Opinion – Martin Wolf: A second Trump administration would put the Republic in danger

Last week, the United States took another step on its journey towards autocracy when Liz Cheney was defeated in the Republican primary in her Wyoming constituency. Her father is former Vice President Dick Cheney, who was the mastermind behind the war in Iraq under George W Bush. She, moreover, has irreproachable conservative credentials. Even so, she became anathema to Republicans. Your crime? She believes that accepting the outcome of fair elections is a greater duty than promoting the lies of her party’s “great leader”.

The Republican Party adopted the “Führerprinzip” (“principle of leadership”) that the Germans imposed in the 1930s. It is the concept that loyalty to a leader that defines what is true and right is the overriding obligation. The Republicans’ adherence to Trump’s Big Lie, that he won the last presidential election, is a perfect example of this principle. In the case at hand, moreover, the concept is directly opposed to a central value of liberal democracy, that of fair elections. Ten years ago, most of us would have thought that such a development would be inconceivable in the United States. But with the rise of Donald Trump, that outcome has become likely. Now the reaction, not so much of Trump to his defeat, but of his party to his lies, provides another defining moment.

As Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt of Harvard University argue in their splendid book “How Democracies Die,” it is not difficult to subvert a democracy. It is something that has happened many times, both in the past and more recently. First, it is necessary to subvert the electoral system. Second, capture the arbitrators (the judiciary, tax authorities, intelligence agencies, police and security). Third, marginalize or eliminate political opponents and, above all, the media. In support of all these aggressions there must be a fierce insistence on the illegitimacy of the opposition and the “falsehood” of information that does not align with the lies that the leader deems most useful at the time.

In his first term, Trump has made a lot of progress in establishing his lies as the truth for those who support him. But neither he nor his subordinates had yet figured out how to change the electoral system or the government, in part because he still didn’t have the “right” helpers—that is, fanatical, competent, and dedicated advisers. He was surrounded by people now considered “disloyal”, that is, by people who had at least some principles.

That has changed. Trump has now turned his face to the party. Cheney’s defenestration is proof of that. Equally important is the widely shared conviction among Republicans that Trump is above accountability for his behavior, before the law or even before Congress. He and his party, as Robert Kagan argued, also took advantage of lies about election “stealing” to justify subverting the US electoral process, a goal on which much progress is being made.

The next crucial step for Trump is the replacement of the leaders and officials of central state institutions with individuals who are personally loyal to him. For that to happen, he must first become president. This is why progress in subverting the elections is important, just as it is important to keep Trump out of prison. But in two recent articles, Jonathan Swan of Axios described something else that would be vital: a plan to ensure the government is made up of true believers, from top to bottom. A crucial aspect of this, he points out, would be to replace the permanent cadre of government agencies with carefully selected, loyal Trump professionals. If the Republicans manage to seize control of Congress, it might become less difficult to imagine something like this happening.

Suppose, therefore, that people loyal to Trump run the FBI, US Federal Police, the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) and the Internal Revenue Service. Suppose further that faithful are placed in all the most important military posts, under a dedicated secretary of defense. Suppose faithful are placed on the board of the Fed (Federal Reserve, the central bank of the United States) and all significant regulatory agencies. Imagine what that would mean for the rule of law and civil rights. Imagine, too, the pressure such agencies could exert on independent companies, including the media.

The logic of the market in an autocracy is the logic of crony capitalism. Would the United States prove to be very different? Perhaps the federal system and the judiciary can protect personal independence. However, if people whose only principle is loyalty to the leader formed the teams of the federal government, it would be difficult to resist his will.

Despotism means government without accountability. It does not mean competent or intrusive government. It is possible that despotism is incompetent and lazy. There are numerous examples of this. But it would be despotism anyway.

What would a second Trump administration of this model mean for the world? What would that mean, above all, for America’s allies? What would the government of a nationalist of the “America above all” school, with a team like the one described above, mean for the credibility that remains for the international liberal economic system? What would that mean for planetary cooperation? “Nothing good” is the answer to all these questions. The end of “American exceptionality” will likely mean the formation of distinct spheres of interest as the basis of the global order. There are those who might like that. But it would also be a —catastrophic, in my view—transformation towards a world of despotism.

In the year 27 BC, the Roman Republic turned into the military dictatorship that we usually call the Roman Empire. It is not impossible that a similar transformation is under way in the United States. This may still seem inconceivable to most people. I hope so. After all, Trump is old. He may not have a suitable replacement. Yet each day he both takes advantage of and exposes the demoralization of the American Republic. American conservatism became a radical nationalist movement, true to the truths invented by one man and dedicated to the overthrow of the “Deep State”, a term the movement uses to designate the government of its own country. Dick Cheney says Donald Trump is “the greatest threat that has ever existed to our Republic”. In this regard, we must believe Cheney: he really is.