By A Concerned and Overwhelmed International Observer

As I attempt to process the implications of Donald Trump's 2024 election victory, I find myself grappling with a familiar yet intensified sense of dislocation - a feeling that parallels but exceeds my reactions to his 2016 win and Brexit. My instinct, honed through years of research and analysis is to disempower fear through knowledge. Dedicating time many people don’t have and honing skills many haven’t been helped to gain, to examine perceived threads systematically. Yet the scale and complexity of what we're facing - combined with emerging evidence of sophisticated preparation to take control - makes this usual coping mechanism feel increasingly inadequate. 

The Mechanics of Democratic Erosion

What we're witnessing isn't simply political change but rather the potential transformation of American governance into something akin to a protection racket operating at unprecedented scale. Recent reporting suggests this may manifest not through dramatic authoritarian gestures but through a "slow-burn authoritarianism" (1) - a more insidious approach combining bureaucratic harassment, targeted intimidation, and dismantling institutional protections.

Project 2025, spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation (2, 3), provides the architectural blueprint for this transformation. ProPublica's investigation reveals how Heritage has already filed over 50,000 Freedom of Information Act requests targeting federal employees who work on climate change, diversity initiatives, or voting rights - creating a database of potential targets for removal (4). In parallel inviting applications and running training courses for people who could replace casualties. This methodical preparation suggests a level of sophistication that exceeds previous authoritarian efforts.

The incorporation of potential financial restructuring, including Trump's new cryptocurrency venture, World Liberty Financial (5), suggests interest in parallel governance systems outside traditional oversight - a classic authoritarian tactic updated for the digital age. When combined with stated plans for mass deportations (6,7) and targeting of opposition (8), we see a coherent strategy for consolidated control emerging.

The Speed of Rights Erosion

Perhaps most alarming is how quickly rights erosion can manifest in social behaviour. The Institute for Strategic Dialogue found a 4,600% increase in misogynistic messaging within 24 hours of the election, combined with an immediate post-election surge in coordinated harassment campaigns (9). Demonstrating how quickly permission structures for abuse can establish themselves when backed by political victory.

We need to know these issues well enough to identify rational compromises, lest they become normalised excessive concessions. The line between pragmatic adaptation and dangerous capitulation requires informed analysis. Put more succinctly by Timothy Snyder in his book “On Tyranny”: Do not obey in advance (10).

Lines drawn quickly become the new normal. Without deep understanding we risk accepting compromises that fundamentally undermine democratic principles while appearing superficially reasonable. 

Global Patterns and International Influence

As someone observing from outside the US, with more than a passing understanding of technology and data, I'm acutely aware of how these developments reflect and reinforce global trends. The strategic playbook being deployed closely resembles Viktor Orbán's approach in Hungary (11) - a comparison made explicit by American right-wing figures such as DeSantis, who openly admires his methods (12). The international network supporting these changes, from Christian nationalist organisations (13) to allied tech billionaires (14, 15, 16), operates across borders with sophisticated coordination. The same currents flow through the wars in Israel (17) and Ukraine. 

“The Bloomberg Billionaires Index estimated that the world’s 10 wealthiest people gained nearly $64bn (about £49.5bn) on Wednesday, the largest daily increase since the index began in 2012.

Elon Musk, the world’s richest person, registered the largest increase with a $26.5bn addition to his fortune, which now stands at $290bn. The prominent backer of Trump’s campaign, benefited from a surge in the share price of Tesla, the electric carmaker where he is chief executive and in which he owns a 13% stake.

Much of the gains for the top 10 was because of a surge in US stocks on Wednesday as investors anticipated a low-tax and regulation-light policy platform.”

Dan Milmo, Gobal technology editor, Guardian, 7^th November 2024

The "slow-burn" approach to dismantling democratic institutions has proven particularly effective. Rather than dramatic crackdowns we see the methodical erosion of institutional independence - a strategy that makes resistance particularly challenging. The Heritage Foundation's systematic information gathering about federal employees mirrors tactics used in Hungary prior to their largest civil service purge. Zach Beauchamp explores that slide in engaging and humanised detail in this 2018 Vox article I thoroughly recommend reading. It is the source for the quote below. 

