The Democratic Party, as it currently exists, seems utterly incapable of mounting a real counterattack against this rising billionaire-backed techno-authoritarianism. And it’s not because they secretly support Trump—it’s because they’ve been bought, blackmailed, and bullied into submission by the very same oligarchs who are trying to dismantle democracy.
Let’s be real: We let billionaires amass an obscene amount of wealth and unchecked power, and now they own everything—the media, the politicians, the think tanks, the courts, and even the “opposition.” Even the most well-intentioned Democratic leaders can’t get anything done because they’re up against a corrupt system where money dictates policy.
Remember when Obama bailed out Wall Street after the 2008 crash instead of locking up bankers? Or how Biden can barely get a corporate tax increase past his own party? That’s not because they “support Trump”—it’s because the system is rigged in favor of billionaires, and both parties have spent decades enabling it.
The difference is that Republicans embrace the corruption, while Democrats just politely manage it.
If the Democratic leadership actually wanted to stop this, they’d be:
• Breaking up tech monopolies, taxing billionaires at Eisenhower-era levels, and putting real restrictions on corporate lobbying.
• Cracking down on dark money, enforcing antitrust laws, and treating Silicon Valley libertarian billionaires like the existential threat they are.
• Actually fighting for the working class instead of throwing them an occasional tax credit and calling it a revolution.
But that would require real courage, and let’s face it: Most of them are too compromised, too comfortable, or too scared to take on the oligarchs.
So, what happens when your so-called “left-wing” party is too weak, corrupt, or cowardly to stop the billionaires from dismantling democracy? You get the slow, polite collapse of everything we were supposed to stand for. And by the time the Democrats realize what’s happened, it’ll be too late.
So yeah, the Democratic leadership isn’t “all Trump supporters.” But they might as well be if they refuse to fight back.
Hi Christina, I was really pleased to find your Substack. I'm not a scientist or an academic but I a woman writer who is really concerned about how women's voices and the issues around gender are being silenced. From my perspective it's happening on who gets published and the platform women have, but I've been reading more and more about AI gender bias so it feels like the odds are stacked against us from who is setting the agenda, funding, making the decisions at every level.
Incredible piece of work a blueprint for all us to read, share and use. I felt inspired just reading it. Thank you for your painstaking work on this 'resistance handbook
Hi again Christina. Thank you once more for your obviously hard work.
In Australia, I'm a member of the Australian Greens, the third most significant party in Australia after the Liberal Party/National Party coalition who are a malicious party of hacks with generations-long ties to the Republicans, and the Labor Party who are a complete mishmash of leftish voices, whose utterings as the party in power have often been somewhat tone-deaf, and sometimes opening themselves to attack from a malicious and malignant opposition party.
Both those parties support Trump. They have to. They have both been beholden to American power for generations, at least since their enmeshment and dominance over the Australian war effort.
So in this situation, and with an election at a date to be set, presumably in April or March, I've decided to recommend to the Australian Greens that we change our policy simply to an anti-Trump policy. Just about everything he does and says, we will vehemently disagree with. At best, we are neutral and willing to see how the dice fall (while protesting that games of chance should have little to do with deciding matters of state and the broader economy. After Trump and his coterie are vanquished, then we can return to our usual concerns about the environment and social justice.
Anyhow, your post is a great progress report. I hope that the Greens will accept this. If so, I'm sure I could get a Greens Senator and possibly Rep too to travel to the US to align ourselves with anti-Trump forces. The Democrats would be probably the most important port of call as the established political opposition to Trump. I think they'd also like to meet voices for the Native Americans, and for the African Americans, members of the local green movement in the US, and with representatives of the Secretary General of the UN,
I think in this new world that new alliances must be made, in what is ultimately a battle of (tarnished) lightness, and the forces of darkness represented by Trump-Musk-Vance.
