Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

Serious question, after the past few months, how can anyone deny that America is heading in a totalitarian direction? Those of you who believe that all of the many actions that have happened in the past few weeks are "okay", please explain your perspective without resorting to "whataboutism" or cherry picking only one or two of the things that have occurred lately. Because from what I'm sitting, this is not behavior of a government based on democratic ideals.

I have no idea if that's true, maybe it is, but the parent specifically asked for a response without whataboutism.

Citation needed for anything on the scale we’ve seen - for example, the topic of this discussion is a non-profit having their status threatened for non-specific reasons which appear to be constitutionally-protected speech. If it’s “fairly obvious”, you should have no trouble providing examples of something equivalent to this legal threat.

I recall right-leaning social media sites like Gab, Parler, r/TheDonald, Infowars being taken offline.

I can’t read the WP article because it’s paywalled, however I have been suspicious of Wikimedia for a long time. I used to donate to them thinking I was helping to keep the severs running, then being alarmed to find the money was going on all sorts of nonsense. The former CEO (Maher) was blatantly a political/intelligence operator. Fits the pattern of the establishment/powers-that-be abusing the NGO/non-profit sector to illicitly further their aims, so I’m not surprised the new DoJ are looking into them.

Those sites weren’t taken offline by Democratic officials, they had to find new hosting after breaking the contracts they entered into with private companies. They were still free to move elsewhere, as they did, whereas in this case Wikipedia is being threatened with penalties for remaining in the country.

I would also note that the last straw for companies like Parler was involvement in a violent attempt to overthrow the government whereas in this case the objection appears to be constitutionally-protected speech. Again, those are nowhere near comparable situations. Where is something like, say, going after a right-wing non-profit because they published content which criticized Biden?

Dems and republicans both do their political corruption, Trump is something else.

https://commonslibrary.org/authoritarianism-how-you-know-it-...

What are the Top 10 Elements of the Authoritarian Playbook?

1. Divide and rule: Foment mistrust and fear in the population.

2. Spread lies and conspiracies: Undermine the public’s belief in truth.

3. Destroy checks and balances: Quietly use legal or pseudo-legal rationales to gut institutions, weaken opposition, and/or declare national emergencies to seize unconstitutional powers.

4. Demonize opponents and independent media: Undermine the public’s trust in those actors and institutions that hold the state accountable.

5. Undermine civil and political rights for the unaligned: Actively suppress free speech, the right to assembly and protest and the rights of women and minority groups.

6. Blame minorities, immigrants, and “outsiders” for a country’s problems: Exploit national humiliation while promising to restore national glory.

7. Reward loyalists and punish defectors: Make in-group members fearful to voice dissension.

8. Encourage or condone violence to advance political goals: Dehumanize opposition and/or out-groups to justify violence against them.

9. Organize mass rallies to keep supporters mobilized against made-up threats: Use fearmongering and hate speech to consolidate in-group identity and solidarity.

10. Make people feel like they are powerless to change things: Solutions will only come from the top.

I'm not an American so I'm kind of looking at this from the side but I'll try to engage here...

What does "heading in a totalitarian direction" mean in this context exactly?

I'm not trying to use this as a "cherry pick" but this was news from today: "Trump administration reverses abrupt terminations of foreign students’ US visa registrations

DOJ announced the reversal in federal court after weeks of intense scrutiny by courts and dozens of restraining orders issued by judges."

How is this consistent with your theory/hypothesis?

I think what's important is not to look solely at evidence supporting your idea. The important thing is to find things that disprove your idea. That's the scientific method. I.e. finding something that weakens your hypothesis is what you need to look for. If you're not able to find anything at all disproving your theory then we should be really worried but I think there are actually many things going on that are consistent with a functioning democracy. Keep in democracy doesn't necessarily mean acting in ways that you consider to be good. You might think it's crazy to make deep cross cuts in the government but if this is what people voted for then maybe that can play out. Yes, it seems arbitrary and maybe important things are being cut, which is no different than what you'll see when companies do layoffs. But there's also a lot of resilience. At least I don't think it's anti-democratic to run on a platform of reducing government costs and then act on it. If anything the opposite. It might be really bad, but democratic, or it might end up being a good idea. Another example is you probably think it's crazy for the US to abandon Ukraine. I don't like that either but the US government can set foreign policy and it was reasonably clear that's the way they were going to go before the elections. Is this good for the world? I don't think so. Is it anti-democratic. I don't think so either. How will it play out? Who knows.

I would say that Trump is pushing the limits of presidential powers more than others before him. Some of the actions his administration is taking are borderline anti-democratic and borderline legal. But many of them are actually legal and some others will work their way through the courts. Even the Supreme Court which is generally right leaning has rebuked Trump and will likely not blindly side with him.

