This is what has been my fear all along. The structures of the 2025 game plan, and its policies, will become implemented to such a degree that it will become difficult to change course. Trump was always the useful idiot. He created a caricature of the strong man authoritarian. A cult followed,and now the country is set up for a corporatized brand of dictatorship that might be impossible to dig out of.
Just so W.J. The only thing I disagree on is the word "impossible". I've had things happen that science calls "impossible" — nothing is impossible, when we align ourselves spiritually.
Reversing oil drilling damage in public lands is a lot more ‘impossible’ than a group of determined creative people coming together to amend a legal charter. Another Article 5 convention to fix the first one? Sweeping societal reforms can come after major human created horrors. As for Mother Earth? 🙏
My concern with an Article V convention isn’t that change is impossible, but that this particular process is being driven by actors whose goal is to remove rights, not expand them. The framing sounds democratic — and could, in theory, be used to repair the damage — but the current push is highly coordinated, well-funded, and backed by groups whose vision for America is exclusionary and authoritarian. I wrote about it here:
So yes — I absolutely believe in our collective capacity to reimagine and rebuild, but I think we also have to be clear-eyed about who’s currently at the wheel, and what their endgame looks like. That would merit caution. It's not that change is bad — but that this change, under these conditions, may lock in harm rather than heal it.
Your assessment is "spot-on!" The figure of "He Who Shall Not Be Named" fades to irrelevancy when the preparatory background of fifty years' planning and perhaps a trillion dollars financing that has been invested in this coup. For all that He matters Mickey Mouse could be President. In fact, Mickey Mouse would be preferable . . .
A characteristic I would highly attribute to Trump overall is "malleable". A characteristic at the opposite end of the scale would likely be "adaptable". (Not really synonyms, as one indicates manipulation, while the other measures free choice.)
Now, reverse both of those with JD , including the context that he seems to have finally discovered his life's work, and he appears to like it. And also, that having free choice doesn't always create a Gandhi or Mandela, or any one of the other distressingly few examples of people who changed the world for the better that I might have used instead.
I don't think we have any less love for Trump at this point in his declining "Idiocracy" than most Heritage members would (admit to in front of witnesses.)
I suspect that getting rid of Trump will be the EASY part. It's all a matter of timing, and how successful they feel they will be at either controlling or preventing the midterms, including...
How many loyal ICE members will be available by then. (Pardon my redundancy.)
I think you’re pointing to something essential here — the difference between being shaped by others and choosing to shape the world yourself. Trump has always been malleable in the hands of those who know how to flatter or provoke him, and that made him unpredictable but also useful to others. Vance, by contrast, seems to have found alignment — not just a role he’s been handed, but one he’s actively embraced. That kind of intentionality makes him more dangerous, not less.
And yes, I agree that removing Trump may end up being the simplest part. The harder question is whether we’re prepared for what steps in to replace him, especially if the systems that enable authoritarian rule are already up and running. Timing matters, as you say. So does infrastructure. And ICE is no longer just a law enforcement agency — it’s increasingly a political tool, one whose loyalty will shape what comes next.
COMPLETELY RIGHT ON! This is the clearest elucidation of Exactly what's going on that I've read anywhere in Substance. Or Anywhere! Finger exactly on the pulse. Good on you, Lori!!
Lori, I can’t read 1000 page of horrible ugly bills in legalese to grok structural implications of change. How can you keep up with these things that are not Trump scandals which you noted was your mission? I’ve noticed a good number of concerned people sharing AIs impression of the BBB and other government documents with double speak. It’s very tempting to use AI. What do you think of AI as a help or not with primary sources?
I don’t examine everything that’s coming through, Sabrina. I can’t — none of us can. I only go deep on the things I feel led, or even compelled, to track. For me, it’s not about volume but discernment — following the threads that keep tugging, even quietly.
And I do use AI — not as a primary source, but more as a counterweight. It helps me pressure-test my thinking, surface counterpoints I might not have considered, and refine the shape of what I’m trying to say — especially when the subject is emotionally charged and I want the tone to land with care. For me, it’s a tool for clarity, not a substitute for judgement.
In the end, I think what matters most is that each of us finds a way of navigating the minefield of information that feels honest and sustainable. No one can track it all. But together, we can hold a much wider field.
I like that idea for use of AI in political learning. I’ll try it, thank you. Are the threads from pro-democracy groups coming together to hear each other? This site gave me some hope some Dems are listening at least; https://www.project2029.me/Project 2029 | Drive Change Together
Nailed it Lori. I would only remove the "if" part in reference to Trump being replaced by Vance. I believe ditching the senile old windbag has always been part of the plan, and right now we are witnessing a coup inside a coup.
Numerous writers have opined that Vance doesn't have the cult worship of MAGA, but by automatically stepping into the Presidency upon Trump's early demise, he wouldn't need the support of the base. Those opinions also assume that there will be further fair elections in 2026-28, which cannot be a foregone conclusion. Proponents of Curtis Yarvin's Dark Enlightenment , like Thiel, Musk and Vance, are calling for the compete dismantling of government, and consider democracy a failed system.
Vance would also have the support of The Heritage Foundation, as he would continue the Christian extremist agendas of both Project 2025 and Project Esther.
The Federalist Society, which through the patient, decades long orchestration of Leonard Leo has stacked the courts with ultra conservative judges, would welcome Trump's replacement with open arms.
Thus far, protests have had little effect in slowing America's march towards complete authoritarian rule. If people remain too shell shocked to organize massive general strikes to show their dissent, they will ultimately be forced to choose between total capitulation or civil war.
This is what has been my fear all along. The structures of the 2025 game plan, and its policies, will become implemented to such a degree that it will become difficult to change course. Trump was always the useful idiot. He created a caricature of the strong man authoritarian. A cult followed,and now the country is set up for a corporatized brand of dictatorship that might be impossible to dig out of.
