Thomas Zimmer

https://mastodon.social/@tzimmer_history

Historian - Democracy and Its Discontents - Website: https://www.thomaszimmer.online - Newsletter: Democracy Americana https://democracyamericana.com

Public Key

npub1tlfxq60vhl8gfy0g2jsdngf4aehtpjs59mu2fnygcz0vtfdctfjs49s6qk

NIP-05 Address

[email protected]

Profile Code

nprofile1qqs9l5nqd8ktln5yj859fgxe5y67um4seg2za79yejyvp8k95ku95egprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0d4hhxarj9ecxjmntqyqqe24pjh

Publishing to

relay.momostr.pink

Author Public Key

npub1tlfxq60vhl8gfy0g2jsdngf4aehtpjs59mu2fnygcz0vtfdctfjs49s6qk

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-07-01 15:28:19 CEST

- reply

Please help me get the word out to people who might be interested in reading Democracy Americana in German: I hope I can build a readership large enough to carry this experiment of offering my work in two languages (it’s a struggle!).
If you want to read the essay in English, you find it here:
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/59b197fa-1a03-44e5-b155-2c221e2a3c0e

2026-07-01 15:26:30 CEST

- reply

The old world is dying. Defending the status quo is no longer an option: It is neither an adequate response to the challenge we face nor is it viable electorally. We live in a profoundly disruptive moment. Restoration won’t do.
A credible transformation is the only way forward.

2026-07-01 15:25:07 CEST

- reply

This is a scary moment. I understand the temptation to cling to the idea that the established strategies and patterns of behavior might yet work still. And perhaps it is unfair to have all this put on the plate of this generation of political leaders. But fair’s got nothing to do with it. We need better.

2026-07-01 15:20:02 CEST

- reply

A political project of restoration centered around defending “the system” and restoring the status quo ante is destined to fail. It is incapable of winning elections. And frankly, the status quo ante isn’t worth restoring anyway, considering that it got us into this mess in the first place.

2026-07-01 15:15:33 CEST

- reply

The challenge is to counter the Right’s promise of “revolution” with a progressive vision that is adapted, both in substance and temperament, to the disruptive challenges we are facing – and therefore capable of channeling the widespread desire for transformation rather than merely reform.

2026-07-01 15:14:35 CEST

- reply

Even beyond those who are ideologically attracted to the Right’s vision of cruel hierarchies, the rightwing project appeals to a sense of discontent and disaffection – to those who may feel that *any* revolution is better than maintaining the status quo or perpetuating “the system.”

2026-07-01 15:13:39 CEST

- reply

One big advantage the Right possesses is that they are pursuing a transformative vision that entails the promise of overcoming - of tearing down! - the status quo. They have a revolutionary theory of the moment and are committed to a (counter-) revolutionary political project.

2026-07-01 15:12:43 CEST

- reply

We are at an inflection point not just in the history of the American Republic, but indeed in recent global history.
Unless we get that diagnosis right, we are doomed to fumble about in the dark. Unless we grasp the assignment, our response is destined to fall woefully short of the task ahead.

2026-07-01 15:11:13 CEST

- reply

We are not witnessing some accidental departure – the crises we are facing have discernible pre-histories we can trace and study. But we are living through a profound disruption nevertheless, one that makes any attempt at “politics as usual” largely obsolete.

2026-07-01 15:09:24 CEST

The German version of my latest essay is out:
I wrote about how the political, economic, technological, and environmental crises intersect – and about the political implications of recognizing the profound disruption we are witnessing.
Eight propositions about this inflection point in history:
https://steady.page/de/demokratie-americana/posts/61a827ea-a4d9-48fd-9851-5c5cfe16f2b6

2026-06-29 14:01:47 CEST

Understanding Our Disruptive Moment in History – and What It Requires
The old order is dead. The Right has a revolutionary theory of the moment that promises renewal. Unless we can counter it with a transformative vision, we will lose.
My new piece:
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/59b197fa-1a03-44e5-b155-2c221e2a3c0e

2026-06-21 16:06:38 CEST

- reply

If Vance were to emerge victorious from what is likely to be a prolonged, chaotic, and dirty struggle between several radical factions for the leadership of post-Trump MAGA, we might be looking at a more coherently extreme and more ideologically disciplined movement.

