The Inevitable.

Wow. It has been a tumultuous past month. Yes, I am alluding to the actions taken by the new administration in the United States, or in other words, an administration not— “of the people, by the people, for the people” as professed by former President Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address; rather, to the contrary, it is “of the oligarchs, by the oligarchs, and for the oligarchs.” Or to be even more exact—the government is in no sense whatsoever perceived by the ones in the higher echelon of power to be for the common good of the public; conversely, it is only for thyself—and the cronies.
 
Many, including me, were certain that such events would transpire. It was meticulously transcribed in a playbook for the ensuing administration, a document commonly reverberated as “The Project 2025.”. That said, the now unfathomable actions were openly propagated by both the president and his acolytes. However, such comments were discerned by both the legacy and new media as plain buffoonery, as lo and behold—to sum up, the hubris was as such, “the American system is too strong for an assault on the basic structure—after all, it follows a co-equal power-sharing mechanism.”
 
Yeah right!
 
Anyhow, in a treatise that dates back to the 7th of October 2024— “28 Days and Counting: A Statistical Tie.”. I posited the following queries:
 
1. Will the balance of the separation of power be tilted exorbitantly towards the executive?
2. Will key departments of the federal government be dismantled, such as the department of education, fermenting the ideological project of one of the candidate’s sycophants’ pet projects?
3. Will the United States have a populist, autocratic, and kleptocratic regime in tandem?
4. Will civil liberties be curbed—to serve the interests of the few members of the family and coterie?
5. Will the woman’s right to decide pertaining to their body be a quest of the past?
6. Will immigrants live in constant fear of being thrown out of the very country that propagates a dream of everlasting prosperity?
7. Will the most pivotal decisions be taken on a social media platform—owned by the most influential surrogates of one of the presidential contenders?
8. Will the United States go through an economic cataclysm—due to policies that will harm the most except benefit the few?
9. Will the United States become a silent observer of global atrocities? Or will the United States survive yet again, as it has from the war of independence to the civil war, the two great wars, the cold war, and the war against terror, and now an ideological struggle—perpetuated to the inculcation of multiple societal backlashes?
  
It is very unfortunate that first and foremost, most if not all the denigrative policies affirm the anxieties that inculcate the hypothetical questions; and most important, the last question has ultimately been actualized— “Will the United States become a silent observer of global atrocities? Or will the United States survive yet again, as it has from the war of independence to the civil war, the two great wars, the cold war, and the war against terror, and now an ideological struggle—perpetuated to the inculcation of multiple societal backlashes?”
 
Sadly, It seems as if at this juncture the United States does not aspire to be either the global policeman as it once touted it to be, nor can it ostensibly claim to be the leader of the free world, whilst simultaneously making its citizenry kowtow to its democratically elected leader, just for the sake of not being embroiled by what is called “flooding the zone.” . In other terms, distracting the plebiscite and, most importantly, the political opposition—not surprisingly, the media—with, in actuality, the dread that follows by the regressive policies undertaken by the administration.
 
To begin with, the United States has evidently gravitated towards an executive-led system, ultimately withering away from the Madisonian model of the co-equal branches of power, which in turn are the executive, the judiciary, and the legislature. Furthermore, the institution was formulated such that the legislature would check the powers of the executive, as in effect it was bestowed upon the power of the purse and the prerogative to impeach federal officers, may they be the president, his cabinet members, or another official.
 
Nevertheless, it is without any surprise that the Republican Party in its current construct has deviated from its duties as prescribed by the founding fathers in the constitution; instead, as it was reverberated by Ezra Klein in an opinion piece, “Trump has turned them into NPCs.” Or in other words, non-player characters epitomize individuals who do not inculcate even a tad bit of tenacity to perform their duties; rather, they have divested it, leaving many others to suffer due to their political follies, forgetting ideological conviction—a lack of moral fortitude.
 
Speaking of moral fortitude, I have described in my previous writing: “The Bubble Bursts—The End of Illusion.” how the new establishment is inextricably peculiar, as it is an eclectic coalition in which each and every constituent carries grievances against the establishment of the yesteryear; yet, some of the upheaval that is displayed at this cusp of time does not carry any merit. The display of one-upmanship by the richest man (a crucial member of the aforementioned coalition) in the world is making utterly crass actions that, mark my words, will go down in history as a travesty of mankind and an epochal moment that will be despised.
 
Pertaining to his actions, there are a myriad: for instance, the creation of an unconstitutional body in the government (DOGE); castigating federal employees; hoarding the information of American taxpayers; dismantling vital organizations and departments; and spewing misinformation about vulnerable groups.
 
After all, I would just like to put forth a single query: how does the richest man in the world have any right to loiter around with the sanction to take vital decisions pertaining to another’s existence? May it be in the form of aid to babies in Africa or welfare in the United States, it appears as if only for the sake of enriching himself, extending his reach of power from his sycophantic freaks on the internet to realpolitik—such as liberal democratic nation-states of the United Kingdom and in the ensuing German election.
 
Has our morality transcended into such a dismal state?
 
Yes. But, many it seems just don’t care.
 
It makes much sense, as many amongst differing age groups are enticed by the algorithmic-driven content—not to say the least, the Oxford word of the year 2024 was “brain rot”; however, such an endeavor can coexist with instilling a sense of civic responsibility—to be well-informed does not have to entail the nitty-gritty, but to know the right from wrong is profoundly important.
 
Not to be sounding doomsday, we live in times of great uncertainty; a black swan event will be, to a large extent, detrimental. Still hope should endure and persist in times of obscurity.
 
Alas, only time will tell if the latter half of the last question comes into fruition— “Or will the United States survive yet again, as it has from the war of independence to the civil war, the two great wars, the cold war, and the war against terror, and now an ideological struggle—perpetuated to the inculcation of multiple societal backlashes?”
 
To recall a quote by Bobby Kennedy, “Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly.”