“A series of changes to electoral rules and laws imposed over time that might individually be defensible, but in combination with corruption and demagogic populism create a new system — one that appears democratic, but functionally is not. 

This is something that can be done without jettisoning democratic institutions or making as much of an open mockery of them as a country like Vladimir Putin’s Russia. All it requires is a ruling political party that cares less about democracy than about maintaining power, and a voting base willing to back the party even as it makes authoritarian rules..

Steve Bannon certainly sees the parallels. Trump’s former senior strategist has repeatedly praised Orbán as a model for his vision of populist politics, once referring to him as “Trump before Trump.” This May, Bannon and Orbán spent an hour meeting one on one in Budapest.”

 Zach Beauchamp, Vox, Sept 2018

This is not a new tactic. Turkey’s post-coup purges rocked Europe (18). In Trumps first term he shed thousands of staff, appointing allies to leadership positions and leaving many critical roles vacant (19). The UK rhetoric called for similar action, peaking under Liz Truss after her ‘fiscal event’ shocked the UK economy (20). Echoing other global calls to ‘drain the swamp’ of ‘deep state’ enemies. A characteristic facet of populism (21). The ‘elite’ as enemy of the populous. The ‘fifth column’ or ‘enemy within’, a.k.a people perceived to be grit in machines. Working to nominally shrink state bodies, bypassing administrative barriers, shedding opponents, disabling oversight, inserting allies. 

Defined Russian information warfare tactics (22) - the "4 Ds" of Dismiss, Distort, Distract, and Dismay - have been readily adopted by domestic actors, creating an environment where truth becomes increasingly opaque and distorted. Elsewhere the sheer scale of news through all media is intentionally and unintentionally overwhelming. Likely the most famous quote about intentional elements:

“The Democrats don’t matter,” Bannon reportedly said in 2018. “The real opposition is the media. And the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit." 

For loyalists targeted the immediate post-election surge in coordinated harassment and the January 6^th 2021 insurrection (23), demonstrates translation into real-world intimidation when given political permission. 

“One response to this situation is to walk away and tune everything out. After all, it takes real effort to comb through the bullshit, and most people have busy lives and limited bandwidth. Another reaction is to retreat into tribal allegiances. There’s Team Liberal and Team Conservative, and pretty much everyone knows which side they’re on. So you stick to the places that feed you the information you most want to hear. 

My Vox colleague Dave Roberts calls this an “epistemic crisis.” The foundation for shared truth, he argues, has collapsed. I don’t disagree with that, but I’d frame the problem a little differently.

We’re in an age of manufactured nihilism.”

Sean Illing, Vox, February 2022

At a far more local level, at least superficially, this is the story of a Republican activist called Christopher Rufo (23, 24), determinedly weaponising the niche degree level topic of CRT (Critical Race Theory) as an existential threat to school children, all in the service of demonising state education, claiming malicious indoctrination, and promoting a shift to more ideologically aligned private schooling (25). That led to violence at school board meetings, death threats for teachers and librarians, and bled into activation of Trump-supporting voter factions in advance of the attack on the Capitol (26).

The Human Cost

While my position allows me to analyse these developments from relative safety, I'm deeply conscious of those facing immediate threats (9).

Women stockpiling Plan B medication (the morning after pill) are likely not overreacting, The New Republic's reporting on the "legal war of attrition" being prepared against vulnerable populations - bureaucratic harassment rather than dramatic crackdowns - making them harder to resist but no less devastating (1).

People voted for a plethora of reasons. Many not deciding until they were in the voting booth or at the kitchen table with a mail in ballot. My partner sees different news and a different internet to me, my sister sees an internet even further removed. They both get very tired very quickly when I share news from tech specialists and investigative journalists. She didn’t vote. She could see no-one who she felt would make her public sector work more bearable. I struggled to argue, but we are here for each other, hoping none of our loved ones get seriously ill or lose their jobs. Losing faith there will still be a social safety net. Wondering how much higher our bills will go. Knowing it’s too late to build back a decent pension. That is not an unusual situation internationally. It is something most people are delighted to be distracted from.