I enjoy reading your substack posts! As someone with autism and a carer for my mum I find anything to do with data and news interesting. Be great to hear your views on other news stories :)
Thank you for your clear-sighted and systematic work. Very helpful, very much appreciated- and not only the content but also the reminder that playing headless chicken isn't a strategy... I do however feel it's time for scientists to wake up and to assume their responsibility in society. That fact that we have advanced societies with considerable proportions of populations not 'believing' in science- as if it were a religion- is worrisome to say the least but elections of anti-science parties shouldn't come as a surprise then. Science is a very well-isolated bubble, with its very own rules and codes (I'm a scientist myself who went into advocacy) but waving papers at people and telling them how stupid they are- a lot of the early COVID conversations were like that- is not helping with building broad societal consensus on the importance of science. It's also not helping with credibility when, after years of talks about how we need evidence-based medicine, there is akin to preemptive obedience removing critical classifiers like WOMEN from clinical publications and not much of any systematic opposition to this entirely unscientific behaviour that in the end will hurt everywhere, independently for whom they voted....
And science has always been political- just the mere fact of scientific investigation, the fact of questioning oneself, of careful observation, of considering opposing views- that alone can become problematic in the wrong circumstances.
And as someone who went from science into cancer patient advocacy- I heartily disagree that scientists are less well-suited to advocacy. Less organised, underexposed, inexperienced- most definitely- but less suited, no way. The success of the HIV/ AIDS community? They had scientists at their core who trained the community. The throwing blood bags and the protest might have been more visible- and helped to enforce their demands- but they came with constructive suggestions that were cutting-edge science. Climate, environmental issues in general, biodiversity- often scientists at the core. Successful advocacy isn't rocket science- but it has some critical components 1. getting started- most ideas will not survive contact with reality anyway, so getting started matters 2. use *all* our expertise to the maximum- one can obviously go into a different field but after years of investing into ourselves, we have plenty of knowledge that can make just that difference in that specific situation- and find others for the missing expertise, there are amazing people out there everywhere, one just has to find them 3. always, always, always evaluate, both the work as well as the method and underlying assumptions. Most people I've seen fail were in love with their solutions and forgot to look really hard at the problem. Lean start-up tools, critical thinking, problem solving - there are plenty of methods to use. Change in complex systems also helps but one can get a lot done with just observing carefully. Scientists have many advantages there- used to learn fast, used to testing, evaluating, considering, not avoiding contradictions. And- if one is on the idea side of things, it's often actually not about big numbers- big budgets. It's about the right leverage, so getting the right things to the right people. And you have definitely found your niche :) so once more, this depth is so much appreciated. p.s. it might help with networks if you accepted connections on LinkedIn
Superb, thank you. Thank goodness for those organisations with the experience to legally challenge. In addition those Blue States can make a difference.
As you say Congress is controlled by Republicans and although the likes of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have spoken out it’s impossible. In addition one or two Democrats are voting with Republicans. They can only be heard although I believe they are working behind the scenes. Furthermore Musk has threatened to use his wealth to ensure those opposing Trump policies will not be re-elected.
The media is certainly acquiescing. Trump’s first term showed what he was capable of doing. Jim Acosta (CNN) questioned Trump relentlessly at press briefings until the day he banned him from the White House. He continued on his prime time programme, although he was later reinstated when CNN and Acosta took it to court. This time CNN relegated him to the ‘early morning’ slot, he stood down but now has a Substack.
Science is so important, not only for public health now but for the research needed to progress. I am shocked that the US has an Executive full of anti-science supporters but in many ways they are supporting Project 2025, something Trump denied on the campaign trail. I hope scientists can fight back somehow but understandably it is so difficult. The US is key along with the UK in scientific research and development.
We have seen in the UK how political and societal norms have been broken. The Conservative Party gave their politicians ‘get out of jail’ free cards. The number guilty of serious ‘misdemeanours’, which were ignored, only leads to a lack of confidence in ‘leaders’. While this went on peaceful protest was criminalised to the point where a 78 year old protester is imprisoned and other criminals had less of a sentence.
