Problems in Bananastan

A free version of "May you live in interesting times, American political instability"

Feb 04, 2024

The Hierophant Tarot card, upside down, signifies rebellion, subversiveness, new approaches

Note: This is a free version of May you live in interesting times, Leitmotif 6: American political instability, that I have made available for a broader audience at the request of some of my paid subscribers who wanted a version to forward. The original, full version, also contains economic and market analysis that has been removed from this version.

Problems in Bananastan

Have you been paying attention to the latest political drama in Bananastan? Tensions between its two main tribes, the Hooters and the Townies, are reaching the breaking point ahead of November’s presidential election. Former President Loudt, a Hooter, seeks to take back the presidency from President Dodder, a Townie, who ousted him four years ago in a close, contested election.

Former President Loudt has been a lightning rod for long-simmering tension between the two tribes. His abrasive, often caustic voicing of many deep-seated Hootie antipathies towards various Townie subgroups and customs deeply offends Townies.1 But Townie fears run much deeper. His long history of dishonesty and megalomania have raised fundamental questions about his suitability as a leader and mental stability.2 He also was dogged throughout his presidency by Townie accusations that he colluded with foreign governments to win office, accusations that he and the Hooters viewed as a witch hunt and abuse of power by Townie legislators and bureaucrats.3 More disturbingly, many Townies believe, fanned by Mr. Loudt’s provocative quips, that he disdains the rule of law and intends to impose a dictatorship through which he will take retribution in a second term.4

For their part, many Hooters see former President Loudt as merely pushing back against what they see as a systematic oppression of their culture by a Townie-dominated media and bureaucracy. Further, a large majority of Hooters believe that Mr. Loudt’s loss to Mr. Dodder resulted from electoral fraud.5 Following the election, in a vain attempt to block its certification, a Hooter mob rampaged through parliament, injuring several police officers, one of whom shot and killed a rioter.6 Hooter fears were reinforced by a gloating post-election report in a Townie-leaning magazine that a “shadow” syndicate of highly placed Townies in business, the press, the bureaucracy, and the judiciary had successfully conspired to rig the election by censoring news unfavorable to President Dodder, spreading disinformation, and by suppressing Hooter advertising and social media.7 These claims were later validated by a trove of emails and other documents published by independent journalists who were given access to a major social media company’s files after a Hooter business magnate bought it following the election.8

Townies, horrified by Mr. Loudt’s refusal to accept his loss and his followers’ assault on parliament, applauded when the Dodder justice ministry commenced the largest criminal prosecution in the country’s history, arresting over 1,000 Hooters, prosecuting several hundred, including one in secret, and jailing many without trial for over a year, some in solitary confinement and conditions so appalling that even leading Townies began to protest.9 Townie prosecutors in various provinces also filed charges against Mr. Loudt and several of his associates for racketeering, conspiracy, election interference, attempts to overturn the election, hush money payments, and inappropriate handling of classified government documents.10 In a decision split along tribal lines, based on a controversial interpretation of the law, a provincial high court ruled that Mr. Loudt could not appear on the province’s ballot in this year’s election; Townies in other provinces moved to do the same.11

Mr. Loudt and many Hooters decried these moves as politically motivated abuses of power and an attempt to undermine democracy.12 Many Hooters have come to see jailed rioters as political prisoners.13 In a move Townies interpreted as retribution, Hooters in parliament began an impeachment inquiry against President Dodder for corruption.14

The increasing use of state power by both tribes against the other mirrors a sharp rise in animosity and distrust between the two tribes to historic levels. Super majorities in both tribes see the other as dishonest and amoral, each seeing themselves as the defenders of democracy and the opposing tribe as anti-democratic.15 These beliefs are being reinforced by self-segregation as Townies and Hooters increasingly choose to live in separate communities and have few friends or associates in the other tribe.16 Social media bubbles have further fortified the division as neither side is exposed to the other’s perspective on common problems.17

The only thing that both tribes appear to agree on is that neither feels represented by or trusts the government, which both increasingly view as corrupt, disinterested and unaccountable.18 But the fall in trust is far broader than just dissatisfaction with elected representation. Trust in a wide array of institutions, including the judiciary, the police, the press, schools, religious institutions, business, and the medical system, is at historic lows in both tribes.19 Indeed, the only public institution that more than 50% of citizens trust is the military and even popular trust in it has fallen to a multi-decade low.

