Modern Authoritarianism Abroad: What Hungary, Turkey, and India Teach Us

Modern authoritarianism doesn’t rise in secret. It happens in plain sight.

Democracies across the globe have voted themselves into crisis—choosing strongmen who promise to restore pride, clean up corruption, or defend tradition. What follows is a pattern: leaders consolidate power, weaken oversight, attack critics, and change the rules to stay in control.

If it feels like what’s happening in the U.S. is unprecedented, it’s not. It’s familiar.
Today, we’re looking at three countries—Hungary, Turkey, and India—where democracies were dismantled not with a coup, but with applause.

Hungary: The Blueprint for Democratic Backsliding

In 2010, Viktor Orbán returned to power in Hungary with a supermajority and a message: Hungary would be “illiberal”—a democracy in name, but not in substance.

He moved fast.

• Rewrote the constitution to cement Fidesz party dominance

• Packed the courts with loyalists and curtailed judicial review

• Cracked down on independent media, cutting off funding and licensing to critical outlets

• Demonized immigrants and minorities as threats to “Christian civilization”

• Redrew electoral districts and changed voting laws to ensure continued power

Orbán didn’t hide it—he called it a new model of governance. Other leaders took notes.

Turkey: Purges and Presidential Power

Turkey’s slide began earlier, but accelerated dramatically after a failed coup attempt in 2016. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan used the crisis to declare a state of emergency, giving himself sweeping powers.

What followed:

• Over 100,000 civil servants, teachers, and judges were purged

• Thousands of journalists and academics were arrested

• Media outlets were shut down or bought by government allies

• The constitution was rewritten via referendum to expand presidential powers and eliminate checks

• Elections were increasingly tilted, with opposition voices silenced or criminalized

Turkey still holds elections—but they’re no longer free or fair in any meaningful way.

India: Majoritarian Nationalism and Institutional Erosion

India, the world’s largest democracy, has seen democratic backsliding under Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP. Unlike the other two, India remains more pluralistic—but the warning signs are mounting.

Modi’s government has:

• Used religious nationalism to target minorities, particularly Muslims

• Pressured media and journalists, including through arrests and tax raids

• Weakened the independence of courts and electoral bodies

• Silenced dissent using sedition and anti-terrorism laws

• Created a chilling effect where open criticism of the government can lead to harassment, job loss, or imprisonment

The danger in India isn’t a dictatorship tomorrow—it’s the normalization of authoritarian tactics.

Why These Cases Matter

None of these countries became authoritarian overnight.
All of them held elections. All of them had constitutions.
And in each case, democracy was eroded step by step—through legal means, aided by fear, distraction, and public fatigue.

These examples matter because they show how democracy dies with a legal pad, not a gun.And they offer a chilling preview of what can happen when institutions are too weak—or too captured—to resist.

The Authoritarian International: CPAC and the New Global Right

These aren’t isolated cases. What we’re seeing isn’t just a coincidence—it’s a shared strategy.

Over the last few years, global right-wing movements have begun to collaborate openly, and CPAC—the Conservative Political Action Conference—has become their meeting ground. Originally a U.S. political event, CPAC has expanded internationally, hosting gatherings in Hungary, Brazil, Mexico, Japan, and elsewhere, inviting authoritarian-aligned leaders to share their vision.

• Viktor Orbán has been featured as a keynote speaker at CPAC, where he laid out his model of “illiberal democracy” and called for international cooperation among nationalists. In his speech, Orbán stated: “We must take back the institutions in Washington and Brussels. We must find friends and allies in one another and coordinate the movement of our troops.” 

• Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro, who sought to overturn his own election loss, has appeared at CPAC and continues to enjoy MAGA support.

• American conservatives, including GOP lawmakers and MAGA-aligned figures, have praised these leaders, echoed their talking points, and adopted their tactics—on immigration, press suppression, election integrity rhetoric, and more.

CPAC is no longer just a place to talk about tax cuts and gun rights—it’s become a hub for authoritarian ideologues to share tools, language, and strategy.

The MAGA movement isn’t just mimicking these regimes—it’s learning from them.
And in many cases, it’s helping export the model right back out to the world.

Coming Up: The Playbook Comes to America

Tomorrow, we’ll turn the lens back home.
The United States may have stronger institutions than Hungary or Turkey—but the same tactics are already being used here. And the guardrails are weaker than many Americans think.

Stay with the series. If you haven’t already, subscribe or share with someone who needs this context.

The Robot Slow Burn: How Automation Changed the Game

In the story of America’s vanishing factory jobs, trade usually gets the headlines. It’s easy to blame a closed plant on a company moving production overseas.

But there’s another story—quieter, slower, and harder to point at. It didn’t happen with a bang, but with a hum.

That story is automation.

Because even as manufacturing jobs disappeared, something strange happened: U.S. manufacturing output went up.

We didn’t stop making things.
We just stopped needing as many people to make them.

Do More with Less: The Productivity Revolution

Since the 1970s, American manufacturing has seen steady gains in productivity:

• Fewer workers produced more goods.

• Machines replaced repetitive human labor.

• Computers ran systems that once took teams of operators.

By the 2000s, it took far fewer people to build a car or cut steel than it did a generation earlier. And that trend hasn’t slowed.

For example:

• In automotive factories, robotics now handle welding, painting, and assembly-line work.

• In steel production, sensors and automation optimize smelting and cutting with minimal labor.

• In electronics, computer-guided systems assemble devices with extreme precision, 24/7.

These weren’t bad decisions.
They were smart business moves—if your goal was efficiency.

But for workers? It meant fewer jobs… or none at all.

The Disappearing Job—Not the Disappearing Industry

One of the biggest misconceptions is that U.S. manufacturing is “dead.”
It’s not.

We still make:

• Aircraft and advanced vehicles

• Industrial machinery

• Semiconductors

• Food, chemicals, and pharmaceuticals

What’s changed is who gets to participate in making those things:

• Today’s factory jobs require technical skills, not just physical labor.

• High-paying blue-collar jobs have shifted to high-tech plants concentrated in fewer locations.

• Routine, repetitive roles are increasingly handled by machines.

Automation hasn’t killed American industry—it’s just made it less accessible to the workers who used to rely on it.

The Slow Burn vs. the Sudden Shock

Unlike trade shocks, which hit fast and hard (like when China entered the WTO), automation was a gradual burn:

• It spread over decades.

• It was uneven—hitting some regions and sectors harder than others.

• It often went unnoticed, because there was no dramatic exit. Just fewer people getting hired.

