned impunity.

Think back a couple of years. Had a masked officer pummeled a woman and then pepper-sprayed her and an observer trying to help her up, it would have been an outrage. Don’t Tread On Me flags would’ve vigorously waved. Headlines would have been made. Yet how many people got that treatment just today? The bar of newsworthiness is being raised from assault to execution. Let’s not forget that both Good and Pretti were shot less than a mile from where George Floyd was killed. It’s understandable for Black Americans to follow their sympathies regarding recent events with a gaze that says, “Welcome to the club.”

Subscribe now

Scroll by scroll, we’re staring into our hands and watching America fragment as it stumbles down a hall of mirrors and smoke. The swift, coordinated lies and cover-up from this administration are making even a diehard Orwell fan like me, who is doing his damndest not to conjure him, call them Orwellian. In the last year, we’ve seen the almighty dollar granted even greater weight to tip the scales of justice. The federal government’s response to what’s happened in Minnesota is an attempt to further partition a dual state. Are you living in the normative state, operating by rules and regulations, or are you in the prerogative state, where laws are arbitrary, and violence goes unchecked by law? Every citizen old enough to vote has lived under presidents from both parties. If we’re in a democracy where either party can hold power, no one should want the rule of law diminished to the executive’s preference of red or blue. But clearly some do. They’re telling us what they think about law and democracy. We should listen.

The same people who long claimed gun ownership is not the problem are now saying owning a gun was the problem for Pretti. The administration spent the entire weekend spreading the false notion that the Second Amendment doesn’t apply to people at protests, even if the gun is holstered and the owner has a permit to carry. FBI Director Kash Patel stared blankly into a TV camera and doubled down on Kristi Noem’s position that “Nobody who wants to be peaceful shows up to a protest with a firearm...” Considering the abundance of photos of Trump supporters carrying guns at protests, the hero worship for Kyle Rittenhouse by the Trump family and right-wing media, and the Presidential pardon of John Banuelos (among others), who fired his gun into the air during the January 6th assault on the Capitol, does that mean none of them were peaceful? Do they deserve to be killed? What about the teachers Trump said should arm themselves in schools? Is that a good place for guns? Guns have been a favorite right-wing prop in everything from political ads to Christmas cards. Is pointing out the hypocrisy just air guitar stripped of all its pageantry and joy?

All officers and employees of Homeland Security (DHS), including CBP and ICE agents, are required to sign the Standard Form 61 (SF-61), taking an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. Their authority as law enforcement is based on the American people’s trust that they take that oath seriously. When Trump, Vance, Miller, Noem, and Bovino all publicly state that ICE and CBP officers have immunity to violate citizens’ 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendment rights, they’re not just saying SF-61 no longer matters; they’re saying the Constitution no longer matters. If that’s the case, what does “law” even mean? Can we reasonably call them “law enforcement?” Perhaps loyalty enforcement is more fitting.

On August 10, 2011, a rookie scuba diver dove into Taman Bay near the ruins of the ancient Greek city Phangoria. Within minutes, at a depth of just 2 meters, he discovered two 6th-century urns. Once out of the water, he posed for a photo op proudly holding his remarkably silt-free, bisque-smooth amphorae. The diver was then Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

Bloggers and independent media mocked it for what it was—a farcical stunt to promote a presidential run. Phangoria was the largest Greek colony in the Black Sea region. Archaeologists surveying the area for years only found shards. Putin denied it was staged, claiming the urns had been waiting for him since the 6th century, as if predestined. State media used the discovery to depict Putin as a brave explorer capable of unearthing greatness in Russia. Two months later, Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov admitted it was a setup. It was obvious—how could anyone believe otherwise? It was done for a “good cause,” to promote Russian archaeology, tourism, and history. Peskov portrayed critics as cynical and unpatriotic, scolding them for obsessing over “insignificant details.”

Subscribe now

If there’s a kernel of truth in every lie, as the idiom goes, what do you call it when there is not? Dostoevsky called it Vranyo. The goal is not to deceive. Vranyo is intentionally and blatantly untrue. The liar knows he’s lying, and he knows the audience knows he knows.