The simultaneous decline in trust in government, institutions and co-patriots of other tribes is worrying social and political scientists regarding Bananastan’s future stability.20 Social capital, or the “glue” of society, is highly related to inter-personal and inter-group trust within it. As Bananastanis lose trust in one another and social institutions, that glue weakens and self-resolution of conflict becomes more difficult.21 Studies suggest that low levels of social capital are incompatible with democratic governance.22 Plunging trust in government limits its ability to adjudicate conflict to halt the slide in social cohesion.23 Without these mechanisms, the potential for political violence, civil strife and even civil war increases.24

Recently, both Hooter and Townie leaders and independent analysts have begun to warn that tribal factionalism is on the verge of spilling into violence and perhaps civil war.25 Secessionist movements in provinces dominated by one tribe or the other (or minorities within provinces) have increased.26 Even a sovereign constitutional crisis has arisen between the Dodder-led federal government and a Hooter-led province over the rights of each to control immigration.27 Against this backdrop, three fifths of Bananastanis expect an increase in political violence, nearly half fear a civil war, and, shockingly, a third now believe violent insurrection is justifiable.28

Although largely confined to the fringes, both Hooter and Townie extremists appear to be actively preparing for armed conflict. The Dodder justice ministry, and Townie-leaning media and academy have focused largely on Hooter extremism, due to a long history of armed Hooter militias, terrorist attacks, the attack on parliament, and greater number of incidents.29 Worries also have grown about Hooter sympathies within the military, the sole trusted public institution: a disproportionate share of the Hooters in the parliament riot were veterans and a former general warned that a military coup was conceivable in 2024.30 Soon after taking office, President Dodder’s minister for war launched a widespread purge of suspected Hooter extremists from the military.31 As with other prosecutions, however, Hooters perceive an anti-Hooter bias and point to rising incidents of Townie extremist attacks, albeit from a lower level.32

A top counterinsurgency expert has warned that Bananastan increasingly mirrors the typical pattern of violent insurgencies, and no one should take comfort from either violence being confined to the fringes or lower levels of Townie violence so far.33 He notes that in all insurgencies, violence is confined to the top 1-3% of a movement’s social “pyramid” and, while Townies lag Hooters’ armed “tip” and Hooters lag Townie’s organizing and propaganda “base,” both are moving at speed to complete their respective insurgency pyramids. Increasing numbers of Townie extremists are arming rapidly and overtly – with the seeming approval of Townie media34 – while Hooters are just as swiftly building communications and propaganda networks.35

Tribal elites on both sides, whether intentionally or irresponsibly, regularly toss matches into this tinderbox, consistent with historical evidence that elite jockeying for power often is the catalyst for civil wars.36 Both Townie and Hooter elites increasingly use dehumanizing language to describe the rival tribe, casually calling the others “deplorables”, “vermin”, “treasonous rats”, or “not even human,” and both presidential candidates have compared the other to history’s most notorious mass-murdering dictators.37

Fanned by provocative statements by Mr. Loudt, some of which he has recently backtracked from,38 elite Townie voices have grown increasingly shrill heading into the election, with increasing calls for “any means necessary” to prevent what they see as a coming Hooter dictatorship.39 A popular Townie podcaster publicly stated that even if President Dodder’s son had “the corpses of children in his basement” censoring such news was justifiable to prevent a re-election of President Loudt.40 Studies and surveys indicate that the caustic rhetoric from elites on both sides is having effect, both in driving intertribal tensions and in creating demand for a “tough leader who will crack down on those who undermine Bananastani values,” a view now held by sizeable majorities in both tribes, but especially Hooters.41 Perhaps more pertinently, it is normalizing threats (and acts) of political violence. Multiple Townie celebrities have “joked” about assassinating former President Loudt, a play dramatized it, a painter fictionalized it, and the editor of a leading national newspaper was accused by a Hooter member of parliament of calling for it.42 Threats and attempted assassinations have increased, including multiple attempts on both Messrs. Dodder and Loudt.43

Power struggles among Hooter and Townie elites are not the only source of sparks with the potential to ignite political instability or violence in Bananastan. There is evidence that at least two of Bananastan’s geopolitical rivals are actively stoking tribal tensions through social media manipulation and aid to both tribal extremist groups and provincial secessionist movements.44 Somewhat alarmingly, in the last year, Bananastan apprehended more illegal entrants from its cross-oceanic geopolitical rival, Sinoland, crossing its Southern land border than it had in the prior ten years combined, most of them military-aged men.45

Surprisingly, Bananastan’s capital markets are unfazed by what appears to be a political powder keg rolling towards a white-hot election. Rising levels of political violence and public acceptance of it in a society with high and widespread animosity between the two main tribes, low levels of trust and satisfaction in government and most public and private institutions – except the military – seems to have no effect. A roaring economy has pushed Bananastan’s large, liquid stock market to new highs and is keeping the Bananastan denarius near historic highs. Perhaps more surprising, despite an historically high debt-to-GDP ratio, interest payments surging with higher global real interest rates, and a third of marketable government debt due to roll this year – with the Dodder treasury planning to increase the short-term share in its refinancings46 – government bond prices show little sign of distress. Term premia, though off historic lows, are still relatively low and most consider Bananastan’s debt to be “risk free.”

