How the federal government has always worked in the past: entrenched civil service completely ignores elected representatives and instead develops rich relationships with industry.
Presidency is largely ceremonial while executive staff is there for resume padding.
Congress throws as much money as possible to industrial pressure groups in exchange for financial backing of election campaigns.
Media backs it in exchange for advertising from same industries and content direction from contacts within bureaucracy.
The overwhelming crucial fact of our times to understand is as follows. Trump administration has attempted a hostile takeover of this deeply entrenched system.
You can agree or disagree with the policy choices – some I like and some I do not – but the big picture is about the fundamental institutional disruption. That's the reason reason for the unending court challenges, the nonstop media frenzies, the freak out panic among industry, the meltdown of academia, and so on.
The settled critique is that Trump is acting like an authoritarian king. The irony is that he is probably the first president since Coolidge who has taken the democratic mandate seriously: acting intending to govern in way consistent with the simple words of Article II: "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America."
Again, you can agree or disagree with policies. But the core challenge to the deep state is the undeniable big theme. Far too few observers have any clue that this is happening or why.
Garet Garrett called the New Deal "revolution within the form." If so, the Trump administration is the counterrevolution within the form. The most exciting dynamic to watch right now is whether and to what extent this attempt succeeds in making lasting change or whether all these efforts are futile. The future of the US and the West generally depends on the results.
The federal bureaucracy’s unaccountable grip has long enabled waste, with careerists prioritizing industry partnerships over taxpayer interests. The End the Deep State Act (H.R. 697) directly confronts this by reclassifying policy-making roles under Schedule Policy/Career, stripping protections from bureaucrats who’ve weaponized permanence to resist elected mandates. This isn’t authoritarianism—it’s enforcing Article II’s clear chain of command.
The real corruption? Agencies like USAID funneling billions to contractors while ignoring congressional spending caps. When 40% of senior bureaucrats later lobby for the same firms they regulated, the revolving door isn’t a bug—it’s the system.
Drain the swamp or drown in $100M consulting contracts.
David Sacks: The biggest lie in this whole debate is calling it a “one-time tax.” There is nothing in the ballot language that guarantees it will never happen again. They’re not writing it into the constitution. This isn’t a one-time tax — it’s the first of many. The real goal is to establish a precedent — They keep minimizing it — “one percent, one time.” That’s intentional. They know the real value isn’t the money today, it’s the precedent. Once the government proves it can confiscate private property from a politically unpopular group, it will be replicated over and over again.
Today they say “billionaires.” Tomorrow the line comes way down — because there’s not enough money. This has never been about billionaires. It’s about creating a system where the government decides who gets to keep their property — They say it’s “just the tip of the pinky.” But that’s how it always starts. Not the fist — just the pinky. The whole point is to normalize asset seizures so that all property is effectively owned by the government, subject to political approval.
This is why democracy has limits. It can’t be two wolves and a sheep voting on dinner. People have rights. And once you allow the majority to vote away private property, you don’t have rights anymore — you have permissions.
No comments:
Post a Comment