Our courts and judges are meant to uphold the law. Mitch McConnell, Republican Senate leader, during Trumps first term, ensured courts were filled with Republican judges. At the same time the Supreme Court was packed with Republican judges, particularly after the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Brett Kavanaugh a Republican judge, who was accused of sexually assaulting a fellow student found his way into the Supreme Court even after the brave woman testified to Congress. Amy Coney Barrett, another Republican judge, was also appointed even after outstanding questioning from Kamala Harris, then Senator. Now the US has a Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, which supports Trump and delayed the work of Special Counsel Jack Smith, who was investigating January 6th insurrection. The Supreme Court passed a law stating Presidents were immune from prosecution when acting out official duties as President. Jack Smith then had to amend his evidence with respect to this law which further delayed the final court appearances. Ultimately Trump got away with it and Jack Smith dropped the case as all the other criminal convictions also dropped. So now the US has a President who is a rapist and felon! That’s what Americans voted for! It is important that the judiciary remains independent.
There’s no doubt and understandable that countries are frightened to confront Trump. I was, however, hoping that Governments would be planning for another Trump Presidency, that they would be checking out Project 2025 and be a little more prepared. Apparently not so much. Bullies have to be confronted in a sensible way I just hope that plans are being put in place now and a collective approach including other European countries and the groups you highlight.
This is brilliant -- truly a public service. I've been in many conversations recently about who is doing what/what needs to be done. This is SO helpful.
Christina, I am co-host of New Books in Political Science. I'd love to interview you about the article (we usually do books but we make exceptions sometimes). It might only hit a few thousand people but maybe it would spread the word? I am at sliebell@sju.edu if you are interested. Would be 20 minutes -- maybe Thursday or Friday, audio only and we'd get it up immediately. Also, I hope you send an op-ed to NYT and others. The diagram is a great visual.
Very informative. And scary. This is the first where I’ve seen what to do as an individual to get involved. Have been feeling helpless and fearful with no place to go
I'm recommending your substack in my substack. Thank you.
The Democratic Party, as it currently exists, seems utterly incapable of mounting a real counterattack against this rising billionaire-backed techno-authoritarianism. And it’s not because they secretly support Trump—it’s because they’ve been bought, blackmailed, and bullied into submission by the very same oligarchs who are trying to dismantle democracy.
Let’s be real: We let billionaires amass an obscene amount of wealth and unchecked power, and now they own everything—the media, the politicians, the think tanks, the courts, and even the “opposition.” Even the most well-intentioned Democratic leaders can’t get anything done because they’re up against a corrupt system where money dictates policy.
Remember when Obama bailed out Wall Street after the 2008 crash instead of locking up bankers? Or how Biden can barely get a corporate tax increase past his own party? That’s not because they “support Trump”—it’s because the system is rigged in favor of billionaires, and both parties have spent decades enabling it.
The difference is that Republicans embrace the corruption, while Democrats just politely manage it.
If the Democratic leadership actually wanted to stop this, they’d be:
• Breaking up tech monopolies, taxing billionaires at Eisenhower-era levels, and putting real restrictions on corporate lobbying.
• Cracking down on dark money, enforcing antitrust laws, and treating Silicon Valley libertarian billionaires like the existential threat they are.
• Actually fighting for the working class instead of throwing them an occasional tax credit and calling it a revolution.
But that would require real courage, and let’s face it: Most of them are too compromised, too comfortable, or too scared to take on the oligarchs.
So, what happens when your so-called “left-wing” party is too weak, corrupt, or cowardly to stop the billionaires from dismantling democracy? You get the slow, polite collapse of everything we were supposed to stand for. And by the time the Democrats realize what’s happened, it’ll be too late.
So yeah, the Democratic leadership isn’t “all Trump supporters.” But they might as well be if they refuse to fight back.
Journalist Jonathan Katz hosting Radley Balko's post "A constant struggle. Some help keeping track of recent events"
https://theracket.news/p/a-constant-struggle
May be of interest
Hi Christina, I was really pleased to find your Substack. I'm not a scientist or an academic but I a woman writer who is really concerned about how women's voices and the issues around gender are being silenced. From my perspective it's happening on who gets published and the platform women have, but I've been reading more and more about AI gender bias so it feels like the odds are stacked against us from who is setting the agenda, funding, making the decisions at every level.
Kamala Harris famously loves a Venn diagram. Id forward if I knew how...
Incredible work, bravo!