It looks as though many millions of people who voted for Biden did not turn out to vote for either Harris or Trump (27). That has spawned all kinds of theories, but it is likely a complex mix of factors. One of which is people being utterly disillusioned, battered, and exhausted. That’s an autocrat’s playground. Selectively spend and brew crises, blame ‘others’, crack down hard, promise better, collect power, purge opponents. It can become a tightening Overton window. I’m wondering if people remember how fast folk lurched from panic to farce to fear to crisis last time.

The Complicity Question

One of the most challenging aspects to process is the role of seemingly "respectable" institutions in enabling these developments. Institutional resources being deployed to facilitate future purges. Targeting everything from employees' browser histories to their use of terms like "climate equity" in emails - reveals a level of preparation that exceeds previous efforts.

Meanwhile, tech leaders align themselves with authoritarian urges while having unimaginable quantities of data, infrastructure, and capital. Simultaneously promoting cryptocurrency (28) and AI developments that could further erode democratic oversight with a fundamentally oversight-averse executive branch. 

There are discrete portions of the tech community with a deep and publicly declared interest in overwhelming traditional financial systems to increase the power and profitability of blockchain alternatives. These are not new power dynamics. Gebru and Torres defined some Silicon Valley views (29) using the acronym TESCREAL. 

“Longtermism was born when EAs [Effective Altruists] reasoned: If our aim is to do the most good possible, and if the future could contain astronomical amounts of “value,” then we should focus on the far future rather than the present (Greaves and MacAskill, 2019).

 Similarly, if our aim is to positively affect the greatest number of people possible, and if most people who could exist will exist in the far future, then we should focus on them instead of current people and contemporary problems, except in so far as doing the latter would influence the far future. Longtermists Hilary Greaves and William MacAskill (2019) thus wrote that we may simply ignore “the effects contained in the first 100 (or even 1,000) years.””

I am not in the least anti-tech. I am fascinated and excited by the potential of most new technologies, but I am also aware of the incredibly perverse incentives (see the profit made by the richest few after Trump’s election), and power imbalances that develop with current levels of tech market consolidation. There are significant risks of progressive capture of both governments and regulators by some tech leaders, enabled by the sheer scale of wealth, global reach, and systems integration. That is not helped by enormous returns achieved from hyping speculative future value. Whether a 2 to 5 year promise of AGI in public (30), or 10,000 year focus in private.

“OpenAI’s rivals seem to understand that AGI is a phantom that burns money and the real money is in defense. What’s OpenAI doing to get in on this? It partnered with government contractor Carahsoft to sell ChatGPT licenses to the government. According to Forbes, it hasn’t gotten in with the Pentagon yet but it did sell $108,000 in licenses to NASA and $100,000 to the Department of Agriculture. Thrilling stuff and chump change for a company that says it’ll soon need $40 billion a year to keep the lights on.”

Matthew Gault, Gizmodo, November 2024 

AI, Data, and the Machinery of Targeted Control

Perhaps the most unsettling aspect of our current situation is how commercial surveillance infrastructure, built ostensibly for advertising and "innovation," stands ready to be repurposed for political control and targeted harassment. The Heritage Foundation's systematic FOIA campaign demonstrates how data can be gathered to identify targets. When combined with AI-driven sentiment analysis and the vast behavioural data held by companies like X (formerly Twitter), this creates extensive  capabilities for identifying and suppressing dissent with explicit hand in glove collaboration between tech leaders and an administration that has declared intent to target journalists, protestors, and other sundry critics (31).

The AdTech Backstory

The AdTech ecosystem wasn't built for authoritarianism - it was built to show us products we might buy, connect us, and work out how to do both more precisely and engagingly. Yet its fundamental architecture - tracking our behaviours, analysing our emotions, assessing our preferences, predicting our responses - provides a turnkey system for political surveillance (32). Period-tracking apps provide a chilling example: in 2022, it was revealed that data brokers were selling location data from such apps, potentially exposing women seeking reproductive healthcare (33). Some firms stopped after the public outcry, but capability remains out there elsewhere.