This is nothing new for Russians. Putin simply updated it for the 21st century. When troops lacking insignia invaded Crimea, Putin denied they were Russians despite the fact that they were speaking Russian, driving Russian vehicles, and carrying Russian-made munitions. For a decade, Putin and his officials, including Sergei Lavrov, denied any connection to the Wagner Group. After all, private military companies are illegal under Russian law. Peskov said it was total “madness” to even speculate Russia would invade Ukraine. On all accounts, Putin and his officials eventually, and matter-of-factly, claimed responsibility.

Well before his first term, Trump embraced vranyo. It started with birtherism. Once elected, the blatant falsehoods snowballed. There was Sean Spicer debasing himself over the inauguration crowd size, Sharpiegate, Trump’s “perfect call” shaking down President Zelensky, the 2020 claim Covid was “going to disappear”, and the “Big Lie” that he won the 2020 election, just to name a few.

In Trump’s second term, he was “elected by a landslide.” As with Putin, the vranyo began with petty ego-inflating fictions. With a cabinet of loyalists, it was weaponized as “justification” for policy, such as Trump’s tariffs. It spread over the body politic like gangrene. Soon, funds appropriated by Congress were denied by the executive in clear violation of the Constitution. ICE became a masked secret police, given the power of warrantless search and seizure. The vranyo expanded militarization. Lies about crime rates and protests, contradicting mountains of photos and videos, were used to deploy the National Guard and Marines to cities, against mayors’ and governors’ wishes.

With the recent public murder of Renee Nicole Good by ICE, the administration told Americans not to believe what they can see with their own eyes in multiple videos from multiple angles.

Ashli Babbitt, who violently stormed the Capitol in an attempt to overturn a free and fair election, was given full military funeral honors. Good, unarmed, and sitting in her car, was gunned down and called a “fucking bitch,” by an ICE officer, outrightly ignoring protocol. Less than 2 hours after the shooting, Kristi Noem began the spin. The administration framed her as a “domestic terrorist.” J.D. Vance took to defaming Good, something he told the public to report to people’s employers if they did so about Charlie Kirk after he was murdered. The subtext is that there are different laws for those who accept the administration’s “truths” and those who do not. If you are not one of them, they can kill all of yours.

The absurdity has entered the world stage. We were told the U.S. was bombing Venezuelan boats in the Caribbean because of drug trafficking to the U.S., despite no evidence. If there were drugs on the vessels, it would most likely be cocaine headed for Europe. When the strikes were accused of being illegal in accordance with both domestic and international law, Trump invoked the laws of war. If it had been an act of “law enforcement,” then killing 123 people without due process might be illegal. But since it involved war and national security, he claimed it fell under executive authority. When the U.S. led an assault on Venezuela and captured Maduro without congressional approval, let alone consulting them, he claimed it was an act of law enforcement. It didn’t matter that these claims were incompatible.

Once Maduro was removed, he stated that the real goal of U.S. intervention was the imperialist seizure of oil. Although Venezuela has the largest oil reserves in the world, its oil is heavy crude, requiring extensive refining. Tens of billions would need to be invested in new infrastructure, and it could take at least a decade of stability before seeing any return on investment (ROI). It’s possible the administration is making claims about oil, just as it forced Ukraine to make a “deal” for rare earth minerals (which would also require a stable nation and years before any ROI), simply to create an illusion of economic gain where there is none.

Trump has claimed we need to take control of Greenland for national security. While other administrations have expressed concern about the potential threat posed by Chinese and Russian ships transiting through the region, Greenland is a Danish territory and a member of NATO. It hosts a U.S. base. It’s already a secured area without the U.S. “owning” the state of Greenland. If the U.S. wanted to pursue other security options to keep Russia and China from “Taking Greenland,” it could. The real threat may be the opposite. If Greenland were a post-NATO U.S. province, who would stop the Trump administration, which has sided with Russia even over its own intelligence agencies, from allowing Russian ships to pass through?