Confronting reality

Politics of the United States now engenders such strong views, even among non-Americans, that it can be difficult to see the forest from the trees. Even those that have noticed the diseased, desiccated trees of modern American political dysfunction might miss that the entire wood lacks only a spark for disastrous conflagration. That a century and a half of stability have made America the anchor of the global polity, economy and markets makes the idea of serious political instability or civil war unimaginable. Like the perspective one gains looking at the forest from a distance, re-examining US circumstances as those of a fictitious place with a different cast of characters can reveal things our emotions or historical biases won’t allow us to see.

Contrary to the received wisdom of the chattering classes, a second presidential term for Donald Trump is not the worst outcome possible in the 2024 US election.47 As would be apparent to any analyst tasked with evaluating “Bananastan’s” political economy or markets, a far more disastrous outcome appears wholly feasible; i.e. that the election, or events surrounding it, precipitate a descent into serious US political instability, violence, civil war, and possible dissolution of the union. (If you believe that I’m misstating the graveness of the US situation, I encourage you to read through all of the linked articles in the 7 pages of end notes to this piece.) Such an outcome would obviously be a tragedy for the US and its peoples, and likely for the world. But it would be absolute carnage for global markets.

The US is not only the anchor of the global political order, economy and markets, and its navy the guarantor of free navigation of the seas on which global trade depends — current Red Sea problems are just the tip of the iceberg — but the yield on its debt is also the “risk-free” rate anchoring every global asset. Political instability in the US would simultaneously crush global risk appetite while robbing the world of its safe asset.

Compared to that, what does it matter for markets if President Biden or President Trump occupies the White House next year? As I wrote in Leitmotif 5, for an election result to affect markets, it must both be a surprise and shift policies in some market-meaningful fashion. Current polling suggests that either man may be elected, so it won’t be a surprise. And while I do not want to minimize the large differences between the two candidates, what market-critical policies are really going to change? “De-risking” from or tariffs on China? US deficit spending? Subsidies for onshoring? More fracking? Mr. Trump was far more willing to openly criticize the Fed, but there is little evidence that it affected their policy choices. Furthermore, markets have been convinced throughout the Biden administration that the Fed lacked the political will to raise rates or, now, to hold them higher for longer.

But of course, maybe the chattering classes are correct: Donald Trump harbors dictatorial ambitions. But dreaming and doing are two very different things. To effect a dictatorship Mr. Trump would require supermajorities in both houses of Congress, something that no Republican president since the 1870s has enjoyed, and which both polling and the number of “blue” states suggest has near-zero likelihood. Even then, he would need to overcome both the Federal bureaucracy and judiciary, neither of which showed any willingness to cooperate with him in his first term. Furthermore, he demonstrated in his first term that he lacks the governing competence and the political machine necessary to fill the 3,000 Executive Service appointments required to manage a vast bureaucracy.

So, for a Trump dictatorship to emerge, we’d need to assume that (1) in the last four years he’s learned how to manage 2¼ million civilian government employees, whose surveyed party affiliation leans heavily towards Democrats, and 2¼ million military personnel, whose officer corps his predecessor just purged of his sympathizers; (2) the Republican Party he has taken over, but in which he is winning only just over 50% of the primary vote, will provide him with a loyalist political machine to staff all his appointments; (3) that Republicans – and not just any Republicans, all loyalists of Mr. Trump – will sweep both houses of Congress with supermajorities in each; (4) that all of the Democratic appointees in the Federal judiciary will resign en masse, clearing a path for a (ready) slate of Trump loyalist appointees; and (5) that all US states, including all the blue ones, cooperate with the new Trump administration. I would argue that none of these are likely individually, and that their joint probability is – in precise mathematical terms – asymptotically close to zero.

US political instability in or around this year’s election is not my base case and I do not think one can put a probability on it. But a realistic read of the current US situation suggests that its probability is not small. More concretely, it is far more likely – and its market effects far more consequential – than a Trump dictatorship.