Musk's acquisition of Twitter/X wasn't just about owning a social platform - it was about acquiring a vast quantity of content and a behavioural database with real-time sentiment tracking (34) useful to target messaging, train his AI, and modify the algorithms. That combines with highly centralised cloud platforms and machine learning systems from third parties that specialise in finding patterns, such as Microsoft, Meta (Facebook), Alphabet (Google), Amazon, and Palantir

False Dichotomies and Real Costs

We're told we face an inevitable choice between innovation and regulation, between technological progress and privacy protection. This framing conveniently ignores how existing technology could be redirected toward control and harassment. The risk exposure has increased dramatically for anyone who might oppose a Trump administration or belong to targeted groups. Consider:

- AI systems can identify likely LGBTQ+ individuals from social media behaviour

- Location data can reveal attendance at protests or medical clinics

- Purchase histories can suggest political leanings

- Communication patterns can identify potential activists

- Sentiment analysis can flag likely opposition

Project 2025's plans for government restructuring align well with Silicon Valley's libertarian dreams of minimal regulation. This confluence of technological capability creates new challenges for resistance. How do we maintain privacy when our devices constantly betray us? How do we organise when algorithms can predict and pre-empt collective action? How do we protect vulnerable groups when their digital footprints make them increasingly visible to malign actors?

The answer isn't Luddism or digital withdrawal - that's neither practical nor effective. Instead, we need to understand these systems well enough to identify their vulnerabilities and build appropriate protections. We need to recognise when "innovation" narratives mask control mechanisms, and when "efficiency" and population protection aims hide outsized adverse outcomes.

Processing While Contributing

As an international observer with relevant expertise but no direct vulnerability, I've questioned whether sharing these analyses helps or merely adds to information overwhelm. I've tentatively concluded that those with the privilege of relative safety and analytical capabilities have a responsibility to help others process these developments - while acknowledging we can't fully understand impact on those directly threatened.

Most critically, we need to know these issues well enough to identify rational compromises, lest they become normalised excessive concessions. The line between necessary pragmatic adaptation and dangerous capitulation to creeping authoritarianism requires careful, informed analysis. Without deep understanding of the mechanisms at play - from administrative harassment to social intimidation - we risk accepting trade-offs that fundamentally undermine democratic principles while appearing superficially reasonable.

What Next?

The path ahead is daunting, but clear-eyed analysis combined with practical solidarity offers our best chance for democratic resilience. Those of us with the privilege of distance must use it to support those on the front lines of resistance, while building understanding of threats that ultimately endanger all democratic societies. 

We need to make a careful distinction between:

- Necessary technological adaptation vs dangerous surveillance expansion

- Legitimate business innovation vs control mechanism development

- Real security measures vs pretexts for tracking

- Genuine platform moderation vs automated harassment enablement

The Weight of Knowledge

The grief and numbness I described at the start of this piece take on new dimensions with this technological understanding. The systems built to show us products now stand ready to identify and suppress dissenters. The platforms that connect us can be weaponised to isolate us. The tools that could enhance democracy are poised to enable autocracy. 

This technological dimension amplifies the international nature of our challenge. When global firms, largely impervious to prompt legal challenge, can analyse global data and Musk's X can influence global discourse, resistance must be similarly borderless. The Christian nationalist networks, aligned tech leaders, and sympathetic media already operate internationally - our response must do the same.

Having said that we can use similar tools to expose preparation for authoritarianism. Just as AI systems can predict dissent, they can also identify patterns of coordinated harassment. The challenge lies in building ethical frameworks for using these tools while maintaining democratic values.