And because it didn’t make headlines, there was less urgency to respond.

Not Just Technology—But Choices

Here’s the uncomfortable truth:
Automation isn’t some neutral force of nature.
It’s shaped by corporate decisions, government policy, and social values.

We could have:

• Invested in retraining and education for displaced workers.

• Slowed the rollout in communities without other job options.

• Spread the gains from productivity more evenly.

But instead, most of the gains went to:

• Investors

• Executives

• Shareholders

Workers were told to “learn to code” or move somewhere else.
Many couldn’t.

What Comes Next

Tomorrow, we’ll shift from the slow burn of robots to the shockwave of offshoring—how trade deals and global supply chains accelerated job losses in very specific places, very fast.

Because while automation eroded the floor, trade sometimes pulled it out from under people entirely.

Modern Authoritarianism: How Democracies Die Step by Step

You don’t wake up one morning to find yourself in a dictatorship. That’s the oldest myth in the book.

In the modern world, authoritarianism doesn’t kick down the front door. It slips in quietly—through elections, headlines, executive orders, and court decisions. It looks like patriotism. It sounds like law and order. And by the time people realize what’s happening, it can be too late.

This week, in our Modern Authoritarianism series, we’re breaking down the Authoritarian Playbook—how democracies around the world have been slowly hollowed out from the inside, and how those same moves are unfolding here in the United States.

But before we talk about what’s happening, we need to talk about how it happens.

Authoritarianism in the 21st Century: A Different Kind of Coup

When people hear the word authoritarian, they picture tanks in the streets. Gulags. Military takeovers.

But the modern version is more subtle. It uses democratic systems to destroy democracy itself.

You vote for a strongman, and he promises to drain the swamp. He attacks the press, undermines the courts, and rewrites the rules. He tells you the other side is corrupt, dangerous, even treasonous. He wraps it all in flags and faith. And he does it all legally—at first.

This isn’t just theory. It’s happened in Hungary. Turkey. India. Brazil. Venezuela. In each case, the warning signs were there. In each case, the playbook worked.

The Seven-Step Playbook

Most authoritarian shifts follow a recognizable pattern—some faster, some slower, but the moves are shockingly consistent:

1. Discredit the press

2. Weaken the courts

3. Undermine elections

4. Target minorities and scapegoats

5. Centralize power and rewrite rules

6. Foster political violence

7. Use the law to punish dissent

This week, we’ll walk through how these steps have played out abroad—and how they’re playing out right now in America.

Why Authoritarianism Always Fails the People

It’s easy to think: Well, maybe a strongman would fix things. Maybe we need someone to clean house, get tough, take control. That’s how it always starts.

But authoritarian governments don’t fix corruption—they bury it.
They don’t bring order—they create fear.
And they don’t protect people like you—they protect themselves.

Here’s what actually happens when authoritarianism takes hold:

• Corruption gets worse, not better.
  Autocrats don’t drain the swamp—they fill it with loyalists. Bribery, nepotism, and abuse of power flourish behind closed doors with no independent press or courts to stop it.

• Instability increases.
  Crackdowns at home spark unrest. Foreign allies become wary. Authoritarians often pick fights abroad to distract from problems at home, dragging nations into conflict or isolation.

• Wealth is siphoned upward.
  The people at the top consolidate economic control. Oligarchs thrive. Ordinary citizens are left with fewer rights, fewer protections, and rising costs—while dissent becomes dangerous.

• Everyone becomes more vulnerable.
  Once checks and balances are gone, no one is safe. Today’s “enemies” might be your neighbors. Tomorrow, they could come for you. Authoritarian power protects no one but itself.

These regimes promise strength—but they deliver fear. They sell simplicity—but real solutions require accountability. Every country that’s gone down this road has paid a steep price, often for generations.

Why This Matters Now

We’re no longer speculating about what might happen—we’re living it.

The United States has elected a man who openly praised dictators, vowed to jail his political enemies, and declared he would be a “dictator on day one.” Now in office again, he’s following through. From purging civil servants to politicizing federal agencies, the authoritarian playbook isn’t a warning anymore—it’s a reality.

We’ll explore exactly how in the coming days. But this isn’t just about one man.

It’s about a movement that wants to roll back rights, silence critics, and concentrate power. And it’s testing whether America’s institutions—our courts, our press, our elections—can hold the line.

History suggests we shouldn’t assume they will.

What You’ll Get This Week

This series isn’t about fear. It’s about clarity.
Each post in Modern Authoritarianism will focus on a specific part of the authoritarian playbook:

• Day 2: What Hungary, Turkey, and India can teach us

• Day 3: How the playbook is being used in the U.S.

• Day 4: A step-by-step breakdown of the tactics

• Day 5: What’s still resisting—and why it matters

• Day 6: How other countries have fought back

• Day 7: What you can do to help defend democracy

If You’re New Here

This blog exists to ask hard questions and explore real answers. I don’t do doom. I do history, systems, and how we fight for better.

If that sounds like your vibe, subscribe or share this series with someone who needs to see it.

Day 2 drops tomorrow.
Until then, keep your eyes open. That’s where resistance begins.

The Great Disappearance: Where Did the Manufacturing Jobs Go?

At the dawn of the 21st century, America was still the world’s largest economy, and its factory towns were still humming—sort of. Steel was still forged. Cars were still built. Goods were still stamped “Made in the USA.”

Then, seemingly overnight, it all began to vanish.

Since the year 2000, the U.S. has lost nearly 5 million manufacturing jobs. That’s not a typo. It’s a transformation—a rupture. Entire regions, once defined by steady union wages and industrial pride, now struggle with unemployment, opioid abuse, and economic despair.

But here’s the thing: there wasn’t just one cause.

Was it trade?
Was it automation?
Was it politics? Policy? Indifference?

Yes. All of the above.

This week, we dive into the fallout from Pax Americana—not in Baghdad or Beijing, but in Buffalo, Akron, Flint, and Youngstown. Because while the U.S. was busy building peace and prosperity abroad, something was breaking back home.

The Vanishing Factory Floor

Let’s start with the numbers:

• Between 2000 and 2010, the U.S. lost over 5 million manufacturing jobs.

• In that same period, manufacturing as a share of total U.S. employment fell from 13% to just 9%—and it kept dropping.

• Entire industries—furniture, textiles, electronics—were gutted.

What once felt permanent—the union job with benefits, the factory shift that paid the mortgage—was gone. And it hasn’t really come back.

What Happened?