How then does one hedge US political instability? Those are insights I reserve for paying subscribers. Wouldn’t you like to be one?

“Donald Trump’s long history of racism, from the 1970s to 2020,” German Lopez, Vox, 13 August 2020; “The 15 most offensive things that have come out of Trump’s mouth,” Nick Gass, Politico, 8 December 2015; “The Complete List of Trump’s Twitter Insults (2015-2021),” Kevin Quealy, The New York Times, 19 January 2021; and “Donald Trump sexism tracker: Every offensive comment in one place,” Claire Cohen, The Telegraph, 7 November 2020.

“The ‘Shared Psychosis’ of Donald Trump and His Loyalists,” Tanya Lewis, Scientific American, 11 January 2021; “Chomsky Says Trump a ‘Sociopathic Megalomaniac’ Who Made US ‘Singularly Unprepared’ for Pandemic,” Andrea Germanos, Common Dreams, 25 May 2020; “Donald Trump Megalomania,” Mark F. Kalita, independently published, 2019; “Finally tally of lies: Analysts say Trump told 30,000 mistruths – that’s 21 a day – during presidency,” Gino Spocchia, The Independent, 21 January 2021; and “Trump’s Habit of Lying About Everything All the Time May Cost Him Trump Tower,” Bess Levin, Vanity Fair, 27 September 2023; and “The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump,” Brandy X. Lee, Ed., Thomas Dunne Books, 2017.

“Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election,” Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, III, U.S. Department of Justice, March 2019; and “Report On Matters Related To Intelligence Activities And Investigations Arising Out Of The 2016 Presidential Campaigns,” Special Counsel John H. Durham, U.S. Department of Justice, 12 May 2023.

“Biden attacks Trump as threat to democracy, warns against his re-election,” Al Jazeera, 6 January 2024; “Biden on Trump ‘dictator’ remark: ‘He’s saying it out loud,’” Steve Holland, Reuters, 11 December 2023; “A New Kind of Fascism,” Christopher R. Browning, The Atlantic, 25 July 2023; “Trump’s Fascist Rhetoric Only Emphasizes the Stakes in 2024,” John Cassidy, The New Yorker, 14 November 2023; “Another Trump Presidency Is the Biggest Threat to Liberal Democracy,” Chris Patten, Project Syndicate, 2 January 2024; “There Is No ‘Both Sides’ to Donald Trump’s Threat to Democracy,” Molly Jong-Fast, Vanity Fair, 8 January 2024; “’Openly authoritarian campaign’: Trump’s threats of revenge fuel alarm,” Peter Stone, The Guardian, 22 November 2023; and YouGov poll, 14-16 March, 2016.

“CNN Poll: Percentage of Republicans who think Biden’s 2020 win was illegitimate ticks back up 70%,” Jennifer Agiesta & Ariel Edwards-Levy, CNN, 3 August 2023; “Almost a third of Americans still believe the 2020 election result was fraudulent,” Ben Kamisar, NBC News, 20 June 2023; “Capitol Police Officer Dies From Injuries in Pro-Trump Rampage,” Michael S. Schmidt, The New York Times, 8 January 2021.

“Capitol riots timeline: What happened on 6 January 2021?” BBC, 2 August 2023; and “Capitol attack: the five people who died,” Kenya Evelyn, The Guardian, 8 January 2021.

“The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election,” Molly Ball, Time, 4 February 2021.

“The January 6 investigation is the biggest in U.S. history. It’s only half done,” Spencer S. Hsu, Devlin Barrett & Tom Jackman, The Washington Post, 18 March 2023; “1,000 people have been charged for the Capital riot. Here’s where their cases stand,” Meg Anderson & Nick McMillan, NPR, 25 March 2023; “In a D.C. jail, Jan. 6 defendants awaiting trial are forming bitter factions,” Tom Dreisbach, NPR, 14 April 2022; “Lawmakers give conflicting accounts of how Jan. 6 defendants being treated in D.C. jail after touring facility,” Scott MacFarlane, CBS News, 25 March 2023; “Jan. 6 defendants win unlikely Dem champions as they face harsh detainment,” Kyle Cheney, Andrew Desiderio & Josh Gerstein, Politico, 19 April 2021; “Feds admit breaking law with delay in case against alleged Jan. 6 rioter,” Josh Gerstein, Politico, 14 March 2022; and “A Jan. 6 rioter was convicted and sentenced in secret. No one will say way,” Alanna Durkin Richer & Michael Kunzelman, Associated Press, 15 September 2023.