Please send to Heather Cox Richardson, whose daily blog I recomm, American political historian
Really interesting and useful. What's your analysis of the President cancelling 'gender' and 'restoring biological truth' - which goes well beyond cancelling DEI initiatives - as one of its first moves? https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/defending-women-from-gender-ideology-extremism-and-restoring-biological-truth-to-the-federal-government/
Incredible piece of work a blueprint for all us to read, share and use. I felt inspired just reading it. Thank you for your painstaking work on this 'resistance handbook
Hi again Christina. Thank you once more for your obviously hard work.
In Australia, I'm a member of the Australian Greens, the third most significant party in Australia after the Liberal Party/National Party coalition who are a malicious party of hacks with generations-long ties to the Republicans, and the Labor Party who are a complete mishmash of leftish voices, whose utterings as the party in power have often been somewhat tone-deaf, and sometimes opening themselves to attack from a malicious and malignant opposition party.
Both those parties support Trump. They have to. They have both been beholden to American power for generations, at least since their enmeshment and dominance over the Australian war effort.
So in this situation, and with an election at a date to be set, presumably in April or March, I've decided to recommend to the Australian Greens that we change our policy simply to an anti-Trump policy. Just about everything he does and says, we will vehemently disagree with. At best, we are neutral and willing to see how the dice fall (while protesting that games of chance should have little to do with deciding matters of state and the broader economy. After Trump and his coterie are vanquished, then we can return to our usual concerns about the environment and social justice.
Anyhow, your post is a great progress report. I hope that the Greens will accept this. If so, I'm sure I could get a Greens Senator and possibly Rep too to travel to the US to align ourselves with anti-Trump forces. The Democrats would be probably the most important port of call as the established political opposition to Trump. I think they'd also like to meet voices for the Native Americans, and for the African Americans, members of the local green movement in the US, and with representatives of the Secretary General of the UN,
I think in this new world that new alliances must be made, in what is ultimately a battle of (tarnished) lightness, and the forces of darkness represented by Trump-Musk-Vance.
I enjoy reading your substack posts! As someone with autism and a carer for my mum I find anything to do with data and news interesting. Be great to hear your views on other news stories :)
Thank you for your clear-sighted and systematic work. Very helpful, very much appreciated- and not only the content but also the reminder that playing headless chicken isn't a strategy... I do however feel it's time for scientists to wake up and to assume their responsibility in society. That fact that we have advanced societies with considerable proportions of populations not 'believing' in science- as if it were a religion- is worrisome to say the least but elections of anti-science parties shouldn't come as a surprise then. Science is a very well-isolated bubble, with its very own rules and codes (I'm a scientist myself who went into advocacy) but waving papers at people and telling them how stupid they are- a lot of the early COVID conversations were like that- is not helping with building broad societal consensus on the importance of science. It's also not helping with credibility when, after years of talks about how we need evidence-based medicine, there is akin to preemptive obedience removing critical classifiers like WOMEN from clinical publications and not much of any systematic opposition to this entirely unscientific behaviour that in the end will hurt everywhere, independently for whom they voted....
And science has always been political- just the mere fact of scientific investigation, the fact of questioning oneself, of careful observation, of considering opposing views- that alone can become problematic in the wrong circumstances.
And as someone who went from science into cancer patient advocacy- I heartily disagree that scientists are less well-suited to advocacy. Less organised, underexposed, inexperienced- most definitely- but less suited, no way. The success of the HIV/ AIDS community? They had scientists at their core who trained the community. The throwing blood bags and the protest might have been more visible- and helped to enforce their demands- but they came with constructive suggestions that were cutting-edge science. Climate, environmental issues in general, biodiversity- often scientists at the core. Successful advocacy isn't rocket science- but it has some critical components 1. getting started- most ideas will not survive contact with reality anyway, so getting started matters 2. use *all* our expertise to the maximum- one can obviously go into a different field but after years of investing into ourselves, we have plenty of knowledge that can make just that difference in that specific situation- and find others for the missing expertise, there are amazing people out there everywhere, one just has to find them 3. always, always, always evaluate, both the work as well as the method and underlying assumptions. Most people I've seen fail were in love with their solutions and forgot to look really hard at the problem. Lean start-up tools, critical thinking, problem solving - there are plenty of methods to use. Change in complex systems also helps but one can get a lot done with just observing carefully. Scientists have many advantages there- used to learn fast, used to testing, evaluating, considering, not avoiding contradictions. And- if one is on the idea side of things, it's often actually not about big numbers- big budgets. It's about the right leverage, so getting the right things to the right people. And you have definitely found your niche :) so once more, this depth is so much appreciated. p.s. it might help with networks if you accepted connections on LinkedIn
Superb, thank you. Thank goodness for those organisations with the experience to legally challenge. In addition those Blue States can make a difference.