We’re often told it was trade deals:

• NAFTA in the 1990s.

• China’s entry into the WTO in 2001.

• Offshoring and outsourcing that moved production to Mexico, China, and beyond.

And yes—trade was a major factor. Economists call it the China Shock: when Chinese imports surged, U.S. manufacturing collapsed in regions that couldn’t compete.

But that’s only part of the story.

The other culprit? Automation.

Robots Don’t Unionize

Even as factories closed in the U.S., manufacturing output actually went up.

Why? Because we replaced people with machines:

• One robot could do the work of five welders.

• Computer-controlled systems replaced human operators.

• Entire production lines became fully automated.

This wasn’t new—it had been happening for decades. But in the 2000s, it accelerated. Technology made production more efficient, but it reduced the need for human labor.

So even the factories that stayed?
They hired fewer people.

And Then There Was Policy

Here’s what made it worse: the U.S. failed to prepare or protect its workers.

• Trade Adjustment Assistance programs were underfunded, confusing, and limited.

• Retraining programs often didn’t match available jobs.

• Other countries—like Germany—paired trade with worker protections and industrial strategy. America didn’t.

We left communities to figure it out alone.

So Which Was It—Trade or Tech?

Both.

• Automation explains the slow erosion of jobs over decades.

• Trade shocks explain the sudden collapse in certain regions and industries.

• Policy failure explains why it hit so hard—and why recovery never came.

This wasn’t a natural disaster. It was a man-made crisis, driven by choices.

What Comes Next

The rest of this week will unpack this fallout:

• Tomorrow, we’ll dig into the slow burn of automation.

• Then the shockwave of offshoring.

• And finally, how politicians tried (and mostly failed) to fix it.

Because if Pax Americana promised peace and prosperity, we need to ask: for whom?

Interdependence vs. Independence: Did Trade Really Prevent War?

One of the big promises of Pax Americana was that free trade would keep the peace.

This idea, often called liberal peace theory, says that countries tied together by economic interdependence are less likely to go to war. Why? Because war is bad for business—and countries with shared markets, supply chains, and investments have too much to lose.

And for decades, it seemed to hold up:

• No world wars since 1945.

• A massive drop in direct conflicts between major powers.

• Trade grew exponentially. So did global GDP.

But now, more than 75 years later, the cracks are showing.
So it’s worth asking: Did trade really prevent war—or just change the way conflict happens?

The Theory: Peace Through Trade

After WWII, the U.S. built a system that:

• Encouraged countries to trade with each other (and especially with the U.S.)

• Tied global markets together

• Created shared economic incentives

The logic was elegant: if your economy depends on your enemy, you can’t afford to fight them.

And to some extent, it worked:

• Germany and France went from centuries of war to peaceful neighbors.

• Japan and the U.S. became allies through trade.

• China and the U.S. became deeply linked despite deep political differences.

The Cracks in the System

But peace didn’t always mean harmony—and trade didn’t always stop violence.

Proxy wars

The Cold War didn’t lead to direct U.S.-Soviet war, but it did fuel bloody conflicts in:

• Vietnam

• Korea

• Latin America

• Africa

Trade didn’t stop war—it outsourced it to other regions.

Exploitation and inequality

Interdependence also meant dependency.
Many countries remained locked in resource-export roles, reliant on U.S. or Western markets.

That created resentment, unrest, and long-term instability.

Strategic backfires

• China grew into a strategic rival—powered by the very trade system the U.S. built.

• Russia traded freely with the West—until it didn’t.

• Sanctions became a tool of war-by-other-means, punishing civilians while elites adapted.

The Domestic Cost: A Tradeoff Too Far?

Here’s the twist: even as global conflict declined, internal tension in the U.S. grew.

• Entire industries hollowed out by offshoring.

• Middle-class jobs replaced with low-wage service work.

• Entire regions left behind by a system that was supposed to bring prosperity.

Trade may have stabilized the world—but it came with a bill.

And too often, American workers were the ones stuck paying it.

What Comes Next

Next week, we’ll turn the lens inward.

We’ll look at how this grand strategy—meant to spread peace, grow economies, and lift all boats—ended up capsizing industries and communities right here at home.

Because if Pax Americana was built on trade, the cracks in that system started showing not in Europe or Asia—but in places like Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

Friend or Market? Case Studies in Strategic Trade

By the late 20th century, U.S. trade policy had evolved into more than a tool for prosperity. It became a litmus test for political alignment.

If you played by Washington’s rules, you got access to the world’s largest consumer market, investment, and economic growth.

If you didn’t, you faced sanctions, embargoes, and exclusion.

Let’s look at how different countries experienced the American-led trade order—not just as economic participants, but as players in a larger geopolitical game.

Japan & South Korea: Allies by Access

After WWII and the Korean War, both Japan and South Korea were devastated. The U.S. stepped in with a clear strategy:

• Security guarantees (bases, treaties, and military aid)

• Massive economic support

• Access to U.S. markets to rebuild export-driven economies

These nations weren’t just helped—they were transformed:

• Japan became an industrial powerhouse by the 1980s.

• South Korea went from dictatorship to democracy, powered by manufacturing and trade.

In return, they aligned closely with U.S. interests throughout the Cold War.

Trade was the glue that held the alliance together.

China: From Outsider to Factory of the World

In the 1970s, China was still closed off from the global economy.

Then came Nixon’s visit in 1972, a historic opening. Over the next few decades, China:

• Gradually opened its economy

• Attracted foreign investment

• Was admitted to the WTO in 2001, with U.S. support

The result? China became the world’s manufacturing hub, lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty—and deeply tying its fate to the global (and American) economy.

But it wasn’t just economics.
The U.S. believed that trade would lead to reform, liberalization, even democracy.

Spoiler: It didn’t.

But it did create a powerful competitor embedded in the very system America built.

Cuba, Iran, North Korea: The Cold Trade

Then there were the countries that didn’t play ball.

• Cuba: Sanctioned since 1960 after nationalizing U.S. property and aligning with the USSR.

• Iran: Cut off after the 1979 Islamic Revolution and hostage crisis.

• North Korea: A rogue state, heavily sanctioned and diplomatically isolated for decades.

These nations became examples—not just adversaries.
They showed the world what happened when you stepped outside the Pax framework: no trade, no aid, no access.

In a system built on prosperity, exclusion became punishment.

Trade as Political Pressure

U.S. trade policy wasn’t just about money—it was a foreign policy tool.