“Trump’s 91 criminal charges and where they stand,” Brie Sparkman & Sara Wiatrak, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, 11 January 2024; “Rudy Giuliani pleads not guilty to Georgia election racketeering charges,” Associated Press, 2 September 2023; and “Trump and 18 others charged in Georgia election inquiry,” Kayla Epstein & Madeline Halpert, BBC, 15 August 2023.

“Colorado Supreme Court declares Donald Trump is ineligible for the White House,” Nicholas Riccardi, Associated Press, 20 December 2023; “Colorado’s disqualification of Trump from the 2024 ballot puts the US in uncharted constitutional territory,” Andrea Scoseria, LSE Blog, 22 December 2023; and “Election officials must block Trump. The Constitution demands it.” Quentin Young, Louisiana Illuminator, 14 April 2023.

“Donald Trump blasts ‘evil and heinous abuse of power’ after second indictment,” Stefania Palma, James Politi & Joshua Chaffin, 14 June 2023; and “’Outrageous’: Republicans vent their fury following Manhattan grand jury’s indictment of Trump in Stormy Daniels ‘hush’ money probe – and vow to exploit ‘blatant abuse of power’ to put him BACK in the White House,” Geoff Earle, The Daily Mail, 30 March 2023.

“Republicans threaten to boycott Jan. 6 committee after Pelosi bars two Trump allies,” France 24, 22 July 2021; “All Americans – including those arrested in the Jan. 6 riots – deserved due process,” Senator Rand Paul, Opinion, Fox News, 10 February 2022; “The January 6 Insurrection Hoax,” Roger Kimball, The New Criterion, 20 September 2021; “How lagging prosecutions and long jail stays are fanning the flames of Jan. 6 extremism,” Laura Italiano, Business Insider, 30 March 2022; and “The Cult of the January 6 Martyrs,” Laura Jedeed, The New Republic, 6 March 2023.

“Biden impeachment inquiry explained: what is happening and could the president be convicted?” Jonathan Yerushalmy, The Guaradian, 14 December 2023.

“As Partisan Hostility Grows, Signs of Frustration With the Two-Party System,” Pew Research Center, 9 August 2022; and “Misperceptions about out-partisans’ democratic values may erode democracy,” Michael H. Pasek, Lee-Or Ankori-Karlinsky, Alex Levy-Vene, & Samatha L. Moore-Berg, Scientific Reports, vol. 12, art. 16284, 29 September 2023.

“The measurement of partisan sorting for 180 million voters,” Jacob R. Brown & Ryan D. Enos, Nature Human Behaviour (5), 8 March 2021; “Are Americans Purposely Moving Next to People Who Share Their Politics?” Dora Mekouar, Voice of America, 18 May 2022; and “Partisan animosity, personal politics, views of Trump,” Pew Research Center, 5 October 2017.

“Social Media, Echo Chambers, and Political Polarization,” Pablo Barberá, in Social Media and Democracy, Ed. Nathaniel Persily & Joshua A. Tucker, Cambridge University Press, 2020; “How tech platforms fuel U.S. political polarization and what government can do about it,” Paul Barrett, Justin Hendrix & Grant Sims, Brookings Institution, 27 September 2021; and “Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization,” Christopher A. Bail, Lisa P. Argyle, Taylor W. Brown, & Alexander Volfowsky, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), vol. 115, no. 37, 28 August 2018.

“Americans’ Dismal Views of the Nation’s Politics,” Pew Research Center, 19 September 2023.

“Public Trust in Government: 1958-2023,” Pew Research Center, 19 September 2023; and “Confidence in Institutions,” Gallup.

“Social Cohesion Is Vital, and We’re Losing It,” Richard Heinberg, resilience, 13 January 2022; “Polarization, Democracy, and Political Violence in the United States: What the Research Says,” Rachel Kleinfeld, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 5 September 2023; “How to Tell When Your Country Is Past the Point of No Return,” Thomas B. Edsall, The New York Times, 15 December 2021; and “Who Is Us?: A Project on American Identity,” The Aspen Institute.

“Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital,” Robert D. Putnam, Journal of Democracy, vol. 6, no. 1, January 1995; “Social Capital: Why We Need It and How We Can Create More of It,” Isabel V. Sawhill, Brookings Institution, July 2020; “America is losing its social capital,” Tomas Hinckley, The Daily Campus, 5 October 2023; and “Erosian of Social Capital a Major Problem, Say Experts,” Leo Doran, Inside Sources, 17 May 2017.