I'm not a fan of this administration but at least so far it doesn't look like it's the end of democracy in America. That seems like fear mongering. I think the "opposition" would be better off trusting democracy more, highlighting how its policies contrast with the current government policies, the problems it would solve better for Americans compared with the current government etc. This is probably going to end up being better for America's democracy in the long run. The erosion of democracy is partly due to the incessant attacking and divisiveness/polarization. Focus on common ground which I think is actually larger than what most think and trying to let better ideas win vs. being critical of everything is better. Not that you shouldn't speak out against obviously bad actions but it seems we are just 100% focused on attacks.

The US states also have a lot of power. The citizenry have a lot of power. Senate/congress. Courts. I think you guys will be fine but let's see how it goes. To me the bigger risk is the loss of common ground and polarization. If you have half the country basically feeling the other half is the enemy rather than debate policies that's something that can lead to trouble.

This feels like a decent list. I'm not an American but some of these processes seem to be happening in other places.

1. Is all of us, on the "right" or the "left". Let's not do this.

2. Here you could say maybe the government is doing a little. But I would still say most of the lies and conspiracies that are reverberating in our society are not originating from there. This is like 95% on all of us (or social media). 5% you can maybe blame Trump.

3. I don't really see this happening yet.

4. I would say the "left" has been demonizing the right very effectively. But sure, goes both ways. This just seems to be standard for political debate today (it's the end of the world if those guys get power). I think it's mostly up to us to push back against this. So if you're a democrat push back against casting Trump as a dictator (I don't think he is) and if you're a republican push back against all this "stop the steal" and "lock her up" whatever nonsense.

5. Not happening IMO.

6. I guess Trump is blaming illegal immigrants for the rise in crime. I don't think is is a perfect match to the intention here. America is so multi-cultural/diverse anyways so this tactic doesn't really work.

7. Trump sort of does this but not really to the extent that I think the author of the list meant. So far it seems there's no fear from voicing dissent. Musk went ballistic on Navarro calling him a moron and is critical of Trumps tariffs. Many other republicans are critical. This is more of a kindergarden than authoritarianism.

8. Not happening. Would be very worrying if we get there.

9. Not happening. We had large rallies before the election but you don't see the sort of things you might see in Iran or Turkey. Again this would be a worrying sign if we get here.

10. Also not happening. You see universities fighting back against Trump. you see courts. you see states. you see people. If anything it seems people feel like they have a lot of power.

Conservatives are the most prominent and dangerous de-bankers. It is well known that Mormons have a lot of power the payment processor world, and censor content they find offensive to their religion, using concerns about fraud and chargebacks as mere convenient excuses.

Yeah, it's pretty clear that Democrats (as they are) are getting fed into the woodchipper.

They became too petty and no longer served their purpose as the political party of the ruling class, oligarchy turned. Hell of a way to go out though.

> I recall right-leaning social media sites like Gab, Parler, r/TheDonald, Infowars being taken offline.

Were these not the actions of private entities rather than official government acts?

There was the whole IRS targeting of conservative groups under Obama.

And I’m sure the “government overthrowers” (lol) also used Facebook and Twitter, yet only these other ones were taken down. We later found out, of course, that the likes of FB and Twitter had embedded censorship teams working hand-in-glove with the security state and advocacy groups.

You seriously don't believe that pardoning people like Enrique Tarrio for violent crimes perpetrated openly in pursuit of political goals doesn't encourage violence?

When you take a step back and look at what is happening as a whole, it's definitely not looking good.

I was going to start listing examples but that's not the point now. And even if something specific is undone weeks after because of outcry it's still a steady two steps forward, one step back, progression in a nasty direction.

I've read some books, seen some documentaries, learned some history. What's happening is very obvious and anyone who doesn't also see it is either ignorant or in denial.

A systematic effort to dismantle the federal government bypassing the legislature entirely, replacing federal employees with people who pledge loyalty to the president over the constitution, firing anybody who would hold him accountable, undermining the separation of powers in favor of an all powerful executive who treats executive orders as law, attacking media outlets and judges they disagree with and threatening to either remove their access to the White House press room or revoke their license or fire them, deporting people without due process, threatening to invade Greenland, threatening to withhold congressionally approved funding as a cudgel, and invoking the friggin Alien Enemies Act of 1798 in a time of peace is not “pushing back a little”.

But if you haven’t realized that yet it’s obvious you never will till it’s too late and sure, maybe that’s harsh to say but as trump himself said “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters” because that’s precisely how much y’all care what he does. Gimme your downvotes but don’t pretend you’re standing on moral high ground, you’d justify anything he does.