It rewarded alignment with:

• Open markets

• Liberal democracy

• U.S. geopolitical interests

And punished those who challenged the system, even if their people paid the price.

This wasn’t free trade.
It was strategic trade—a way to shape behavior, contain threats, and reward loyalty.

What Comes Next

Tomorrow, we’ll wrap up Week 2 by asking:

Did all this trade really keep the peace—or just shift the pain elsewhere?

Because while trade tied the world together, it also left deep imbalances. And some of the biggest costs were felt not overseas—but right here at home.

Made in America, Sold to the World: Trade as Economic Diplomacy

When we talk about Pax Americana, we often focus on the military alliances, trade deals, and financial systems that kept the world in orbit around the U.S.

But just as important—maybe more—was something subtler, shinier, and often shrink-wrapped.

America didn’t just export products. It exported a way of life.

From Big Macs to microchips, from blockbuster movies to business software, the U.S. used trade not only to sell goods, but to spread influence, values, and identity.

Trade became diplomacy by other means—and American corporations became its ambassadors.

When Business Became Foreign Policy

Starting in the postwar boom and accelerating into the 1980s and ’90s, U.S. trade policy worked hand-in-hand with American companies to crack open foreign markets.

Sometimes through:

• Bilateral trade deals

• GATT/WTO mechanisms

• Or just raw economic pressure: “Buy our goods, or risk losing access.”

The U.S. government often acted as deal-maker-in-chief—lobbying for airlines to buy Boeing jets, pushing telecoms to adopt American standards, or supporting franchises entering new regions.

In effect, U.S. companies became informal agents of foreign policy—delivering capitalism in a cup, a car, or a credit card.

Consumer Culture as Soft Power

Think about the icons of late 20th-century global expansion:

• McDonald’s in Moscow (1990): A line around the block symbolized the collapse of the Soviet dream—and the rise of fast-food democracy.

• Coca-Cola in every corner store: A sugary emblem of freedom (or imperialism, depending on whom you asked).

• Hollywood blockbusters: Painting American life as loud, fast, and full of possibility.

These weren’t just brands. They were symbols—of prosperity, modernity, and American dominance.

To many, they represented progress.
To others, cultural invasion.

Either way, they worked.

Globalization, Made in the U.S.A.

As free trade expanded, so did the reach of U.S. companies:

• Microsoft and IBM built the world’s digital infrastructure.

• Nike and Levi’s clothed a global youth culture.

• Walmart, Starbucks, and Apple became everywhere.

These companies didn’t just sell things—they shaped norms, expectations, and even languages (ever heard “Google it” in another country?).

This was globalization—with an American accent.

Brands as Ambassadors

U.S. trade policy wasn’t just about shipping containers—it was about ideological packaging.

Buy American goods, and you buy into:

• Consumer choice

• Individualism

• Aspirational identity

That made American brands powerful tools of soft power—and sometimes, of political leverage.

Trade wasn’t neutral. It was a tool for shaping the global order, one Happy Meal at a time.

What Comes Next

Tomorrow, we’ll take a look at case studies—countries that leaned into trade with the U.S. and those that resisted.

Because for all its global reach, Pax Americana wasn’t universal—and not everyone was happy living in a mall built by America.

From GATT to the WTO: Writing the Rules of Global Trade

If Pax Americana was a global game, then the U.S. helped write the rulebook—and one of the biggest chapters was trade.

From the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1947 to the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995, the U.S. didn’t just participate in global trade.
It shaped how it worked, who got to play, and what the rules would be.

And while it was pitched as a win-win system of free trade for all, the reality was more complicated.

GATT: The First Draft

GATT was born in the aftermath of WWII, alongside the U.S.-led financial order created at Bretton Woods.

Its goal was simple in theory:

Lower tariffs. Reduce trade barriers. Grow the global economy.

In practice, GATT was a gentlemen’s agreement between major Western powers—especially the U.S.—to open up markets on their terms.

For decades, it helped expand trade and connect economies. But it also locked in advantages for countries that already had power, capital, and industrial might.

WTO: Globalizing the Game

By the 1990s, the world had changed. The Cold War was over. New economies were rising. And trade was more complex than ever.

Enter the World Trade Organization (WTO), launched in 1995.

Unlike GATT, the WTO had enforcement power. Countries could bring disputes to a global court. Rulings were binding. Compliance became mandatory.

And guess who helped design the system?

That’s right: the U.S., alongside European allies and a few emerging markets. They created the rules to protect:

• Intellectual property

• Corporate rights

• Global supply chains

But not necessarily workers, climate, or local industries.

Free Trade, American Style

The idea behind all this was that free trade brings peace and prosperity.
Open markets = more cooperation = less war.

And for many countries, it worked—especially export powerhouses like Germany, Japan, and (eventually) China.

But the U.S. also used the system to enforce its values:

• Free-market capitalism

• Deregulation

• Intellectual property protection

• Corporate-friendly dispute mechanisms

If you wanted access to the U.S. market, you had to play by its rules.

The Fairness Question

On paper, free trade sounds fair. But in practice:

• Wealthy countries kept subsidies that protected their farmers and industries.

• Poorer nations often struggled to compete and had little say in rule-making.

• Labor rights and environmental standards were usually left out of trade deals entirely.

For many, the system didn’t feel like a level playing field—it felt like a stacked deck.

What Comes Next

Tomorrow, we’ll explore how U.S. companies used this system to expand globally—and how economic diplomacy became a powerful (and sometimes controversial) foreign policy tool.

Because trade wasn’t just about tariffs and treaties.
It was about shaping the world in America’s image—one container ship at a time.

The Marshall Plan: Cash, Capitalism, and the American Way

After the bombs stopped falling in 1945, Europe was in ruins—physically, politically, and economically.

But the war left behind more than rubble. It created a void—and the United States filled it, not with troops or tanks, but with cash.

The Marshall Plan, launched in 1948, wasn’t just a recovery package. It was a strategy. A strategy to stop the spread of communism, rebuild friendly nations, and lock in U.S. economic dominance for a generation.

Rebuilding Europe—with Strings Attached

Officially called the European Recovery Program, the Marshall Plan sent over $13 billion (roughly $160 billion today) in aid to Western Europe between 1948 and 1952.

It funded:

• Rebuilding roads, factories, and cities

• Stabilizing currencies

• Restoring confidence in capitalism and democracy

But it wasn’t pure generosity.

In exchange, countries had to:

• Align politically with the U.S.

• Open their markets to American goods

• Stay out of the Soviet sphere of influence

Economic recovery was the reward. Political loyalty was the price.