2026-06-21 16:05:25 CEST

RE: https://mastodon.social/@tzimmer_history/116788249443459695
This is also a reminder that JD Vance is a proper extremist who believes his right to rule and impose a reactionary order transcends the law and the constitution.
Had he been president in the spring of 2025 or in January 2026, he and Miller likely would have escalated further.
#note1577…f99u

2026-06-21 15:07:43 CEST

Sunday reading: I wrote about how the Trumpists have been contemplating despotism, the fault lines within the regime, and the prospects for a post-Trump MAGA.
This week’s piece - on crucial inflection points, the remaining barriers against extremism, and Miller/Vance lusting for escalation:
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/71475e17-b44e-43ec-83de-f17533e5bf92

2026-06-19 21:58:27 CEST

Why the Right Hates Juneteenth
Wrote this three years ago - but worth reiterating now, as America is ruled by a regime seeking to restore complete white male dominance in all spheres of life:
Today’s MAGA GOP stands in the political, ideological, and spiritual tradition of the (neo-) Confederacy.
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/d0ccb3a5-7dec-4a2f-ab33-0604f5ef9431

2026-06-18 15:12:45 CEST

- reply

But in hindsight, we can see how time was working against the Trumpists. They had risen to power with a short-term strategy aimed at quickly overwhelming the system, hoping to force a comprehensive regime change before anyone could really react.

2026-06-18 15:11:53 CEST

- reply

I know it feels ages ago. But let us remember where the country stood. The speed and the scope of the early assault on the constitutional order was unprecedented. Political institutions and civil society seemed to prove a lot less resilient than it should have been on paper.

2026-06-18 15:10:56 CEST

- reply

What are the main takeaways from this reporting?
First, the spring of 2025 emerges as the key inflection point: Had Trump actually suspended habeas corpus unilaterally, without authorization from Congress, it would have been a potentially lethal blow to the American Republic.

2026-06-18 15:09:58 CEST

- reply

The day after Trump subjected the nation to his deranged birthday party spectacle of violence, the New York Times dropped new reporting that sheds light on how the MAGA government internally contemplated radical steps that would have potentially ended the American Republic.

2026-06-18 15:07:16 CEST

When the Republic Almost Fell
What we can learn from new reporting on how the Trumpists have been contemplating despotism, the fault lines within the regime, and the prospects for a post-Trump MAGA.
Some thoughts from my new piece (free to read, no paywall):
🧵
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/71475e17-b44e-43ec-83de-f17533e5bf92

2026-06-13 15:18:57 CEST

🚨
My newsletter on American politics and history is now also available in German
Same analysis, same content. But in German. And with a slight tweak to the title: Demokratie Americana is now live.
Please help me spread the news!
https://steady.page/en/demokratie-americana/posts/c3204e00-f2ca-43cd-bd00-2c4fe12cc541

2026-06-11 17:10:15 CEST

Was wird aus Amerika?
Ich hatte das Vergnügen und die große Ehre, in Berlin mit Adam Tooze und Robert Habeck über Geschichte, Gegenwart und Zukunft der USA zu sprechen – und was das alles für den Rest der Welt bedeutet.
Das Gespräch gibt es nun als Video und Podcast:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcBcCQsvHFc

2026-06-03 16:16:50 CEST

- reply

Over the past month, I wrote a series of long essays that can hopefully serve as a framework for how to think about the long struggle over how much democracy, and for whom, there should be in this country – and help us put the end of the civil rights era in historical perspective.

2026-06-03 16:15:00 CEST

In light of the Roberts Court emphatically clarifying that the voting rights era really is OVER and that the nation’s laws and constitution can henceforth only be used to *curtail* the right of minorities to vote, I am reposting my series of essays on the history of multiracial democracy:
🧵
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/b0eafc14-f68d-4499-8108-b440bad1af7f

2026-06-02 15:20:33 CEST

- reply

Here’s where we are: A president initially lifted into office by a minority, backed by a Senate elected by and representing a minority, created a hard-right majority on the Supreme Court that nullified the most important law ever passed in U.S. history against the will of a clear majority.