Examples of U.S. Vranyo are plentiful. But what’s the advantage for leaders to construct a culture of verifiably false narratives? Some people will believe the lies. But that’s a bonus, not the intention. Officials taking to the podium and parroting obvious falsehoods demonstrate loyalty. Without it, the regime would fall. People with a greater loyalty to verifiable truth out themselves as the enemy. That polarization is fuel for autocracy. At this stage, they want the opposition to loudly voice how mind-boggling and outrageous their claims are. It’s a necessary first step towards silencing them. The algorithms rejoice in the fear and anxiety. Tech billionaires and crypto bros rake in the Benjamins. The White House ballroom gets funded. Loyal citizens get further radicalized. In a world where facts are reduced to picking a side, the more aggressive the oppositional response, the easier it’s dismissed by loyalists as emotional, irrational, unpatriotic, and deranged. That’s ambrosia for trolls. The lies waste journalists’ time and energy by forcing them to address the nonsense. The more time journalists spend debunking a firehose of falsehoods, the more newsworthy topics go unmentioned. In response to the accusation of lying, the administration engages in “I know you are, but what am I?” antics, making claims that the critics are just the “fake news,” suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome. The truth gets fuzzier and less sticky under the parade of gaslighting, even for those striving to reveal it.

Subscribe now

Then there are those who know the lies aren’t true, but are willing to play along. They’re the model citizens of illiberal states. In the USSR, Khrushchev would announce to the world that they had surpassed U.S. agriculture production by wildly absurd numbers. Taking his orders, central planners would demand that farmers meet the impossible production targets. While standing in food lines, malnourished farmers would lie to reporters with tales of their abundant crops. Leadership would claim victory. Rinse, wash, repeat. This very cycle played out in Maoist China, leading to the Great Famine, in which estimates of 30 million Chinese starved to death. Authoritarians know they have a lock on the population when they play along.

Most significantly, Vranyo gives the administration an illusion of everything Stephen Miller champions: strength, force, & power. Bending the perception of reality can make weak, unpopular leaders appear stronger than they are. It’s a show of power. The administration may even appear to have the upper hand, at least in our mind’s eye. That’s far more real to the vrun-in-chief than what your eyes see.

Friday, Jan. 2, a fire broke out at the 800 block of 10th Street in Arcata, California. Seven local businesses, apartments, and an art studio were destroyed. Half of the block is now gone. One of the businesses was Northtown Books, a sixty-year staple of the community. I worked there for eight years. It greatly shaped who I am.

There’s a dark symbolism in the burning of books. The local media outlet, Lost Coast Outpost, asked me to write something on it. You can read it here:

NORTHTOWN BOOKS WAS THE BEST EDUCATION THIS HUMBOLDT KID COULD HAVE HOPED FOR

Zaatari Camp, Jordan, July 2013 — A child placed a piece of bread in my hand while barrel bombs and artillery fire echoed in the distance. His generosity was louder than war. We smiled and forgot the situation until we couldn’t. Even in the bleakest of times, people share meals.

Burbank, August 2025 — at the Talleyrand, seven of us squeeze into a banquette booth and slather our bread with butter. This fine establishment was beloved by the most golden of Californians, Huell Howser. The menu boasts a thumbs-up icon next to the hot turkey sandwich; make no mistake, it’s dripping with a glorious yellow gravy and Huell-approved. It’s Thanksgiving every day here. There’s also a full bar. The waitress, armed with a sass only found in those who got into the biz when regulars could enjoy a smoke with their omelet, informs us that the bartender pours generously. With a wink, she tells me she might sip our drinks before bringing them to the table to prevent spills.

Such uniquely American charm should not be wasted on unappreciative souls. Thankfully, my present company values brows low and high. It’s one of many things I love about them. They’re also funny as hell. The high school art teacher at the table scrolls through his phone, pulling up pictures his students drew of him while quoting their unfiltered trash talk: “Mr. Robbins, you don’t work out, do you?” We laugh. We toast the recently engaged couple, who I was confident would take the plunge. Just as we silenced our phones, we try to tune out the relentless chatter drifting through the dining room. “Trump,” this. “Trump,” that. For a brief moment, an unspoken glance circles the table as we contemplate the political leanings of the other diners. It’s good for all Americans to bump elbows where meals are shared. But is everyone safe?