The Real Goal: Containing Communism

The fear in Washington was that poverty, chaos, and hunger would drive Europeans into the arms of communism.

So the U.S. took a gamble:

If capitalism could deliver jobs, stability, and food—it would win hearts and minds.

And it worked.
Communist parties lost ground. U.S. allies flourished. And Western Europe was locked into Pax Americana—economically, militarily, and ideologically.

Aid First, Trade Later

The Marshall Plan didn’t just stabilize Europe—it created customers.

As factories reopened and cities revived, Europe started buying:

• American steel

• American grain

• American machinery

• American movies, music, and ideas

It was a closed loop of growth:

• Dollars flowed out through aid.

• Goods and influence flowed back in through trade.

This was the first major proof of a new kind of power:
Economic diplomacy.

Not a Handout—A Loyalty Program

Think of the Marshall Plan like an elite credit card rewards program:

• Spend with America, and you get stability, security, and access.

• But if you default—or align with the Soviets—you lose those benefits.

It wasn’t charity. It was a strategic investment in a world order designed by and for the U.S.

What Comes Next

Tomorrow, we’ll explore how the U.S. wrote the global rulebook through trade agreements like GATT—and how that system eventually became the WTO.

Because giving aid was one thing.
Writing the rules of trade was how America kept the house edge.

Remembering Pope Francis

Pope Francis passed away today at 88. He died in his Vatican residence, just one day after Easter. His final public words were a blessing for peace — fitting for a man whose papacy was defined by compassion, humility, and care for those often forgotten.

Born Jorge Mario Bergoglio, he made history when he became the first Latin American pope in 2013. But what really set him apart was how deeply human he remained in the role. He rejected the palatial papal apartment in favor of a guesthouse. He rode in a Ford Focus. He kissed the feet of refugees, washed the feet of prisoners, and reminded everyone — especially church leaders — that power should serve, not dominate.

He preached a Gospel rooted in mercy. He told us not to judge people for being gay. He welcomed divorced and remarried Catholics back to the table. He called for civil unions long before it was safe to do so in church circles. He said the death penalty has no place in a modern, moral world. And he warned against what he called a “globalization of indifference” — where people become numb to suffering.

He challenged the rich and powerful too. In Laudato Si’, his climate encyclical, he called on all of us — especially governments and corporations — to protect our planet and prioritize the poor. In Fratelli Tutti, he laid out a vision of solidarity and social friendship, one that didn’t rely on borders or tribes but on shared human dignity.

Was he perfect? No. No pope is. He faced resistance inside the Vatican. Some of his reforms were incomplete. But he opened doors that had been shut for centuries. And he changed the global conversation — not just within the Church, but beyond it.

Pope Francis reminded us that faith, at its best, means showing up for others. Listening more than speaking. Walking with the wounded. Being brave enough to choose love over fear.

That legacy matters. And it will live on — not just in Vatican halls, but wherever people are still trying to live with kindness, humility, and hope.

Rest in peace, Pope Francis. You were the shepherd we needed.

The Bretton Woods Blueprint: Building the Global Economy

If Pax Americana had a blueprint, it was drawn in 1944 at a quiet resort in New Hampshire.

There, while World War II was still raging, representatives from 44 Allied nations met to answer a big question:

How do we keep the global economy from collapsing again—like it did in the 1930s?

Their answer was the Bretton Woods system. And it changed the world.

What Was the Bretton Woods Conference?

The conference created a new postwar financial order designed to:

• Prevent another Great Depression

• Stabilize currencies

• Encourage global trade

• And—let’s be honest—keep the U.S. in charge

Two major institutions were born:

• The International Monetary Fund (IMF): to stabilize currencies and help countries in crisis.

• The World Bank: to fund reconstruction and development.

Both were headquartered in Washington, D.C.
Both gave the U.S. an outsized role.
And both became tools of U.S. influence in the decades to come.

The Dollar as the World’s Anchor

Bretton Woods created a system of fixed exchange rates:

• Other countries pegged their currencies to the U.S. dollar.

• The dollar, in turn, was pegged to gold.

That made the dollar the anchor of global trade—and gave the U.S. enormous power.

If you wanted to trade, you needed dollars.
If you needed to borrow, you turned to the U.S.-dominated IMF or World Bank.

It was a kind of economic orbit, with Washington at the center.

Stability with Strings Attached

The goal was global stability—and for a while, it worked:

• Trade grew.

• Currencies stayed stable.

• Developing countries got access to credit and aid.

But U.S. leadership came with conditions.

Countries had to adopt free-market reforms to access funds.
They had to align with Western economic models—and often Western politics.

And while this order helped rebuild Europe and Japan, it sometimes trapped poorer nations in cycles of debt and dependency.

Bretton Woods Wasn’t Just Finance

It was about creating a rules-based global order that served two purposes:

1. Prevent chaos, depression, and currency wars.

2. Preserve U.S. influence—without needing direct rule or military occupation.

Instead of controlling territory, the U.S. controlled the flows of money.

It was empire without colonies. Power through balance sheets.

What Comes Next

Tomorrow, we’ll look at one of the most powerful expressions of this system in action:
The Marshall Plan—when the U.S. spent billions to rebuild Europe… and win its loyalty.

Because sometimes the best way to control the world isn’t through war—it’s through investment.

SCOTUS Issues Emergency Order to Stop Trump Migrant Deportations

In a rare and powerful move, the Supreme Court stepped in to block one of the Trump administration’s most extreme actions to date—an attempt to deport Venezuelan migrants to a prison in El Salvador before they had a chance to challenge their removal.
Slate

Shortly before 1 a.m. on Saturday, the Supreme Court issued an emergency order halting the Trump administration’s reported efforts to fly Venezuelan migrants to an El Salvador prison before they could challenge their deportation. The court’s late-night intervention is an extraordinary and highly unusual rebuke to the government, one that may well mark a turning point in the majority’s approach to this administration.

This decision offers a glimmer of hope in a time when democratic norms are under daily assault. It shows that even now, the rule of law can prevail—and that the courts can still act as a check on power when it matters most. For those fighting for justice and humanity in our immigration system, this moment is a reminder: the fight is not over, and we are not alone.

Trade as the Quiet Superweapon of Pax Americana

We tend to think of power in terms of armies, alliances, or nuclear weapons.

But in Pax Americana, one of the United States’ most powerful tools wasn’t loud—it was economic.
Trade wasn’t just about business. It was a strategic weapon, a way to shape the world without firing a shot.

