Citing two Trump administration officials, NBC News reports that “the entire East Wing of the White House will be demolished ‘within days'” to make room for something called either (depending on who you ask) the White House State Ballroom or the Donald J. Trump Ballroom at the White House — a 90,000-square-foot, 900-capacity party venue.

Concept illustrations, as one might expect with any Trump project, resemble storyboards from a prospective The Simpsons Take Versailles! film.

Because the project is to be funded with influence buys … er, “donations” — from Trump’s would-be big business cronies, one person recently told me how great it is that “the people” will get a beautiful ballroom at “no expense to the taxpayer.” Really? When do my wife and I get an invite to strut our tango stuff there?

Unlike some, I’m not bothered by the kitschy concept art (it’s Trump, whaddayagonnado?), the partial demolition of the White House (I’d be glad to see the whole thing gone for good), or the corporate influence-buying (at least with Trump it’s all done right out in the open).

However, it seems to me that this is the kind of government project that cries out for public input, comments, and suggestions, and I have an alternative proposal to offer:

First, once the East Wing is demolished, leave it demolished.

Second, if the rest of the building isn’t going to come down too, deed the remaining ruin to a non-profit, funded entirely by voluntary donations, with the mission of running it as a museum.

While I’d prefer to see those two things as part of a larger package based on the historical fate of Carthage, I’ll try to take a more moderate line here, based on the presumption that we’re going to let the federal government exist a little while longer. So:

Third, either fund an allowance for Trump and future presidents to rent small apartments of their choice, or lease (in perpetuity, or until we dissolve the US government) a suite at the Willard Hotel as living quarters for presidential households.

Fourth, set aside some office space in the Capitol Complex for the use of the president and his or her staff.

Not a LOT of office space, mind you — just enough for the president and staff to do their constitutionally mandated duties, which are mainly minor administrative and ceremonial functions.

For ceremonial functions that draw crowds, give the president scheduling priority for use of Lafayette Square. I’m sure the government can find a few pop-up canopies and a suitable caterer. Burrito bar, anyone? Someone tell JD Vance to pick up a couple of kegs of domestic beer. Ask Linda McMahon to drag the cornhole set out of her garage. Karaoke after dinner!

This whole “the president is so special” thing has gotten way out of hand. Time to trim the fat. Let the White House stand if we must, I guess, but turn it into a reminder of our past errors rather than a symbol of pretend current greatness.

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

Man carrying child’s body in Gaza. Fars Media Corporation.  Attribution 4.0 International license.

“You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will,” Union general William Tecumseh Sherman wrote in an 1864 letter warning the citizens of Atlanta — which his advancing army had just occupied — to evacuate. “War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it.”

Over the last two years, Sherman’s words come to mind whenever an opponent of Israel and/or supporter of the Palestinians confidently asserts that the violence in Gaza is “not a war” because it is so terrible.

It IS a war, and that’s why it’s so terrible.

Let us, as we should, acknowledge that the Israeli regime’s goal in Gaza is genocide or, at a minimum, the only slightly less odious project of “ethnic cleansing.” There’s zero room for doubt, given Israeli officials’ open public statements, that they want the Palestinian Arabs now living in Gaza either killed off or exiled en masse to make room for Israeli “settlement” of the area.

That’s the objective.

War is the means of achieving that objective, and war is a process of killing people.

That many of the dead in all wars, and most of the dead in this one, are civilian non-combatants, doesn’t turn those wars into non-wars. It just turns them into worse wars. It’s right there in the terminology. The killings of civilian non-combatants aren’t just “crimes,” they’re “war crimes.”

One dodge the “this isn’t a war, it’s [insert term of opprobrium here]” crowd often resorts to is a claimed disproportion in the size and power of the forces involved.

By that criterion, there’s never been a war in all of human history. In every war, all sides attempt to bring overwhelming force to bear on opponents they hope won’t bring as much. “God,”  Comte de Bussy-Rabutin observed, “is usually on the side of the big squadrons against the small.”

That truth applies at both the tactical and strategic levels. In the attacks of October 7, 2023, for example, Hamas attempted to take on a bigger overall opponent in smaller parts through the tactical element of surprise.

To which Israel responded with overwhelming force at all points, because it had the people and weapons to do so. And still does — the supposed “ceasefire” has barely reduced its tempo of operations and hasn’t changed its clear objectives.

Trying to separate war from the genocide and ethnic cleansing that often accompanies it is cheap moralizing for propaganda points.

War, again per Sherman, is all hell.

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

Back in June, I attended the first “No Kings” rally in Gainesville, Florida, On October 18, I attended the second.

Positive differences:

While crowd estimates always vary, this rally definitely turned more people out than the last one. Part of that might have to do with University of Florida students having been home for the summer in June, but back in class now. Then again, this was also football homecoming weekend at UF, so “No Kings” was only the SECOND-biggest event in town. At both events, the crowd age definitely trended much older than “college kids.”

This event also seemed more heavily focused than the first on opposition to the Trump administration’s anti-immigrant agenda and its military misadventures (both direct and by proxy, both abroad and with occupations of American cities at home). Not only are those issues where I tend to agree with most of the “No Kings” crowd, but they’re also more germane to the theme.

Negative similarities:

The first “No Kings” rally, I wrote then, was largely a Democratic “campaign event for the 2026 midterms and 2028 presidential election. Those of who oppose Trump but aren’t Democrats came along for the ride. Our support was co-opted whether we liked it or not.”

If anything, the second event took on an even more “vote — and by the way, vote Democrat” tone.

Despite the increased and welcome focus on Trump’s foreign military misadventures and domestic martial law moves, there was still plenty of “Yes Kings” signage and sloganeering.

One speaker, believe it or not, even devoted a minute or two to praising Joe Biden’s (and before him, Donald Trump’s) COVID-19 monarchical pretensions and decrying the “No Kings” protesters of that era … many of whom, unfortunately, reverted to their own prior “Yes Kings” advocacy on January 20, 2025.

Quite a few of the protesters seemed upset by the current “government shutdown,” and intent on recovering “their” government funding for … well, insert pretty much any activity here and I saw it supported.

And, of course, I heard a lot of talk about “democracy,” which in American practice tends to resemble monarchy on steroids. As Mather Byles asked in 1773,  “Which is better — to be ruled by one tyrant three thousand miles away or by three thousand tyrants one mile away?” We’re not going to vote our way out of this mess.

The rally was a good time with a positive vibe, and I’m glad to see Americans coming together in opposition to one tyrant.

But until and unless we start coming together in opposition to tyranny itself — the state per se — and in support of liberty for all, the only question is how much more kingly and despotic our next ruler will get than the previous one got.

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