“What Happens When Democracies Become Perniciously Polarized,” Jennifer McCoy & Benjamin Press, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 18 January 2022.

“From Political Violence to Political Trust? How Transitional Justice Affects Citzen Views of Government,” Risa Kitagawa, International Studies Quarterly, vol. 67, no. 1, March 2023; “How can political trust be built after civil wars? Evidence from post-conflict Sierra Leone,” Pui-Hang Wong et alia, Journal of Peace Research, vol. 53, no. 6, 13 October 2016; and “Building trust among enemies: The central challenge for international conflict resolution,” Herbert C. Kelman, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, vol. 29, no. 6, November 2005.

How Civil Wars Start, Barbara F. Walters, Penguin Random House, 2023; and Revolution and Rebellion in the Early Modern World, Population Change and State Breakdown in England, France, Turkey, and China, 1600-1850, Jack A. Gladstone, Routledge, 25^th Anniversary Edition, 2016.

“Jimmy Carter: I fear for our Democracy,” President Jimmy Carter, opinion, The New York Times, 5 January 2022; Ages of Discord, Peter Turchin, Beresta Books, 2016; and The Next Civil War: Dispatches from the American Future, Stephen Marche, Avid Reader Press/Simon & Schuster, 2023.

“Secession is here: States, cities and the wealthy are already withdrawing from America,” Michael J. Lee, The Conversation, 20 March 2023; “Analysis: Secession movements underscore a polarized America,” Reid Wilson, pluribus news, 26 February 2023; “Secession movements gain traction in US amid deepening political rifts: ‘A long-standing problem,’” Jon Brown, Fox News, 2 December 2022; “America: Love It Or Leave It,” Kaia Hubbard, U.S. News & World Report, 5 November 2021; and List of active separatist movements in North America, Wikipedia.

“What’s Really Happening in Biden vs. Abbott vs. the Supreme Court,” Stephen I. Vladeck, The New York Times(opinion), 1 February 2024; “The crisis within Texas’ border crisis,” Ankush Khardori, Politico, 30 January 2024; “Texas ‘defending itself from border invasion’ in migrant crisis row,” Rozina Sabur, The Telegraph, 27 January 2024; and “Illegal Migration Forcing U.S. Constitutional Crisis,” Rod Dreher, The European Conservative, 26 January 2024.

“Two in five Americans say a civil war is at least somewhat likely in the next decade,” Taylor Orth, YouGov, 26 August 2022; and “1 in 3 Americans say violence against the government can be justified, citing fears of a political schism, pandemic,” Meryl Kornfield & Mariana Alfaro, The Washington Post, 1 January 2022.

“The Rise of Political Violence in the United States,” Rachel Kleinfeld, Journal of Democracy, vol. 32, no. 4, October 2021; “The Escalating Terrorism Problem in the United States,” Seth G. Jones, Catrina Doxsee & Nicholas Harrington, Center for Strategic International Studies, 17 June 2020; “Surveying the Landscape of the American Far Right,” Mark Pitcavage, George Washington University Project on Extremism, August 2019; The Militia Movement, Anti-Defamation League, 2020; “Investigators Eye Right-Wing Militias at Capitol Riot,” Adam Goldman, Katie Benner & Alan Feuer, The New York Times, as updated 10 June 2021; Strategic Intelligence Assessment and Data on Domestic Terrorism, Federal Bureau of Investigation, May 2021; and “Domestic Terrorism: Focus on Militia Extremism,” FBI News, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 22 September 2011.

“Nearly 1 In 5 Defendants In Capitol Riot Cases Served In the Military,” Tom Dreisbach & Meg Anderson, NPR, 21 January 2021; and “Prepare for Military Coup After 2024 Election, Ex-General Warns,” Brendan Cole, Newsweek, 31 December 2021.

“Biden’s Secretary of Defense Is Moving to Purge the Military of White Supremacists,” Eric Lutz, Vanity Fair, 4 February 2021; and “’Close the loopholes’: The Pentagon’s next front in its hunt for extremists,” Bryan Benker, Politico, 4 April 2022.