2026-06-02 15:19:21 CEST

- reply

The aggravated assault on minority political representation exacerbates the ongoing crisis of legitimacy American democracy has been suffering for quite some time by making the country’s political institutions even less representative, less responsive.

2026-06-02 15:16:27 CEST

- reply

For anyone who believes in the promise of egalitarian pluralism, the goal should be to create a society where the status of the individual is not massively determined by race, gender, religion, or wealth. America is now aggressively moving in the opposite direction.

2026-06-02 15:15:32 CEST

- reply

The basic point is this: As long as our political leaders don’t look anything like the people they are supposed to represent, as long as white men are vastly overrepresented in the halls of power (in politics and beyond), we cannot pretend to be living in a fair, truly democratic society.

2026-06-02 15:14:14 CEST

- reply

America is already facing significant discontent across the political spectrum and a widespread resentment towards political elites. Trust in established institutions more generally has been declining massively. These trends are only going to be exacerbated now.

2026-06-02 15:13:22 CEST

- reply

Descriptive representation is not a panacea. But it significantly increases the legitimacy of political institutions among minority and traditionally marginalized groups. Conversely, the lack of descriptive representation undermines trust, destroys the perception of fairness.

2026-06-02 15:12:30 CEST

- reply

An escalating crisis of representation and legitimacy:
I discuss the value of “descriptive representation,” when the demographics of elected officials and thus the parliamentary chambers correspond to the demographic makeup of the electorate.

2026-06-02 15:11:15 CEST

- reply

As a result, counties and communities with a large Black population received a much larger share of public goods and state funding. Overall, Black economic power increased, as fiscal redistribution combined with improved employment opportunities.
That’s all in danger now.

2026-06-02 15:10:23 CEST

- reply

Through the 1965 Voting Rights Act, African Americans and other minorities became a constituency that politicians had to reckon with, they finally had a fair chance to elect representatives of their choice who would advocate for the interests of disadvantaged communities.

2026-06-02 15:09:04 CEST

- reply

The ugly post-civil rights reality:
It is not just in Congress, but in state legislatures, county commissions, city councils, and school boards across large swaths of the country where the effects will be most immediately felt.

2026-06-02 15:07:11 CEST

Taking stock of where America stands one month after the end of the voting rights era:
The country is facing an escalating representation crisis, a spiraling crisis of legitimacy, and an accelerating disintegration into two incompatible Americas.
This piece is free to read, no paywall:
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/859d67c6-fa2f-4059-b4da-f93dec85c0a6

2026-05-18 15:37:54 CEST

- reply

We are now into the second white reactionary “Redemption.”
Let’s make sure we really understand why the civil rights era was a distinct period in U.S. history, why it had such a transformative impact – and what the country is about to lose, now that it is over.
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/8f16b18f-41d5-41f9-884b-f76a13852986

2026-05-18 15:35:28 CEST

- reply

The crowning achievements of the civil rights struggle, which had codified America’s Second Reconstruction, are no more.
The struggle is not over. But the battle for democratic freedom will now have to be waged under far more difficult conditions.

2026-05-18 15:33:46 CEST

- reply

It is the cumulative effect of the MAGA government’s dismantling of the federal civil rights infrastructure plus the Supreme Court’s ultimate dismantling of the Voting Rights Act that makes this such a breakthrough moment for the reactionary countermobilization.

2026-05-18 15:32:32 CEST

- reply

We are dealing with a decades-long, multi-level effort to roll back the racial and social progress towards egalitarian democracy, dismantle the machinery that was built to enforce it, and re-impose structural conditions that make democratic fairness functionally impossible.

2026-05-18 15:30:55 CEST

- reply

The civil rights order was toppled by a decades-long, multi-level reactionary countermobilization that had an ideological arm, a grassroots activist arm, an institutionalized legal movement, a media/propaganda arm, funded by a donor class at war with the modern state.