It’s been two weeks since we’ve seen the street vendor who, for years, sold hot dogs and agua fresca on a corner not far from here. We heard he was thrown to the ground, brutalized, and detained by ICE agents. They hid behind masks, dehumanizing themselves so they could dehumanize others. We don’t know his citizenship status. It doesn’t matter. Did he get due process? It’s unlikely. For months, people across the country have been denied their rights regardless of citizenship status. Was he deported to a foreign prison? Is his family okay?

A blitzkrieg of headlines trudges through my skull. But soon, the world beyond our table falls under it like a napkin from a lap. I return to tales of weddings and the couple’s plans. We share what we love about our partners. The married couples recount what’s kept their relationships alive through good times and bad. This isn’t social media. We’re free to be vulnerable. We smile. We laugh. We raise our glass to love. Hugs are exchanged, a group photo is taken, and goodbyes are said.

Not long into the drive home, the headlines push on to the front of my mind. A tinge of guilt and helplessness surfaces as they contrast against a beautiful night of normalcy. It’s integral for moments of joy to leave unpleasant facts in the shadows of our shared humanity. It’s that very humanity which brings me back to face them.

Subscribe now

I’m trying to be clear-headed about this American moment. Hyperbole is for clickbait and algorithms. Before Trump’s first term, I was a guest lecturer on Middle Eastern autocracy and the Syrian Civil War. I was also helping a family who had escaped the fascism of Syrian dictator Bashar Assad open a restaurant. One of the cooks had been brutally tortured as a teen, forced to eat human feces mixed with smashed glass. He was fortunate to be released from the notorious Sednaya prison and escape to America. However, his survival required the removal of half his stomach.

Assad, with the aid of Russia and Iran, leveled his country. Between 700,000 and 1 million people were killed. Roughly 14 million Syrians were displaced. For much of the 2010s, I interviewed survivors of war, torture, and the trauma of living in a country where, if a neighbor wants to get rid of you, all they have to do is tell the Mukhabarat (secret police) you said the leader’s name in a negative tone. That kind of fear doesn’t just change what you say or who you talk to; it changes how you think.

America isn’t there. So where are we? There are many steps along the path from a constitutional democracy to a totalitarian state. With each one, it feels like a volume knob is being turned up on an old car stereo. Everything gets louder as we progress from 1 to 11. Is the dial set at a democratic republic, illiberal democracy, a hybrid government, competitive autocracy, kleptocracy, or full-blown fascism? Are we somewhere in between? Can Americans identify the differences? Is it reaching a level where we can no longer hear each other? How do we turn it down? From the back seat, we shout, Are we there yet?!

For many Americans, regardless of political affiliations, it feels as if there’s a weighted blanket over our society. If you’re like me, it’s hard to sleep when you’re too hot. Concerns about affordability, career prospects in the age of A.I., social hostility, distrust, political violence, polarization, income inequality, misinformation, and social isolation are common topics of conversation. Everything is politicized. Uncertainty and fear are being amplified and exploited for profit and power. This isn’t new, at least not for all of us.

No matter what form of government you live under, not everyone experiences it equally. America, the “land of the free, home of the brave,” the “shining beacon on the hill.” But it’s here where Thomas Jefferson and the Committee of Five wrote, “All men are created equal,” while owning slaves and denying women voting rights. It’s here where the natives were slaughtered, the Japanese interned, and Jim Crow was the law of the land. In 1935, the Nazis looked to America’s history of racial litigation as inspiration for the Nuremberg Laws, which stripped Jews of citizenship and made interracial marriage illegal.

For some Americans, the idea that we were ever a democracy seems absurd. There has always been discrimination and efforts to enshrine unequal rights in favor of contingencies who feel threatened by the pursuit of our founding ideals. Those ideals have yet to be fully realized, but progress has been made. The greatest thread throughout American history is the collective effort and hard work that has bent that moral arc towards justice. The Trump administration is bending it back.

