Rip Van Linker and “Competitive Authoritarianism”

Debs Canton 1918 largeEugene Debs speaking in Canton, Ohio, shortly before his arrest for sedition.

“I now think the United States may well be evolving,” Damon Linker writes at Persuasion, “to become a competitive authoritarian system in which free elections are still held but fall far short of fairness.”

While I often disagree with Linker — I’m a radical libertarian, he’s a conservative-leaning centrist, do the math — I also often agree with his criticisms of Donald Trump, the MAGA wing of the Republican Party, and the faux “populism” they espouse.

But wow. I don’t know that I’ve ever resorted to the Britishism “gobsmacked” to describe my response to an op-ed before. In this case, it’s the only term that really fits.

What happened to the Damon Linker who was born in 1969 and has written on politics for decades … and why has he been replaced with a doppelgänger who, Rip Van Winkle style, apparently fell asleep in the early 1880s and just now woke up?

The whole idea of “fairness” in American elections went out at the end of the 19th century with the introduction of the “Australian” ballot — a government-printed ballot that replaced write-in elections (that is, all American elections prior to 1888).

Naturally, once the government started printing ballots, the government got to decide which candidates could appear on those ballots.

Would it shock you to learn that the two “major” political parties, the Democrats and Republicans, have ever since colluded to ensure that it’s always difficult, and often impossible, for independent and “third party” candidates to compete?

In 1988, those two “major” parties also took over the quadrennial ritual of “presidential debates” from the League of Women Voters, forming the Commission on Presidential Debates and turning those public affairs into bi-partisan — not multi-partisan — beauty contests.

After Ross Perot made it onto the “debate” stage in 1992, the CPD started tweaking its rules. Over the 29 years since, only Republicans and Democrats have been deemed eligible for a share of “debate” screen time.

It’s not difficult to find authoritarianism over that whole history, either.  Herding immigrants and the immigrant-adjacent off to concentration camps is nothing new (ask the Nisei about World War 2). Neither is imprisoning political opponents (Convict 9653, also known as Eugene Debs, ran for president from prison in 1920 after his conviction for speaking against military conscription).

Same play, new cast. Our “competitive authoritarian system in which free elections are still held but fall far short of fairness” is older than any living American … except, perhaps, Rip Van Linker.

Thomas L. Knapp (X: @thomaslknapp | Bluesky: @knappster.bsky.social | Mastodon: @knappster) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY

Call The Jeffrey Epstein Memo What It Is: A Cover-Up

“The DOJ may be releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein’s clients? Will that really happen?” a Fox News host asked US Attorney General Pam Bondi on February 21, 2025. “It’s sitting on my desk right now to review,” Bondi replied.

On July 8, Bondi’s department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation released an unsigned memo claiming that a “systematic review revealed no incriminating ‘client list.'”

Something of a bombshell, but the shell carried two bigger payloads inside.

First: “We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.”

Second: “[N]o further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted.”

Bondi defended the “no further disclosures” decision (while also trying to explain missing time from video covering Epstein’s cell at the time he allegedly killed himself)  at a cabinet meeting because most or all of the unreleased evidence supposedly consists of child pornography. Not child pornography of Epstein or his “clients” sexually abusing minors, just stuff he downloaded.

Move along, folks, nothing to see here.

And yet the UK’s Prince Andrew settled a lawsuit (reputedly for $16.9 million) with one of Epstein’s victims, who claims that Epstein delivered her into Andrew’s clutches for sex while she was a minor.

And Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell sits in prison, sentenced to 20 years in prison for sex trafficking and conspiracy.

And records HAVE been released including the names of many prominent individuals — including one Donald J. Trump — who flew on Epstein’s private plane (“The Lolita Express”), in some cases to and from his private island where lavish “sex parties” were allegedly held.

There may or may not be a piece of paper somewhere labeled “my client list, signed, Jeffrey Epstein,” but no “evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties?” If that’s a joke, it’s not funny. But it isn’t a joke. It’s a lie. Period.

Who were Epstein’s accomplices in crime? We may never know.

But the US Department of Justice knows, and would rather keep that information to itself than tell the rest of us about it.

Now, I’m not saying Donald Trump’s name would appear on a list of those who provably had sex with minors courtesy of Epstein’s trafficking operation. Given his known history and predilections, and his long public friendship with Epstein, it wouldn’t surprise me, but hey, maybe not.

Trump’s own name wouldn’t have to be on that list to make him want to quash the matter, though. A number of prominent, wealthy, and powerful people have already been shown, beyond doubt, to have associated with Epstein.

Some of those prominent, wealthy, and powerful people have already been publicly accused of taking part in, and advantage of, his depredations.

Any or all of those prominent, wealthy, and powerful people are well-positioned to bludgeon Trump with threats, buy his favors with inducements, or become useful targets for extortion by a president who regularly, even openly, engages in that practice.

We may not know the reasons for this blatant cover-up, but we all know that’s exactly what’s going on here.

Thomas L. Knapp (X: @thomaslknapp | Bluesky: @knappster.bsky.social | Mastodon: @knappster) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY

Texas Flood Deaths: No, Not Trump’s Fault

Texas Floods Devastate Local Communities

As I write this, the known death toll of floods in Texas stands at 104, including dozens of children from summer camps dotting the affected area. That number will likely increase.

It’s a terrible thing, and naturally many of us not caught in the middle of it would like to assign blame.

“Key roles at local offices of the National Weather Service, in particular, went unfilled as the floods hit,” the New York Times reports. US Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) wants “an investigation into the scope, breadth, and ramifications of whether staffing shortages at key local National Weather Service (NWS) stations contributed to the catastrophic loss of life and property during the deadly flooding.” US Senator Christopher Murphy (D-CT) cites “consequences to Trump’s brainless attacks on public workers, like meteorologists.”

But let’s be real here. No, US president Donald Trump and his administration are not to blame for it — and I say that as someone possessed of an ingrained “blame government first” mentality in general and a strong dislike for Trump in particular.

Trump’s not responsible for the weather, and to the extent that federal agencies are responsible for accurately forecasting that weather and warning the public of dangerous situations (they shouldn’t be, but they are), they did exactly that.

According to an ABC News timeline:

The National Weather Service’s Austin/San Antonio office issued its first flood watch at 1:18pm on July 3.

That evening at 6:10pm, the Weather Prediction Center warned of severe thunderstorms in the affected area.

At 1:14am on July 4, flash flood warnings  with a “considerable” damage tag — automatically triggered alerts on weather radios and mobile devices. Those warnings were upgraded at 3:35am and 4:03am.

At 4:35am — nearly 16 hours after the first watches and three hours after the emergency warnings — started going out, the Kerr County Sheriff’s Office reported the first observed flooding.

By 7am, evacuations were under way.

It’s important, at this point, to assure you that I’m not trying to SHIFT blame to the victims. There are many reasons other than negligence why those alerts might have been missed, or why those who received them took action that seemed sufficient, but turned out not to be, to save their own lives and  others’.

But while we could (and probably will) see failures and foul-ups in the post-flood response from FEMA et al.,  and while we can (and definitely will) argue incessantly about various things Trump and his team do, this particular tragedy didn’t result from failures of the government systems in place to warn us of impending disaster.

Trying to get politicians and the politically involved to not “play politics” with every bad thing may be a fool’s errand, but it’s always worth condemning when it happens.

Thomas L. Knapp (X: @thomaslknapp | Bluesky: @knappster.bsky.social | Mastodon: @knappster) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY