How much longer will the Republicans let Donald Trump continue on his
way? Violating the constitution and ruining
the strategic position of the United States in the world.
We are witnessing the two oldest democracies fighting to survive serious
threats against their political system, i.e. precisely their democracy. It will
be interesting to see the result of these fights. In the UK the main risk is Brexit
and disrespect from the PM for Parliament and the laws and not least Supreme
Court. If this is not stopped and thus creates precedence, democracy as we know
it will cease in the UK.
In theUnited States the main threat is a Republican party caring too
much for power and positions to oppose an unfit president. This combined with
the extreme polarization. The Supreme Court in the States will be of limited
value in the fight for the old American democratic system as long as it is de
facto taken over by one political side.
In both America and Britain we see one man trying to take more control
of the administration than the constitution entitles him to. The tendency towards
increased personal power is typical in late modernities. In the West of today
we see it everywhere from the United States and Turkey to China. But of course
it must look strange when the leader strengthening his power is clearly
unqualified.
The historical comparisons show the trend toward greater personal power
both in the late Roman Republic and in the first Chinese modernity up to 221
BC. In the last case combined with a long time strengthening of the political
discipline of the states. This last trend is today matched in the Chinese part
of the Western civilization, but certainly not in the United States.
In the end of modernities, also in ours, one-man-rule will win. And even
though this process is often driven by personal wish for power, in a deeper
sense the purpose will be to strengthen the state against internal chaos and/or
external threats in the form of competitors. The purpose is not to allow a PM
to stubbornly implement ruinous self-defeating decisions or to let a president
make and enact erratic decisions or election promises no matter the concrete
circumstances.