Since the end of World War II, sociologists and political scientists have developed statistical models to determine the conditions under which democracies backslide (transition from democracy to autocracy). By most accounts, the U.S. should be well-protected against democratic backsliding. Three factors commonly considered are the longevity of a democracy, the state's GDP (Gross Domestic Product), and income inequality.

Renowned Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington, in his 1991 book, The Third Wave: Democratization in the late 20th Century, made a case for what he called the “Two-Turnover Test.” His thesis was that if power had been peacefully transferred from one party to another, and then back again, that democratic state was less likely to backslide. In terms of time, the Two-Turnover Test spans 10 to 20 years. Even if we grant that the U.S. wasn’t a democracy until the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, his benchmark of stability has been met. The January 6th attack on the Capitol and the legislative attempt to delegitimize the 2020 election muddies the waters. More significant is that Huntington’s argument applies more to 20th-century revolutions and coups than to the gradual erosion of norms that has been prominent in the global rise of 21st-century autocracies.

According to Adam Przeworski and Fernando Limongi’s research in Democracy and Development, no democracy richer than Argentina in 1976, with a per capita GDP of $19k in today’s U.S. dollars (AFI), has backslid. As Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt note in Tyranny of the Minority, Hungary backslid with a per capita GDP of $21k (AFI). The per capita GDP of the U.S. in 2024 was $86k. While a robust economy still seems to be preventative, it’s not a rule.

As University of Chicago professor Susan C. Stokes argues in her Princeton Press book, The Backsliders, income inequality provides a leverage point for backsliding. Across several states that have experienced backsliding in the 21st century, as income inequality rose, political polarization followed. Trust in institutions eroded. As this happens, cracks in the system emerge that aspiring autocrats can exploit to dismantle it further under the guise of reform. They then break down the system from within to enrich themselves and their cronies, while finding scapegoats to blame when they fail to deliver results for citizens. The Gini Coefficient (a statistical measure of income inequality) shows that the U.S. has experienced a rapid increase in income inequality along with increased political polarization.

Both Brazil and Poland experienced backsliding even as income inequality declined. However, Brazil’s judiciary and Poland’s record-breaking civic mobilization halted their democratic backsliding. There’s not enough data to be conclusive, though it’s possible that lower rates of income inequality played a role.

While the longevity of U.S. democratic institutions and the strength of per capita GDP may make the U.S. appear safeguarded against backsliding, the ongoing trends of rising income inequality and political polarization suggest a greater potential for backsliding.

Bret Stephens at the New York Times, along with contributors to the Wall Street Journal editorial page and National Review, have argued that America’s “guardrails” will protect it from backsliding. The U.S. Constitution is often cited as a bulwark of democracy. Yet nearly every Latin American country that’s based its constitution on it — including Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela — has experienced repeated cycles of democratic backsliding. The Philippines, a former U.S. colony, heavily borrowed from the Constitution, even directly copying sections of it. That didn’t prevent backsliding.

Subscribe now

Throughout history, most governments have been autocratic. There are currently between 65 and 81 autocratic countries. The number is rising. This trend doesn’t always make the news when it lacks the media appeal of violence. Most modern constitutional democracies don’t transition to autocracy through tanks and troops; they do so through lawyers and legislation. According to the study "Keeping the Democratic Facade” by Anna Luehrmann and Staffan Lindberg, since 1990, 70% of democracies that have backslid have done so through legal means. Half of those expansions of executive power were achieved through reinterpretation of existing laws.

When Trump descended on the golden escalator, left-leaning voters saw him as an easily beatable carnival barker. His autocratic ambitions were visible to people who’ve studied autocracies or lived in one. Still, it was hard to imagine a man so unfit would be elected by the American people. Yet they did. Strong baffoonish vibes aren’t unique to Trump in the halls of aspiring autocrats. Many tyrants of the past were seen as quasi-cartoon characters.