Practical Steps

Given these realities, resistance requires both technological and human responses:

1. Individual Actions:

- Understand privacy tools without becoming paralysed by surveillance fears

- Support encrypted communication while maintaining community connections

- Document abuse patterns while protecting vulnerable individuals

- Build resilience without isolating from digital spaces 

2. Collective Measures:

- Develop community defence against automated harassment

- Create ethical frameworks for technology use

- Support institutional resistance at all levels

- Maintain international solidarity networks

- Share knowledge about system vulnerabilities and protections

3. Institutional Preparation:

- Support privacy-protecting infrastructure

- Build legitimate oversight mechanisms

- Develop democratic alternatives to surveillance capitalism

- Protect whistleblowers and ethical tech workers

This knowledge, while overwhelming, is essential for effective resistance. We must understand well enough to: 

- Identify genuine threats without paranoid paralysis

- Build real protections without false security

- Support vulnerable communities without exposing them

- Maintain hope while acknowledging danger

The path ahead requires holding multiple truths in mind: these systems are immensely powerful, but not omnipotent; the threat is serious, but not insurmountable; the future is uncertain, but not predetermined. By understanding the mechanisms of control - from bureaucratic harassment to AI-driven surveillance - we can better resist them while building democratic alternatives.

SOURCE LIST

1.  “Trump’s Slow-Burn Authoritarianism”, Greg Sargent, New Republic (Sep 2024) https://newrepublic.com/article/185487/trump-maga-legal-war-slow-burn-authoritarianism

2.  "Project 2025", The Heritage Foundation (2023), full searchable copy of the policy document on document cloud https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24088042-project-2025s-mandate-for-leadership-the-conservative-promise

3.  “The roadmap: Where Project 2025 might take America” Andrew Prokop, Vox, (Jul 2024) https://www.vox.com/politics/360318/project-2025-trump-policies-abortion-divorce

4.  "Heritage Foundation Staffers Flood Federal Agencies With Thousands of Information Requests" Sharon Lerner and Andy Kroll, Propublica (Oct 2024) https://www.propublica.org/article/have-government-employees-mentioned-climate-change-voting-or-gender-identity-the-heritage-foundation-wants-to-know

5.  “The Trumps Have Gone Full Crypto With World Liberty Financial” Khalili, Wired (Sept 2024) https://www.wired.com/story/trump-world-liberty-financial-crypto-defi/

6.  "How would Trump's promise of mass deportations of migrants work?" Bernd Debusmann Jr & Mike Wendling, BBC News (Aug 2024) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9z0lm48ngo

7.  “How America Forgot About One of Trump’s Most Brutal Policies”, Ankush Khardori, Politico (Oct 2024) https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/10/28/trump-immigration-family-separation-00185512

8.  "Trump Allies Bully Dems, Media to Shut Up About His Fascist Plans" Andrew Perez and Asawin Suebsaeng, Rolling Stone (Jul 2024) https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-allies-fascist-plans-dems-media-1235060142/ 

9.  “Your body, my choice: Hate and harassment towards women spreads online", by Isabelle Frances-Wright and Moustafa Ayad, ISD (Nov 2024) https://www.isdglobal.org/digital_dispatches/your-body-my-choice-hate-and-harassment-towards-women-spreads-online/

10.  “Lesson 1. Do not obey in advance” (podcast), Discussing the first chapter of “On Tyranny” Timothy Snyder (Oct 2021) https://snyder.substack.com/p/lesson-1-do-not-obey-in-advance-podcast

11.  “More Power, Less Support: The Fidesz Government and the Coronavirus Pandemic in Hungary” Agnes Batory, Cambridge Press (Feb 2022) https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/government-and-opposition/article/more-power-less-support-the-fidesz-government-and-the-coronavirus-pandemic-in-hungary/A4B55C85F0FFB99FDF939334162220BF

12.  "How Ron DeSantis is following in Viktor Orbán's footsteps" Zach Beauchamp, Vox (Apr 2022) https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2022/4/28/23037788/ron-desantis-florida-viktor-orban-hungary-right-authoritarian 

13.  “Christian Nationalism in Support for Donald Trump” Anna Maccaroni, University of New Hampshire, Perspectives, Vol 15, Article 5 (2023) https://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1139&context=perspectives

14.  “How Tech Billionaires Learned to Love Trump Again” Susan B Glasser, New Yorker (Oct 2024) https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/10/28/how-republican-billionaires-learned-to-love-trump-again 