“Tom Cotton: Send In the Troops,” Senator Tom Cotton, opinion, The New York Times, as updated with editor’s note 5 June 2020; “Steube: Democrats Refuse to Acknowledge Widespread Antifa Violence as Domestic Terrorism Despite Overwhelming Evidence,” Congressman Greg Steube, press release, 25 February 2021; “Andy Ngo, Antifa and the Breakdown of American Justice,” Melissa Chen, Konstantin Kisin Substack, 16 August 2023; “Media’s Defense of Antifa: Former Member Exposes Ignored Violence,” Eightify (undated summary and link to Fox News television interview; “Far-left versus Far-right Fatal Violence: An Empirical Assessment of the Prevalence of Ideologically Motivated Homicides in the United States,” Celinet Duran, Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society, vol. 22, no. 2, 2021.

“Home of the hateful, fearful, heavily armed,” David Kilcullen, The Australian, 30 May 2020.

“Far-Left Extremist Groups in the United States,” Counter Extremism Project, August 2022; “Anti-Fascist. Armed to the Teeth,” Jack Crosbie, Rolling Stone, 18 May 2023; “’If others have rifles, we’ll have rifles’: why US leftist groups are taking up arms,” Kim Kelly, The Guardian, 22 July 2019; “A New Wave of Left-Wing Militants Is Ready to Rumble in Portland – and Beyond,” Madison Pauly, Mother Jones, May/June 2017; and “Redneck Revolt: the armed leftwing group that wants to stamp out fascism,” Cecilia Saixue Watt, The Guardian, 11 July 2017.

“Right wing builds its own echo chamber,” Sara Fischer & Dan Primack, Axios, 12 December 2021; “Digital Populism: The Internet and the Rise of Right-wing Populism,” Sena Eksi, European Center for Populism Studies, 26 December 2021“Top 50 largest news websites in the world: Surge in traffic to Epoch Times and other right-wing sites,” Aisha Majid, Press Gazette, 27 January 2021; Network Propaganda: Manipulation, Disinformation, and Radicalization in American Politics, Yochai Benkler, Robert Faris & Hal Roberts, Oxford Academic Press, 18 October 2018; “The Koch Network and Republican Party Extremism,” Theda Skocpol & Alexander Hertel-Fernandez, Perspectives on Politics, vol. 14, no. 3, 31 August 2016; and “The Online Extremist Ecosystem,” Heather J. Williams, et alia, Perspective, Rand Corporation, December 2021.

“Intra-Elite Competition: A Key Concept for Understanding the Dynamics of Complex Societies,” Peter Turchin, blog, peterturchin.com, 30 December 2016.

“Read Hillary Clinton’s ‘Basket of Deplorables’ Remarks About Donald Trump Supporters,” Katie Reilly, Time, 10 September 2016; “Trump is not the only one who calls opponents ‘animals.’ Democrats and Republicans do it to each other,” Alexander Theodoridis & James Martherus, The Washington Post, 21 May 2018; “Party Animals? Extreme Partisan Polarization and Dehumanization,” James Martherus, Andy Martinez, Paul K. Piff, & Alexander G. Theodoridis, Political Behaviour, vol. 43, no. 2, June 2021; “After Calling Foes ‘Vermin’ Trump Campaign Warns Its Critics Will Be ‘Crushed,’” Michael Gold, The New York Times, 13 November 2023; and “Why Biden’s campaign keeps linking Trump to Hitler,” Holly Otterbein, Elena Schneider & Jonathan Lemire, Politico, 19 December 2023.

“Trump backs off 2024 campaign theme threatening political ‘retribution,’” Alexandra Hutzler, ABC News, 11 January 2024; “Trump Promised Retribution. He’s Not So Sure That’s What Iowa Voters Want.” Eric Cortellessa, Time, 15 January 2024; “’Other than day one’: Trump supercharges concerns of dictatorship in second term,” Brett Samuels & Alex Ganitano, The Hill, 12 July 2023; and “Pledging ‘retribution,’ Trump fuels fears for rule of law,” Piotr Smolar, Le Monde, 8 December 2023.

“This is how democracies die,” Steven Levitsky & Daniel Ziblatt, The Guardian, 21 January 2018; “It’s Time for Democrats to Break the Glass,” Ronald Brownstein, The Atlantic, 6 January 2022; “Democratic 2020 strategy must be gloves off, abandon all subtlety: ‘Trump will kill your dog!’” Lucian K. Truscott, IV, Salon, 27 July 2019; “Democrats say they’re saving democracy. So why are they bending it?” David Winston, Roll Call, 7 September 2022; and Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigration Rights and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary, website.

“Sam Harris: Trump, Religion, Wokeness,” Triggernometry, YouTube (video link), August 2022.

