President Trump’s decision to [outrage of the day] triggers a crisis for our Constitution and our democracy.
This is no longer about the shameless lies, exaggerations and slanders that the president has trotted out …. It’s no longer about wasting billions of dollars….
… now poses a fundamental challenge to our democracy: [current fundamental challenge]. This is the line between a constitutional republic and a presidential autocracy….
This is no exaggeration…. If [uncrossable line of the moment is crossed] a chilling precedent will be set.
…. But what will stand in the way of a willful president?
…. If the Senate folds and the courts roll over, we will be well on our way to an elected autocracy.
…. a direct assault on our democracy.
Now we will see who stands with the Constitution, and who does not.
Janis Joplin:
Ghoshs These ist, dass etwas, das so groß ist wie der fundamentale Wandel unserer natürlichen Umwelt, das sprachliche Darstellungsvermögen übersteigt.
—Robert Habeck, Wer wir sein könnten, (Köln: Verlag Kiepenheuer & Witsch, 2018), 119.
I think it was while reading Wolin in 2015 that I first noticed American authors writing about the end of US democracy always use the future tense, and over the last three or more years I’ve seen this as a failure in perception, but I think Habeck on Ghosh’s insight with regards to climate change is applicable here as well, and the limit is one imposed by the language commentators find accessible.