The whole anti-DEI sweep across the government where people who don’t remove “let’s treat people nice” posters risk getting fired and attacking people using the office of the president is so obviously deplatforming and censorship that your criticism of democrats is laughable. When’s the last time Biden threatened to revoke Fox News license? Republicans even a tiny bit critical of Trump get exiled for daring to step out of line. You don’t hate censorship and deplatforming, you love it, can’t get enough of it, you just hate it when it happens to people you like.

Is that Enrique Tarrio, FBI informant, you are referring to?

Consider the illegal immigration question. Tens of millions of people are in the country, knowingly in violation of the law. Many foreign criminal gangs are operating in the country. Yet the federal government was prevented from even constructing a simple wall to stop the situation getting worse. Not only that, but other authorities in the country are even declaring “sanctuary cities”, openly contravening the efforts of federal law enforcement. Latest thing we hear is district judges harbouring illegal immigrant gang members in their home. We are at a point of complete absurdity. So, yes, invoking the “Alien Enemies” act is quite reasonable, given the circumstances. We are not starting from a point of normality.

Consider that the cure "first deport then ask, if at all" will be worse than disease. Not even Nazi Germany had such indiscriminate approach. They marked people first (yellow stars, pink triangles) and then deported them. Trump administration is incapable even of that.

Yes, but actions taken by corporations in concert with the government, due to pressures exerted by the government by extralegal means, which, I’m told, is the definition of fascism.

The wall was a waste of tax payer money and purely theatric since it hasn’t helped. Saying illegal immigration is a problem today basically acknowledges as much if it weren’t also backed up by statistics.

https://www.cato.org/blog/border-wall-didnt-work

No, illegal immigration is not the same as an invasion by another nation.

I don’t condone harboring criminals but if they are indeed criminals they should be tried in a court of law because that is the American way. On the other hand if these illegal immigrants are fleeing violence rather than creating it, have lived here for years and/or have kids born and raised in the US, then I can understand the grace afforded them by sanctuary cities as deporting them is not illegal but ethically questionable. Deporting someone who has never known anything but living in this country to another one they have no connection to because their parents brought or birthed them here illegally would be legal but would it be justice? I don’t think it would, I think it’s more complicated.

The true absurdity is thinking due process is optional in this country. How the party that purports an unwavering belief in the founding fathers, constitution, law, and American exceptionalism compromised so hard on a fundamental right is beyond the pale.

If it’s optional for these immigrants then it’s optional for every citizen if Trump deems it so; the precedent is set, just call someone the enemy and you’re good. Your only defense that this couldn’t happen to US citizens would be the courts and an adherence to societal and legal norms both of which Trump has shown clear indifference to.

Addendum:

Amazing, it already happened and got posted to HN.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43801959

https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/ice-deports-3-u-s-citize...

“New Orleans, LA - Today, in the early hours of the morning, the New Orleans Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Field Office deported at least two families, including two mothers and their minor children – three of whom are U.S. citizen children aged 2, 4, and 7. One of the mothers is currently pregnant. The families, who had lived in the United States for years and had deep ties to their communities, were deported from the U.S. under deeply troubling circumstances that raise serious due process concerns.

…

In the case of the other family, a U.S. citizen child suffering from a rare form of metastatic cancer was deported without medication or the ability to consult with their treating physicians–despite ICE being notified in advance of the child’s urgent medical needs.“

Truly, justice in action, protecting us from criminal pregnant women and children with cancer. Probably MS13 gang members. What a great and powerful country we’ve become, Jesus would be proud /s

Look I’m not against law enforcement, I’m sure we have common ground somewhere, but how can I take the illegal immigration rhetoric seriously, take a hardline stance, if this is part of reality?

> There was the whole IRS targeting of conservative groups under Obama.

There was a lot of talk about that but I note you left out the part where it wasn’t real. The IRS investigated both liberal and conservative groups, but only the conservative groups lied about being singled out as part of a defense strategy.

https://web.archive.org/web/20180225112702/https://www.treas...

The straightforward answer is that those supporting the autocratic authoritarianism want autocratic authoritarianism. They've been primed with decades of anti-American grievance politics condemning our distributed societal institutions as being foreign attackers, and they crave the simplicity of some big man with a big stick to make the complex world go away. They've also been primed to believe that they are supporting "freedom" (even though it never plays out that way in practice), so the more these actions reek of autocratic authoritarianism the more aggressive they get in their rationalizations.

I've had to read up on him since I'm not that familiar with this topic.

I guess at some level? But in comparison with actual authoritarian regimes/societies this seems to be in the noise.

> Encourage or condone violence to advance political goals: Dehumanize opposition and/or out-groups to justify violence against them.

Again, I don't think we're seeing this happen. Has Trump given some extreme element a sense that they can get away with things they couldn't previously? Sure. That was also the case in his first presidency. Is this a society shaping phenomena. Not really yet. Could we be in a long term change that will end up with a non-democratic US? Anything is possible. Everyone needs to uphold democratic values.