The U.S. didn’t just build military bases. It built markets.
And those markets became the glue that held together its version of global peace.

Trade as Diplomacy

After WWII, the U.S. offered more than just protection—it offered access:

• To American consumers, hungry for goods.

• To investment and capital, fueled by U.S. banks.

• To rules and stability, enforced through institutions like the GATT and later the WTO.

In return, countries aligned with U.S. interests.
Not out of fear—but because it paid to play by America’s rules.

Trade became a form of economic diplomacy:

• Rewarding allies with access, aid, and favorable terms.

• Punishing adversaries with sanctions, embargoes, and isolation.

Markets Over Missiles

Where previous empires conquered territory, the U.S. integrated economies.

Need an example?
Just look at Japan, Germany, or South Korea. After WWII, the U.S.:

• Helped rebuild their economies.

• Welcomed their exports.

• Turned former enemies into capitalist allies.

Each country became part of the American-led global supply chain—and the price of rebellion was high.

This wasn’t about generosity. It was about building a world system where war became less appealing and interdependence made everyone think twice.

Trade as a Source of Control

When you run the world’s largest market, you get leverage.

• The U.S. could pressure other nations by threatening to cut off access to American consumers.

• It could enforce policy preferences through trade deals.

• It could pull strings using institutions like the World Bank and IMF, both headquartered in Washington, D.C.

And with the dollar as the global reserve currency, every transaction came with a connection to U.S. financial power.

Peace Through Prosperity—on America’s Terms

This wasn’t just about economics—it was about order.
Free trade wasn’t a feel-good slogan. It was a strategic doctrine.

If countries were making money through the U.S.-led system, they were less likely to rock the boat.
Global peace, Pax-style, was built not just with weapons—but with contracts, supply chains, and shipping routes.

What Comes Next

This week, we’ll unpack the trade tools of Pax Americana:

• How the U.S. designed the global economy to reinforce its power.

• How free trade became a geopolitical weapon.

• And eventually, how the very system that created peace abroad began to create unrest at home.

Tomorrow, we start at the blueprint level—with Bretton Woods, the financial architecture that started it all.

Why Pax Americana Still Matters—Even If It’s Cracking

For nearly 80 years, Pax Americana has defined how the world works.

It shaped borders, trade routes, alliances, and even the stories we tell ourselves about peace and power. Whether you were born in Kansas or Kenya, chances are your life has been shaped in some way by the world America built after WWII.

It wasn’t perfect. Far from it.
But for a long time, it felt permanent.

Now, that era may be fading.
So before we move forward, let’s pause and ask: What did Pax Americana actually give us—and what did it take?

What the Pax Gave the World

Let’s start with the wins:

No world wars.

Since 1945, we’ve avoided another all-out conflict between global superpowers. That’s no small feat. The Cold War was tense, but it didn’t go nuclear. And that’s largely because of deterrence, alliances, and the sheer dominance of U.S. military power.

Economic integration.

Trade flowed. Businesses globalized. Supply chains stretched across continents. Former enemies became economic partners. Billions of people were lifted out of poverty (especially in Asia), thanks in part to open markets and global finance.

Relative stability.

The U.S. created and led international institutions like the UN, World Bank, IMF, NATO, and WTO—structures that, despite their flaws, kept the global system from collapsing into chaos.

For decades, this system worked well enough to maintain peace, grow wealth, and project American ideals around the world.

But It Came at a Cost

Behind the headlines of prosperity, there were cracks forming.

Inequality rose.

The benefits of globalization didn’t reach everyone. While corporations and investors got richer, working-class communities in the U.S. and elsewhere lost jobs, security, and identity.

Forever wars and overstretch.

From Vietnam to Iraq to Afghanistan, the U.S. tried to manage peace through force—often with devastating results. The cost in lives, treasure, and trust has been enormous.

Environmental damage.

The growth model supported by Pax Americana—endless consumption, fossil fuel dependency, global shipping—has helped drive the climate crisis we now face.

Trust frayed.

The institutions America built have lost credibility. At home, Americans have grown skeptical of the system they once led. Abroad, allies are hedging their bets. Rivals are rising.

If the Pax Is Cracking… What Comes Next?

The signs are everywhere:

• Russia is testing the system with force.

• China is building its own rival order.

• The U.S. is more divided at home, less predictable abroad.

But the Pax was never just about military bases or blue jeans.

It was also about trade—and that’s where we go next.

Teasing Week 2: Trade as the Real Engine of Power

Next week, we’ll dive into the silent lever that held Pax Americana together: trade.

• How the U.S. used access to its markets as both carrot and stick.

• How global capitalism became the glue that held allies close—and adversaries in check.

• And how the very system that promised peace and prosperity eventually helped hollow out the American middle class.

Because behind the culture and the carriers was a quieter force—the spreadsheet diplomacy of supply chains, tariffs, and open markets.

Winners and Grudging Participants: How the World Lived Under the Pax

Not everyone wanted to live under Pax Americana.
But once the U.S. built its global order—military, economic, and cultural—most of the world had to decide: join, resist, or try to balance both.

Some countries became true allies. Others played along for the benefits. And a few stood apart, resisting or challenging American influence outright.

Let’s take a look at the winners, the reluctant participants, and the rivals that made Pax Americana anything but simple.

The Winners: Western Europe, Japan, South Korea

After WWII, much of the democratic West fell into lockstep with the U.S.—and it paid off.

Western Europe:

• Got billions in U.S. aid through the Marshall Plan.

• Was protected by NATO from Soviet aggression.

• Rebuilt into wealthy, stable democracies with strong trade ties to the U.S.

Japan:

• Occupied and reshaped by the U.S. after the war.

• Given access to U.S. markets and technology.

• Rose from destruction to become the world’s second-largest economy by the 1980s.

South Korea:

• Protected by U.S. troops after the Korean War.

• Turned from a dictatorship into a thriving democracy and tech superpower.

• Became a key ally in Asia—militarily and economically.

In these cases, American support helped fuel stability and prosperity, and in return, the U.S. gained loyal allies and strategic footholds.

The Reluctant Participants

Not every country loved the Pax—but many still played the game.

Latin America:

• Saw frequent U.S. interference—backing coups, toppling leftist governments, supporting right-wing regimes.

• Many leaders cooperated to keep trade flowing and receive aid, but resentment grew over time.

Middle East:

• Some governments aligned with the U.S. (Saudi Arabia, Israel, Egypt).