“Both Democrats and Republicans think the opposite party has stronger negative feelings about them than they actually do,” Christian Rigg, Political Psychology, 6 April 2021; “Exaggerated meta-perceptions predict intergroup hostility between American political partisans,” Samantha L. Moore-Berg, Lee-Or Ankori-Karlinsky, Boaz Hameiri, & Emilie Bruneau, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), vol. 117, no. 26, 11 June 2020; “Metadehumanization erodes democratic norms during 2020 presidential election,” Alexander P. Landry, Elliott Ihm, Spencer Kwit, & Jonathan W. Schooler, @sap Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, vol. 21, no. 1, December 2021; and “Survey: A large number of Americans want an anti-democratic leader,” Tarah Williams, Andrew Bloeser & Brian Harward, PBS, 9 February 2023.

“Actor Johnny Depp apologizes for ‘poor taste’ Trump assassination joke,” Paul Sandle, Reuters, 23 June 2017; “Carole Cook Jokes About President Trump Assassination: ‘Why Not?’” Alexia Fernández, People, 10 September 2018; “Another Hollywood star ‘joked’ about killing Trump, but no one’s laughing,” Juana Summers, CNN, 24 June 2017; “The Assassination of Donald Trump Painting,” Jay Rechsteiner, painting, acrylic on canvas, Saatchi Art; and “Matt Gaetz accuses media of ‘greenlighting’ Trump assassination,” Gustaf Kilander, The Independent, 5 December 2023.

“Billings man charged with making threats to kill U.S. Sen. Jon Tester, threats against President Joe Biden,” press release, U.S. Department of Justice, 27 September 2023; “FBI shoots and kills man suspected of threatening Joe Biden,” Sky News, 10 August 2023; “Death Threats to Members of Congress Have Doubled This Year, Capitol Police Say,” Rebecca Klapper, Newsweek, 18 May 2021; “Over 12,000 tweets are calling for Trump’s assassination. Here’s how the Secret Service handles it,” Sasha Lekach, Mashable, 2 February 2017; “Canadian woman who attempted to assassinate Trump sentenced to 22 years behind bars,” Lawrence Richard, Fox News, 18 August 2023; “’He never even watched the news’ – the Brit who tried to kill Trump,” Nell Frizzell, The Guardian, 27 January 2017; and Security incidents involving Donald Trump, Wikipedia.

“Meta closes nearly 4,800 fake accounts in China that tried to polarize US voters,” The Guardian, 30 November 2023; “Suspected Chinese operatives using AI generated images to spread disinformation among US voters, Microsoft says,” Sean Lyngaas, CNN, 7 September 2023; “China-Linked Internet Trolls Try Fueling Divisions in U.S. Midterms, Researchers Say,” Dustin Volz, The Wall Street Journal, 26 October 2022; “Chinese influence operation seeks to sow political discord, ‘aggressively’ targets U.S. midterms,” AJ Vicens, Cyberscoop, 26 October 2022; “Foreign Interference in U.S. Elections Focuses on Cultivating Distrust to Reduce Political Consensus,” Marek N. Posard, RAND Corporation, 1 October 2020; “US charges 4 Americans, 3 Russians in election discord case,” Curt Anderson, Associated Press, 18 April 2023; “A leading California secession advocate got funding and direction from Russian intelligence agents, US government alleges,” Charles R. Davis, Business Insider, 2 August 2022; and “Texas, California Separatists Attend Kremlin-Funded Conference,” ABC News, 27 September 2016.

“Growing Numbers of Chinese Migrants Are Crossing the Southern Border,” Eileen Sullivan, The New York Times, 24 November 2023; and “Migrants find tips on Chinese version of TikTok for long trek to U.S.-Mexico border,” Echo Wang & Mica Rosenberg, Reuters, 28 April 2023.

Marketable US Treasury debt maturing in the next year represents 33.8% of total marketable debt; 68% of net new borrowing in 2024 is projected to be T-Bills, bringing the total short-term debt share to 34.5% by year end; Quarterly Release Data: 2024 – 1^st Quarter, U.S. Treasury Department, 12 January 2024.

“Another Trump Presidency Is the Biggest Threat to Liberal Democracy,” Chris Patten, Project Syndicate, 2 January 2024; “Opinion: The big risks facing the world in 2024,” Frida Ghitis, CNN, 27 December 2023; “The world cannot hedge against Donald Trump,” Edward Luce, Financial Times, 6 December 2023; and “Donald Trump poses the biggest danger to the world in 2024,” The Economist, 16 November 2023.

Thematic Markets

Discussion about this post