2026-05-18 15:28:30 CEST

- reply

Alas, throughout U.S. history, democratic progress – any attempt at leveling existing hierarchies of race, gender, religion, and wealth – has inevitably led to a massive countermobilization orchestrated by the forces of reaction.

2026-05-18 15:26:53 CEST

- reply

No one needs to pretend that the 1960s civil rights legislation fixed everything. But the structural conditions under which the struggle for equality had to play out were significantly altered: The playing field became vastly more conducive to a truly democratic politics.

2026-05-18 15:25:30 CEST

- reply

2026-05-18 15:24:31 CEST

- reply

African Americans and other minorities were now a constituency that politicians had to reckon with; their needs and preferences needed to be factored in – and they finally had a fair chance to elect representatives of their choice who would advocate for disadvantaged communities.

2026-05-18 15:23:34 CEST

- reply

The impact of the Voting Rights Act was immediate and comprehensive. Voter registration among African Americans increased dramatically, the turnout-gap between Blacks and whites was practically eliminated. Minority political representation exploded on all levels.

2026-05-18 15:22:35 CEST

- reply

But in practice, any success at extending the promise of equality beyond white people depended on forceful enforcement through the state – on the federal government imposing it against the enemies of democracy.

2026-05-18 15:21:17 CEST

- reply

The impetus for the federal government to accept such a role came from below. Effective civil rights legislation followed public pressure. And the pressure was achieved by the tireless work and sacrifice from civil rights activists – and especially the Black freedom movement.

2026-05-18 15:19:32 CEST

- reply

Here was an acknowledgment that this situation needed to be remedied by active countermeasures. Political, legal, and social structures needed to be dismantled and reformed, and the federal government needed to take responsibility for enacting countermeasures.

2026-05-18 15:18:28 CEST

- reply

The civil rights legislation of the 1960s fundamentally changed the structural conditions shaping the struggle to democratize America. It was fueled by an understanding that the inequalities of American life were the result of discriminatory intent and structures.

2026-05-18 15:17:39 CEST

- reply

Republicans are gleefully extinguishing Black political representation across the South.
None of this is subtle. None of it is new. White supremacists justified their fight against Reconstruction and against desegregation with the same arguments about the South’s “freedom.”

2026-05-18 15:15:32 CEST

- reply

Wherever and whenever Republican lawmakers get the chance, they rush to exclude people of color from political participation and extinguish minority representation - all in service of rolling back the civil rights order and restoring unfettered white male Christian supremacy.

2026-05-18 15:12:38 CEST

- reply

The first task for observers, analysts, and citizens alike is to understand, acknowledge, and describe clearly and honestly what is happening around us.
I allowed myself to write angry about the endless attempts to obscure rather than illuminate what is right in front of us.

2026-05-18 15:09:44 CEST

Putting the end of the civil rights era in historical perspective.
I wrote about the Rise and Fall of the Second Reconstruction, 1964/65 – 2025/26: An attempt to really grasp what a profoundly important - and disturbing - moment in U.S. history we are currently witnessing.
My new piece:
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/8f16b18f-41d5-41f9-884b-f76a13852986

2026-05-17 17:02:57 CEST

RE: https://mastodon.social/@tzimmer_history/116590063717975282
The first task for observers, analysts, and citizens alike is to understand, acknowledge, and describe clearly and honestly what is happening around us.
I allowed myself to write angry about the endless attempts to obscure rather than illuminate what is right in front of us.
#note156j…amca

2026-05-17 15:06:29 CEST

The Rise and Fall of the Second Reconstruction, 1964/65 – 2025/26
Putting the end of the civil rights era in historical perspective: How it transformed the nation, how it was toppled by a raging reaction, and what comes next.
My attempt to capture the significance of this dark moment:
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/8f16b18f-41d5-41f9-884b-f76a13852986

2026-05-06 15:26:40 CEST

- reply

If “backlash” and “polarization” are inevitably the price to be paid for equality, we might as well do it right, make a proper push. Piecemeal reforms and half-measures are easily dismantled, they will only leave the people who will suffer most from the countermobilization defenseless.