• Others (like Iran post-1979) rejected U.S. influence outright.

• U.S. military bases and oil politics made the region a constant source of tension.

India:

• Tried to walk a non-aligned path during the Cold War.

• Accepted U.S. trade but resisted Western-style alliances.

• Eventually warmed to the Pax in the 2000s as ties with China and Russia shifted.

These nations often acted as frenemies—cooperating for practical reasons while keeping their distance politically or culturally.

The Resisters: Soviet Bloc, Maoist China, and Beyond

Of course, not everyone bought in at all.

The Soviet Union:

• Built its own rival order: Pax Sovietica—a world of command economies, satellite states, and ideological control.

• The Cold War was the defining battle between these two visions of global peace.

China:

• Initially part of the communist bloc, then broke away.

• Spent decades resisting U.S. influence—until it entered the global economy (and WTO) in the early 2000s.

• Now stands as a challenger to the Pax, offering its own model of order.

Cuba, North Korea, Iran:

• Reject the U.S.-led order entirely.

• Face sanctions, isolation, or proxy pressure as a result.

Why Most Still Played Along

Despite the critics, many countries found Pax Americana more useful than not:

• Access to U.S. markets and loans.

• Protection under the U.S. security umbrella.

• Stability in a world that had just survived two world wars.

For all its flaws, the Pax created a sense of order—and for many, the alternative seemed worse.

What Comes Next

Next time, we’ll zoom out and ask: What did Pax Americana really give the world?
A long peace between superpowers, sure.
But was it fair? Was it sustainable? Was it worth the cost?

And more importantly—what happens when that order starts to break down?

The Dollar Empire: How the U.S. Made the World Bank on It

You’ve probably heard the phrase: “Follow the money.”

Well, if you follow it far enough across the 20th and 21st centuries, it almost always leads back to the United States.

Pax Americana wasn’t just about military might or cultural influence—it was also about monetary power. In fact, much of the global system the U.S. built after WWII rests on a single, simple truth:

The world runs on the U.S. dollar.

Let’s unpack how that happened—and why it still matters today.

The Dollar as Global Reserve Currency

After WWII, the U.S. helped create the Bretton Woods system, which set the dollar as the central currency of global finance.

Back then:

• Other currencies were pegged to the U.S. dollar.

• The dollar was pegged to gold.

• The U.S. became the anchor of the global economy.

Even after the gold standard ended in the 1970s, the dollar stayed on top. Why? Trust. Strength. Stability. And because… everyone else was already using it.

Today:

• About 60% of global currency reserves are held in dollars.

• Most international trade, including oil, is priced in dollars.

• Countries stockpile dollars to stabilize their economies or pay debts.

In other words, the U.S. doesn’t just use money—it makes the money the world uses.

Petrodollars and the Oil Loop

One key moment in this story: the rise of the petrodollar system.

In the 1970s, the U.S. struck a deal with Saudi Arabia and other oil-producing nations:
Sell oil only in dollars.
In return, the U.S. would provide military protection and political support.

This meant every country that needed oil (i.e., every country) also needed U.S. dollars.

So oil exporters—like the Saudis—ended up recycling those dollars right back into U.S. banks, real estate, and government bonds.

It was a closed loop that kept the dollar strong, demand high, and American influence steady.

The Fed: Central Bank to the World

The U.S. Federal Reserve doesn’t just affect interest rates in Kansas or California. Its decisions ripple across the entire planet.

Why?

• Global borrowing is often done in dollars.

• Emerging markets watch the Fed to decide when to raise or lower their own rates.

• During financial crises (like 2008 or 2020), the Fed becomes a lender of last resort—not just to U.S. banks, but to foreign central banks too.

This gives the U.S. massive influence over the global economy, without ever firing a shot or signing a treaty.

Control Through Capital

Being the issuer of the world’s reserve currency gives the U.S. power few other countries have:

• It can impose sanctions by cutting off access to U.S. banks.

• It can track money flows and pressure foreign governments.

• It can borrow more cheaply, because everyone wants U.S. bonds.

In short: it can use money as a weapon—and often has.

The Empire of Spreadsheets

So while Pax Americana was backed by aircraft carriers, it was enabled by spreadsheets.

Military alliances kept the peace.
Cultural exports built goodwill.
But the dollar quietly made sure everyone stayed connected to the U.S.—willingly or not.

And that financial power became just as critical to the global order as any warship or diplomat.

What Comes Next

Next time, we’ll look at how different countries experienced this system—some as partners, some as clients, and some as outright critics.

Because not everyone was thrilled to live under the American-led world order—even if they were cashing its checks.

Hollywood, Coca-Cola, and Blue Jeans: The Soft Power Play

When you think about American power, it’s easy to picture tanks, military bases, or the White House. But some of the most influential tools the U.S. ever used didn’t come from a Pentagon briefing—they came from a movie studio, a soda fountain, or a Levi’s store.

During Pax Americana, the U.S. didn’t just export weapons and dollars. It exported something even more powerful: culture.

From Hollywood films to fast food, from pop music to the American Dream, the United States became a global brand—and that brand played a huge role in shaping the world order.

Hollywood: The Global Storyteller

After WWII, American movies flooded international markets. They weren’t just entertainment—they were vehicles for values:

• Individualism

• Freedom

• Democracy

• Capitalism

Audiences from Paris to Seoul were watching American lives, struggles, and dreams unfold on screen. Whether it was Casablanca or Star Wars, these stories subtly (or not-so-subtly) spread American ideals about right and wrong, good and evil, heroes and villains.

Hollywood didn’t just show the world what America was—it showed what people around the world could aspire to be.

Coke, Levi’s, and the Global American Lifestyle

• A bottle of Coca-Cola became a symbol of modernity and freedom—so much so that it’s been banned or boycotted in countries resisting U.S. influence.

• Levi’s jeans were once smuggled into the Soviet Union like precious contraband.

• McDonald’s became shorthand for American consumerism and convenience—its arrival in Moscow in 1990 symbolized the fall of communism to some.

These products weren’t just products. They were portable pieces of American life, offering a taste of prosperity, individuality, and simplicity.

Music, TV, and the American Soundtrack

From rock ’n’ roll to hip hop, American music shaped global youth culture—and challenged authority along the way.

TV shows like Dallas, Friends, and The Simpsons gave the world a window into everyday American life—messy, funny, imperfect, but full of freedom and possibility.

Even when the stories weren’t flattering, they were real—and they were everywhere.