As you say Congress is controlled by Republicans and although the likes of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have spoken out it’s impossible. In addition one or two Democrats are voting with Republicans. They can only be heard although I believe they are working behind the scenes. Furthermore Musk has threatened to use his wealth to ensure those opposing Trump policies will not be re-elected.
The media is certainly acquiescing. Trump’s first term showed what he was capable of doing. Jim Acosta (CNN) questioned Trump relentlessly at press briefings until the day he banned him from the White House. He continued on his prime time programme, although he was later reinstated when CNN and Acosta took it to court. This time CNN relegated him to the ‘early morning’ slot, he stood down but now has a Substack.
Science is so important, not only for public health now but for the research needed to progress. I am shocked that the US has an Executive full of anti-science supporters but in many ways they are supporting Project 2025, something Trump denied on the campaign trail. I hope scientists can fight back somehow but understandably it is so difficult. The US is key along with the UK in scientific research and development.
We have seen in the UK how political and societal norms have been broken. The Conservative Party gave their politicians ‘get out of jail’ free cards. The number guilty of serious ‘misdemeanours’, which were ignored, only leads to a lack of confidence in ‘leaders’. While this went on peaceful protest was criminalised to the point where a 78 year old protester is imprisoned and other criminals had less of a sentence.
Our courts and judges are meant to uphold the law. Mitch McConnell, Republican Senate leader, during Trumps first term, ensured courts were filled with Republican judges. At the same time the Supreme Court was packed with Republican judges, particularly after the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Brett Kavanaugh a Republican judge, who was accused of sexually assaulting a fellow student found his way into the Supreme Court even after the brave woman testified to Congress. Amy Coney Barrett, another Republican judge, was also appointed even after outstanding questioning from Kamala Harris, then Senator. Now the US has a Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, which supports Trump and delayed the work of Special Counsel Jack Smith, who was investigating January 6th insurrection. The Supreme Court passed a law stating Presidents were immune from prosecution when acting out official duties as President. Jack Smith then had to amend his evidence with respect to this law which further delayed the final court appearances. Ultimately Trump got away with it and Jack Smith dropped the case as all the other criminal convictions also dropped. So now the US has a President who is a rapist and felon! That’s what Americans voted for! It is important that the judiciary remains independent.
There’s no doubt and understandable that countries are frightened to confront Trump. I was, however, hoping that Governments would be planning for another Trump Presidency, that they would be checking out Project 2025 and be a little more prepared. Apparently not so much. Bullies have to be confronted in a sensible way I just hope that plans are being put in place now and a collective approach including other European countries and the groups you highlight.
This is brilliant -- truly a public service. I've been in many conversations recently about who is doing what/what needs to be done. This is SO helpful.
re your other comment - i doubt any newspapers, particularly US ones, read my substack! not least cos I normally write about covid...
Christina, I am co-host of New Books in Political Science. I'd love to interview you about the article (we usually do books but we make exceptions sometimes). It might only hit a few thousand people but maybe it would spread the word? I am at sliebell@sju.edu if you are interested. Would be 20 minutes -- maybe Thursday or Friday, audio only and we'd get it up immediately. Also, I hope you send an op-ed to NYT and others. The diagram is a great visual.
thank you!
Very informative. And scary. This is the first where I’ve seen what to do as an individual to get involved. Have been feeling helpless and fearful with no place to go
A superb work
You are doing a great public service with this. Thank you!