2026-05-06 15:25:10 CEST

- reply

Too often, a timid class of political leaders makes avoiding such “backlash” their overriding concern. But backlash politics, driven by a logic of defeatist appeasement and pre-emptive abandonment of justice and equality, is guaranteed to stifle egalitarian policies.

2026-05-06 15:24:05 CEST

- reply

The fate of the first Reconstruction is such a crucial reference point. One implication is that democratic progress – any attempt at leveling existing hierarchies of race, gender, religion, and wealth – will inevitably lead to a massive reactionary countermobilization.

2026-05-06 15:22:39 CEST

- reply

It did not last. America’s first attempt at biracial democracy was toppled in different places at different moments. But across the South, it was drowned in ostensibly “race-neutral” laws and almost unimaginable levels of white reactionary violence.

2026-05-06 15:21:53 CEST

- reply

What followed was an awe-inspiring democratic experiment. Here was the glimpse of what a society that extended the democratic promise beyond just the white population might look like. The country achieved a level of biracial democracy it wouldn’t reach again until a century later.

2026-05-06 15:20:53 CEST

- reply

This attempt to transform a nation built on racial hierarchy into a biracial democracy was nothing short of revolutionary. The framers behind these amendments explicitly intended regime change: From a regime grounded in slavery to a regime grounded in equality.

2026-05-06 15:19:55 CEST

- reply

It is hard to overstate the significance of what happened here. As the Civil War ended, and those who had chosen to commit treason in defense of their right to enslave fellow human beings were defeated on the battlefield, the nation was fundamentally reconceptualized.

2026-05-06 15:19:09 CEST

- reply

On paper, the United States became a multiracial democracy almost exactly one hundred years before the civil rights revolution of the 1960s, with the passage of the Reconstruction Amendments to the constitution after the end of the Civil War.

2026-05-06 15:18:16 CEST

- reply

Until relatively recently, the political system was best described as a white man’s democracy, or racial caste democracy. There is absolutely nothing old or consolidated about *multiracial, pluralistic democracy* in America.

2026-05-06 15:17:27 CEST

- reply

Before the civil rights legislation of the 1960s, the American political system was fairly democratic, at least by contemporaneous international comparison, if a person happened to be a white Christian man – but it was something else entirely if they were not.

2026-05-06 15:13:08 CEST

- reply

To grasp the historical significance of what the Roberts Court has done, we must understand what America was prior to the civil rights revolution of the 1960s. We must also understand the historical references that ought to shape our response: Reconstruction and “Redemption.”

2026-05-06 15:12:19 CEST

- reply

The Roberts Court has returned the country to the situation before the Second Reconstruction that was codified in the 1960s civil rights legislation by allowing for systematic racial discrimination intended to entrench white dominance based on facially neutral laws.

2026-05-06 15:11:20 CEST

- reply

If anyone needed a reminder, last week’s Supreme Court decision clarified both the nature and the stakes of the political conflict.
The question at the core of this struggle is: Can a society built on racial hierarchy be transformed into a multiracial democracy?

2026-05-06 15:05:37 CEST

Multiracial Democracy is Young and Fragile
A brief history of the struggle to reconstitute a nation built on racial hierarchy around the principle of equality – Part I: Lessons from the rise and fall of Reconstruction.
This piece is free to read, no paywall - and some thoughts:
🧵
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/b0eafc14-f68d-4499-8108-b440bad1af7f

2026-05-06 14:06:30 CEST

Multiracial Democracy is Young and Fragile
A brief history of the struggle to reconstitute a nation built on racial hierarchy around the principle of equality – Part I: Lessons from the rise and fall of Reconstruction.
My new piece:
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/b0eafc14-f68d-4499-8108-b440bad1af7f

2026-04-26 15:17:32 CEST

- reply

It was always mistake to equate technological futurism with social progressivism, as the fundamental worldview in the tech elite circles has always had inherently anti-democratic tendencies, leading so many of them to conclude that democracy is incompatible with their “vision”

2026-04-26 15:14:27 CEST

- reply

This is not *just* a story of capitalists attempting to maximize profit by sucking up to the authoritarian regime. Let us not assume a false binary between profit motives and ideology. Yes, these guys want to sell stuff. But it’s also a tale of political and ideological radicalization.