Throughout his first term, using words like 'authoritarian' to describe Trump was seen by the majority of Americans as an overreaction. If you’re caught up in the daily news, it’s easy to forget how bad things were during that first term. When he wanted to shoot peaceful protesters in Lafayette Square, it didn’t happen; there were “adults in the room” like General Mattis. Nearly a year into his second term, that’s no longer the case.

As of this writing, half of Project 2025 has been implemented. Nearly a decade into Trump’s dominance of the news cycle, pointing out his desire to be a dictator feels cliché. He’s pointed it out himself. It’s important to remember that autocracy is cliché. Autocrats would rather you see it as nostalgia. After all, rarely is what they present in the media original. Trump proudly taunted a 3rd term while wearing a hat that reads, “Trump was right about everything.”

It’s a joke, his loyalists say. Never mind how much he lies and is glaringly wrong. Never mind that instead of coming up with his own slogan, he plagiarized Mussolini, who proudly embraced the catch phrase, “Mussolini ha sempre ragione” — Mussolini is always right. Autocracy is cliché.

I could list an overwhelming number of actions this administration has taken to erode our democracy. There will surely be more by the time you’re done reading this. For the sake of brevity, if prominent examples don’t quickly come to mind, Professor Christina Pagel and her team at University College London are keeping a detailed record.

The Trump administration is historically unpopular. He’s the first president in modern history not to crack 50% approval. They’ve tried to consolidate power much faster than figures like Erdoğan in Turkey and Orbán in Hungary. This has fueled increased resistance. When scholars of 1930s fascist movements are asked why people accepted autocracy, a common quote often attributed to Mussolini is offered: “The trains run on time.” This was mostly propaganda. But enough people bought the illusion of safety and order. The Trump administration has tried to pull the same rabbit from its Mussolini hat. While they have managed to deceive some Americans regarding crime and even propagated the outright lie that Trump won the 2020 election, they are struggling to convince the majority that the economy is strong when it contradicts their daily experiences. While income inequality may be their opening, it could also be their undoing.

Unlike dictators who seize power in their prime, Trump’s health and mental acuity appear to be declining as quickly as his approval ratings. It’s unclear he’ll make it through this term, let alone be coherent enough if his administration finds a way to subvert the 22nd amendment so he can run for a third. Our elections may remain secure despite attempts to undermine them. The 2026 midterms will be revealing.

Given the damage done, there’s a chance—if we can unify across our diverse ideologies to protect our democracy— we can come back stronger than ever. But who knows? I’ve yet to find a reliable crystal ball. Dictators don’t act alone. I’ve come across opinions suggesting that when a strongman falls, their autocracy collapses with them. I can point to several cases where that isn’t true, at least not for long. There are aspects of what we’re witnessing that are unique to the 21st century. The push toward kleptocracy on this scale has no clear historical precedent but is how mafia states, such as Russia, operate. So, while there are no MAGA predecessors who combine Trump’s media savvy and charismatic base appeal, this threat could very well last beyond Trump.

Authoritarians rule by taking away the future and replacing it with fantasy. They drain citizens of hope and a sense of direction. They want the headlines rolling through the streets of your mind, perpetuating feelings of helplessness and uncertainty. They require dependence and praise. They want “truth” to be a command. If we can’t accurately discuss the good and bad of the past, we lose our references. Reality becomes malleable. If we can’t imagine a better future, how can we build one?

So what are we to do? It could be putting your body on the line if it comes to that. But for now, speak up even when daily life feels normal despite knowing it’s not for people who may not look like you or have your income. If it feels cliché, don’t let that stop you. Now’s not the time to lose momentum. This administration has three years left. It ain’t over. Give your money to companies that refuse to bend to the state. Patiently talk with family who disagree or may not be politically engaged. Run for local office. Read. Vote. I’ll be facing it with my pen (well, ok, keyboard) in hand and a stack of books by my side. You can too. And never forget, there’s strength in simply letting others know they’re not alone. Meet your friends in person. Have dinner. Be sure to pass the bread. Give them hugs, take that group photo, and never hesitate to raise your glass to love.