Soft Power vs. Hard Power

What the U.S. mastered during Pax Americana was the balance of hard power (military, money, trade) and soft power (influence, culture, values).

Where other empires ruled with force, America often ruled with attraction. People wanted what it had—or at least what it represented.

But not everyone welcomed this influence.

When Soft Power Backfires

Cultural dominance can also breed resentment:

• In conservative societies, American media has been seen as corrupting or immoral.

• In post-colonial nations, U.S. branding can feel like a new kind of imperialism—one that sells burgers instead of bullets, but still rewrites local culture.

• Critics argue that global “Americanization” flattens traditions, replaces diversity with uniformity, and turns everything into a market.

So while many around the world embraced American culture, others resisted it—or tried to fight it off entirely.

What Comes Next

The U.S. didn’t need to conquer the world—it just needed to sell it something irresistible. Culture, in this era, was currency.

But even the best branding campaign needs a solid product behind it. As Pax Americana rolled on, it wasn’t always clear whether the promises of freedom and prosperity matched the reality—especially for people back home.

Tomorrow, we’ll dig into a different kind of power: economic power.
Because behind the movies and music was something even bigger: money.

Guns, Bases, and Bombers: The Military Backbone of Pax Americana

When people think of peace, they don’t usually think of tanks, fighter jets, or missile silos.

But when it comes to Pax Americana—the era of global order built by the United States after WWII—military power was the steel frame holding it all together. It wasn’t about conquest, but it was about control.

The U.S. didn’t just promise peace.
It made sure everyone knew it had the firepower to enforce it.

Bases Everywhere, All the Time

After WWII, the U.S. made a radical decision: it wouldn’t bring its troops home.

Instead, it built a global military presence unlike anything the world had seen.

• Europe: Tens of thousands of troops stationed in Germany, Italy, and the UK.

• Asia: Bases in Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and later Guam.

• Middle East & Africa: Airstrips, radar stations, and rapid deployment hubs.

• The “Lily Pad” Strategy: Dozens of smaller bases scattered across the globe, ready for quick action.

Today, the U.S. maintains around 750 military installations in more than 80 countries.

These bases weren’t just for defense. They were signals—reminders that the U.S. was always present, always watching, and always ready.

Alliances as Force Multipliers

Military strength wasn’t just about boots on the ground—it was about alliances.

• NATO (1949): The first peacetime military alliance in U.S. history. “An attack on one is an attack on all.”

• U.S.-Japan Security Pact: Gave America a stronghold in the Pacific.

• South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, and more: Each agreement extended U.S. influence and created a global web of military cooperation.

These alliances weren’t just mutual defense pacts. They were political partnerships—tools for shaping the world in America’s image.

The Bomb That Changed Everything

After dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the U.S. emerged as the first and only nuclear power—for a time.

Even after the Soviet Union caught up, the doctrine of mutually assured destruction (MAD) helped prevent another world war. Both sides knew a nuclear fight would mean global annihilation.

That fear—strange as it sounds—kept the peace.

And behind that peace was a massive U.S. nuclear arsenal, backed by submarines, bombers, and intercontinental missiles, many still stationed around the globe to this day.

Peace Through Strength… or Global Domination?

All of this raises a key question: was Pax Americana about keeping the world safe—or about controlling it?

• To some, U.S. military power protected democracy, deterred aggression, and kept fragile regions from falling into chaos.

• To others, it looked like imperialism in a new form—not conquest, but coercion. Not occupation, but dominance.

Either way, it worked—for a while.

No world wars. Fewer large-scale conflicts between great powers. A relatively stable global order.

But military might was only part of the Pax. The U.S. also used something else—softer, subtler tools—to win hearts, minds, and markets.

What’s Next?

Tomorrow, we’ll look at how America exported not just troops and tanks, but something far more persuasive: its culture.

From movies to music to Big Macs, the next layer of Pax Americana wasn’t enforced by generals—it was sold by storytellers.

Transported Beyond Seas

“For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences…”

When the Founders wrote that line in the Declaration of Independence, they weren’t being poetic—they were making a legal and moral accusation. Under British rule, colonists were sometimes seized and shipped across the Atlantic to face trial in England, in courts that did not recognize their rights, and among juries that did not understand their communities.

These weren’t trials; they were warnings. They were reminders that power, unaccountable, does not care for borders or justice. And they were one of the reasons Americans chose revolution.

Today, that same logic is whispering its way back into American politics.

In a recent conversation with El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, Donald Trump suggested that “homegrown criminals”—that is, American citizens—should be sent to El Salvador’s infamous CECOT prison. He praised the images of shackled prisoners packed into cells and told Bukele he’d need “about five more places.”

No U.S. citizens have been sent there—yet. But immigrants have.

Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a work-authorized immigrant who lived in Maryland, worked full-time as a union sheet metal apprentice, and had a permit issued by the Department of Homeland Security, was mistakenly deported to El Salvador and thrown into CECOT. The government admitted it was an administrative error—but then refused to bring him back, arguing that once he was outside U.S. borders, he was beyond the court’s jurisdiction.

Later, they accused him of being MS-13 to justify leaving him in a foreign prison, despite no trial and a court order saying he should be returned.

This is how it starts.

First, an “administrative error.”
Then, a legal technicality.
Then, an accusation—untested, unproven, and politically convenient.

And soon, a precedent: that if the government decides you are undesirable, it can simply remove you—across borders, beyond protections, and outside the Constitution.

The Founders saw it coming. They called it tyranny.
We should too.

A Whisper of Tyranny: Homegrowns and the Death of Due Process

Let this sink in… the President of the United States is actively discussing sending U.S. citizens to terrorist prisons in El Salvador—effectively deporting them.

The Daily Beast

The president discussed the proposal during a conversation with Bukele—an ally in his agenda to expel undocumented immigrants without due process—about his mass immigration crackdown. Trump has deported about 250 individuals in the last month alone under the Alien Enemies Act, a rarely used wartime statute that targets anyone seen as an enemy of the American people.

“Homegrown criminals next,” he whispered to Bukele as he entered the Oval Office.

“I said homegrown’s the next,” he added, raising his voice. “The homegrowns. You got to build about five more places.”

Meanwhile, no progress appears to be made on returning someone from that prison who was sent there by administrative error.
NPR

El Salvador's President Nayib Bukele said on Monday that he was not inclined to return Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia to the United States.

Over in my piece on Tyranny, where I quoted the Declaration of Independence, I quoted some of these complaints brought against King George … but I really want to bring in a few more.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.