2026-04-26 15:12:08 CEST

Sunday reading:
Fueled by profit motives, ideological radicalization, and elite self-victimization, America’s tech barons are aggressively taking the side of authoritarianism.
I wrote about why the tech billionaires are aligning with Trump – and why now:
🧵
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/7b369a88-108e-4535-be65-b0faebebe324

2026-04-26 14:00:52 CEST

Why the Tech Billionaires Are Aligned with Trump
Fueled by profit motives, ideological radicalization, and elite self-victimization, America’s tech barons are aggressively taking the side of authoritarianism. But why now?
My new piece:
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/7b369a88-108e-4535-be65-b0faebebe324

2026-04-12 15:23:52 CEST

- reply

This regime is not systematically implementing a masterplan. We are dealing with chaotic destruction wrought by an increasingly delusional wannabe-dictator who leads a comically incompetent government and a movement drowning in its own conspiratorial hyperreality.

2026-04-12 15:22:36 CEST

- reply

I have zero doubt that Donald Trump would love to cancel the elections or nullify a result he doesn’t like and rule as a dictator.
But I strongly disagree with the suggestion that Trump and his regime are currently executing a coherent scheme to get us to that end result.

2026-04-12 15:21:33 CEST

- reply

The greatest danger now is not that they will systematically execute some complex secret masterplan, but that delusion, ideology, and ineptitude are conspiring to make escalation almost inevitable. Chaos, zealotry, and a violent obsession with projecting dominance breed destruction.

2026-04-12 15:20:05 CEST

- reply

There really is no need to come up with some long-term scheme to explain why Trump and Hegseth love committing war crimes. The American government is in the hands of delusional, abusive bigots and zealots. They believe this sort of violence projects dominance and power.

2026-04-12 15:18:47 CEST

- reply

But Trump and Hegseth are not committing war crimes and threatening genocide because they decided it was the best way to distract from their *real* agenda. They are doing it because this is how they understand power, how they want to exert power, how they feel powerful.

2026-04-12 15:17:34 CEST

- reply

In reaction to the President’s genocidal threats, some prominent politicians and political commentators insisted it was either all a cunning distraction or perhaps, as Timothy Snyder suggested, all part of a devious long-term scheme to erect dictatorship.

2026-04-12 15:16:36 CEST

- reply

If we suspect coherence and foresight as the main drivers, we fail to understand the inner thinking of this regime. If we insist there must be strategic deliberation underneath the escalating chaos, we risk sanitizing what this government is doing and what fuels the man who leads it.

2026-04-12 15:15:25 CEST

- reply

The notion of a masterplan or secret scheme becomes problematic when it is used to end or even pre-empt that investigation - “They are following the authoritarian playbook! Emulating Orbán! It’s all Project 2025! What else is there to discuss?” – rather than start that reflection.

2026-04-12 15:14:35 CEST

- reply

What is the best way to make sense of what this President and this government are doing? What is the best framework for understanding what drives and motivates them, what causes them to act the way they are acting? The inner thinking of the regime deserves serious investigation.

2026-04-12 15:13:38 CEST

- reply

Although borne out of an understandable impulse to emphasize the authoritarian threat, the notion that Trump is executing a coherent masterplan nevertheless constitutes a form of sanewashing.
The man who is president is acutely dangerous. But he does not have a plan.

2026-04-12 15:11:26 CEST

Sunday reading - I wrote about the coherence fallacy:
The MAGA regime will continue to escalate because they are ideologically, temperamentally, and psycho-politically incapable of anything else.
But there is no strategic genius at work here.
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/70c12168-9b07-44a1-aadc-a4ced5a2d5aa

2026-04-11 20:10:11 CEST

RE: https://mastodon.social/@tzimmer_history/116386197737824806
This regime is not systematically implementing a masterplan. We are dealing with chaotic destruction wrought by an increasingly delusional wannabe-dictator who leads a comically incompetent government and a movement drowning in its own conspiratorial hyperreality.
#note1dlc…0km9