Just so W.J. The only thing I disagree on is the word "impossible". I've had things happen that science calls "impossible" — nothing is impossible, when we align ourselves spiritually.
Ok. I'll take your word for it...I guess. 😆
Reversing oil drilling damage in public lands is a lot more ‘impossible’ than a group of determined creative people coming together to amend a legal charter. Another Article 5 convention to fix the first one? Sweeping societal reforms can come after major human created horrors. As for Mother Earth? 🙏
My concern with an Article V convention isn’t that change is impossible, but that this particular process is being driven by actors whose goal is to remove rights, not expand them. The framing sounds democratic — and could, in theory, be used to repair the damage — but the current push is highly coordinated, well-funded, and backed by groups whose vision for America is exclusionary and authoritarian. I wrote about it here:
https://loricorbetmann.substack.com/publish/posts/detail/163275728?referrer=%2Fpublish%2Fposts
So yes — I absolutely believe in our collective capacity to reimagine and rebuild, but I think we also have to be clear-eyed about who’s currently at the wheel, and what their endgame looks like. That would merit caution. It's not that change is bad — but that this change, under these conditions, may lock in harm rather than heal it.
Your assessment is "spot-on!" The figure of "He Who Shall Not Be Named" fades to irrelevancy when the preparatory background of fifty years' planning and perhaps a trillion dollars financing that has been invested in this coup. For all that He matters Mickey Mouse could be President. In fact, Mickey Mouse would be preferable . . .
Thank you Carleton — it always heartens me when we are in alignment (although all things considered, it probably should not…)
". . . in this coup is considered." (I have to have a word with my proofreading staff.)
A characteristic I would highly attribute to Trump overall is "malleable". A characteristic at the opposite end of the scale would likely be "adaptable". (Not really synonyms, as one indicates manipulation, while the other measures free choice.)
Now, reverse both of those with JD , including the context that he seems to have finally discovered his life's work, and he appears to like it. And also, that having free choice doesn't always create a Gandhi or Mandela, or any one of the other distressingly few examples of people who changed the world for the better that I might have used instead.
I don't think we have any less love for Trump at this point in his declining "Idiocracy" than most Heritage members would (admit to in front of witnesses.)
I suspect that getting rid of Trump will be the EASY part. It's all a matter of timing, and how successful they feel they will be at either controlling or preventing the midterms, including...
How many loyal ICE members will be available by then. (Pardon my redundancy.)
I think you’re pointing to something essential here — the difference between being shaped by others and choosing to shape the world yourself. Trump has always been malleable in the hands of those who know how to flatter or provoke him, and that made him unpredictable but also useful to others. Vance, by contrast, seems to have found alignment — not just a role he’s been handed, but one he’s actively embraced. That kind of intentionality makes him more dangerous, not less.
And yes, I agree that removing Trump may end up being the simplest part. The harder question is whether we’re prepared for what steps in to replace him, especially if the systems that enable authoritarian rule are already up and running. Timing matters, as you say. So does infrastructure. And ICE is no longer just a law enforcement agency — it’s increasingly a political tool, one whose loyalty will shape what comes next.
COMPLETELY RIGHT ON! This is the clearest elucidation of Exactly what's going on that I've read anywhere in Substance. Or Anywhere! Finger exactly on the pulse. Good on you, Lori!!
Thanks so much Jessica — I’m really glad it landed.
Lori, I can’t read 1000 page of horrible ugly bills in legalese to grok structural implications of change. How can you keep up with these things that are not Trump scandals which you noted was your mission? I’ve noticed a good number of concerned people sharing AIs impression of the BBB and other government documents with double speak. It’s very tempting to use AI. What do you think of AI as a help or not with primary sources?
I don’t examine everything that’s coming through, Sabrina. I can’t — none of us can. I only go deep on the things I feel led, or even compelled, to track. For me, it’s not about volume but discernment — following the threads that keep tugging, even quietly.
And I do use AI — not as a primary source, but more as a counterweight. It helps me pressure-test my thinking, surface counterpoints I might not have considered, and refine the shape of what I’m trying to say — especially when the subject is emotionally charged and I want the tone to land with care. For me, it’s a tool for clarity, not a substitute for judgement.
In the end, I think what matters most is that each of us finds a way of navigating the minefield of information that feels honest and sustainable. No one can track it all. But together, we can hold a much wider field.
I like that idea for use of AI in political learning. I’ll try it, thank you. Are the threads from pro-democracy groups coming together to hear each other? This site gave me some hope some Dems are listening at least; https://www.project2029.me/Project 2029 | Drive Change Together
Nailed it Lori. I would only remove the "if" part in reference to Trump being replaced by Vance. I believe ditching the senile old windbag has always been part of the plan, and right now we are witnessing a coup inside a coup.
Numerous writers have opined that Vance doesn't have the cult worship of MAGA, but by automatically stepping into the Presidency upon Trump's early demise, he wouldn't need the support of the base. Those opinions also assume that there will be further fair elections in 2026-28, which cannot be a foregone conclusion. Proponents of Curtis Yarvin's Dark Enlightenment , like Thiel, Musk and Vance, are calling for the compete dismantling of government, and consider democracy a failed system.
Vance would also have the support of The Heritage Foundation, as he would continue the Christian extremist agendas of both Project 2025 and Project Esther.
The Federalist Society, which through the patient, decades long orchestration of Leonard Leo has stacked the courts with ultra conservative judges, would welcome Trump's replacement with open arms.
Thus far, protests have had little effect in slowing America's march towards complete authoritarian rule. If people remain too shell shocked to organize massive general strikes to show their dissent, they will ultimately be forced to choose between total capitulation or civil war.