2026-04-11 15:00:41 CEST

Donald Trump Does Not Have a Plan
He has dictatorial desires. But not everything is a brilliant distraction or part of a cunning masterplan. Let’s not turn incompetent agents of malice into omnipotent supervillains.
Some thoughts from my new piece:
🧵
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/70c12168-9b07-44a1-aadc-a4ced5a2d5aa

2026-04-11 14:01:47 CEST

- reply

I wrote about the coherence fallacy:
This regime is not systematically implementing a masterplan. We are dealing with chaotic destruction wrought by an increasingly delusional wannabe-dictator who leads a comically incompetent government and a movement drowning in its own conspiratorial hyperreality

2026-04-11 13:59:46 CEST

Donald Trump Does Not Have a Plan
He has dictatorial desires. But not everything is a brilliant distraction or part of a cunning masterplan. Let’s not turn incompetent agents of malice into omnipotent supervillains.
My new piece:
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/70c12168-9b07-44a1-aadc-a4ced5a2d5aa

2026-04-04 15:11:57 CEST

No Right Is Ever Safe – but Progress Is Possible
The outrageous assault on birthright citizenship should prompt us to reflect on the fragility of democratic progress - and our own responsibility to defend it.
Some thoughts from my new piece:
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/0999474f-9069-4edc-8afa-14ba857741fa

2026-03-28 14:02:10 CET

Forget all the “Protests don’t matter” and “No Kings is just silly” nonsense.
Protests matter. Societal resistance has been hardening. It’s a massive problem for the MAGA regime.
And “No Kings” is crucial as part of an effort to dispel the idea that “real America” stands behind Trump.
https://steady.page/en/democracyamericana/posts/a40ac673-b42b-4108-9756-feeae62ca5e8

2026-03-27 18:38:30 CET

- reply

What’s come under pressure is white Christian patriarchal dominance – what the Right likes to call the “natural order.” In a way, we have never been closer to finally realizing that promise of egalitarian democracy. And that is precisely why the Right is freaking out.

2026-03-27 18:37:13 CET

- reply

And they are reacting to something real: Our “Western” societies have indeed become more pluralistic, less white, less overwhelmingly Christian.
In that sense, it was not some perfectly stable liberal democracy that suddenly fell into crisis (because such an order never existed).

2026-03-27 18:36:06 CET

- reply

And here comes the glass-half-full perspective: The reason why the Right has been radicalizing so much is that they feel their backs against the wall. The anti-democratic radicalization of the Right has not been fueled by a sense of strength, but by a pervasive sense of weakness.

2026-03-27 18:35:04 CET

- reply

A truly egalitarian multiracial, pluralistic democracy in which an individual’s status was not determined to a significant degree by race, gender, religion, or wealth?
I don’t think that’s ever been achieved anywhere.

2026-03-27 18:33:54 CET

- reply

The stakes in this moment are so high because of the world-historic significance of the current fight over democracy: Is it possible to establish a stable liberal democracy under conditions of gender-egalitarian, multiracial, multi-religious pluralism?

2026-03-27 18:31:42 CET

- reply

Finally, a reader recalled that I used to combine explorations of why/how everything was so messed up with a reminder that the situation is not hopeless, that there is, in fact, a glass-half-full interpretation of our moment in world history. That strikes me as important.

2026-03-27 18:29:46 CET

- reply

Even if you believe, quite plausibly, that the focus now needs to be on the question of how we get out of here, any project of renewal and transformation better be based on a proper understanding of what it is that ails the nation, of what we are actually living through right now.

2026-03-27 18:27:53 CET

- reply

Another recurring theme: A general sense that explorations of how we got here are less valuable now – that the focus should firmly be on the question of how we get out of here, and what comes next. I get it. But I am also alarmed by this general “We don’t need more historical takes” sense.

2026-03-27 18:26:23 CET

- reply

Don’t allow yourself to be bombarded with “Breaking News!” alerts constantly, don’t scroll news sites all day, reading hundreds of headlines… It only simulates staying informed. But it actually has the opposite effect: We are drowning. Look instead for clarity, perspective.