15.  “A Running List of the Tech CEOs Donald Trump Claims Are Calling Him To Suck Up” Makena Kelly, Wired (Oct 2024) https://www.wired.com/story/tech-ceos-trump-claims-are-courting-him/

16.  “Trump’s victory adds record $64bn to wealth of richest top 10” Dan Milmo, Guardian (Nov 2024) https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/nov/07/trump-victory-adds-record-wealth-richest-top-10 

17.  “Editorial | Netanyahu's Office's Alleged Crimes Could Rival Those of a Mafia” Haretz, (Nov 2024) https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/editorial/2024-11-11/ty-article/netanyahus-offices-alleged-crimes-could-rival-those-of-a-mafia/00000193-17d1-def0-a3f7-bff31cb60000 

18.  “Turkey dismisses 6,000 more workers in post-coup crackdown”, Reuters (Jan 2017) https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-security-dismissals/turkey-dismisses-6000-more-workers-in-post-coup-crackdown-idUSKBN14Q2CE/

19.  “Tracking Turnover in The Trump Administration” Kathryn Dunn Tenpas. Brookings Institute, (Jan 2021 https://www.brookings.edu/articles/tracking-turnover-in-the-trump-administration/

20.  “Britain’s ‘deep state’ thwarted my plans, Liz Truss tells US far-right summit” David Smith, The Guardian (Feb 2024) https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/21/liz-truss-deep-state-cpac-far-right

21.  Definition of Populism, European Centre for Populism Studies (includes other useful definitions) https://www.populismstudies.org/Vocabulary/populism/

22.  “Facebook Hosted Surge of Misinformation and Insurrection Threats in Months Leading Up to Jan. 6 Attack, Records Show” Craig Silverman, ProPublica, Craig Timberg, The Washington Post, Jeff Kao, ProPublica, and Jeremy B. Merrill, The Washington Post (Jan 2022) https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-hosted-surge-of-misinformation-and-insurrection-threats-in-months-leading-up-to-jan-6-attack-records-show

23.  “How a Conservative Activist Invented the Conflict Over Critical Race Theory” Benjamin Wallace-Wells, New Yorker (Jun 2021) https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conservative-activist-invented-the-conflict-over-critical-race-theory

24.  "Who is Christopher Rufo? The right-wing activist launching an American 'counter-revolution" Zach Beauchamp, Vox (Sep 2023) https://www.vox.com/23811277/christopher-rufo-culture-wars-ron-desantis-florida-critical-race-theory-anti-wokeness

25.  “Convinced that schools are brainwashing kids to be left-wingers, conservatives are seizing control of the American classroom” Jonathan Chait, NyMag Intelligencer, (May 2023) https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/desantis-florida-trump-education-politics.html

26.  “The Radical Right Interests Behind the School Boards Race Row” Sian Norris and Heidi Siegmund Cuda (Nov 2021) https://bylinetimes.com/2021/11/15/the-radical-right-interests-behind-the-school-boards-race-row/ 

27.  “Where are the ‘20 million missing votes’? Dems cling to false hopes of huge gap between Biden and Harris” Melissa Goldin, The Independent (Nov 2024) https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/20-million-votes-missing-harris-biden-democrats-b2643564.html 

28.  Bitcoin price will ‘rise 100X, replace gold and rival value of entire stock market’, PayPal founder claims ‘The central banks are going bankrupt,’ Peter Thiel says. ‘We are at the end of the fiat money regime’ Anthony Cuthbertson, (Apr 2022) https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/bitcoin-price-prediction-2022-thiel-paypal-b2053309.html

29.  “The TESCREAL bundle: Eugenics and the promise of utopia through artificial general intelligence”. Gebru and Torres, (Apr 2024)  https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v29i4.13636

30.   “Sam Altman May Be One of the Biggest Losers of This Election” Matthew Galt, Gizmodo (Nov 2024) https://gizmodo.com/sam-altman-may-be-one-of-the-biggest-losers-of-this-election-2000522109

31.  “Trump Wants the Military to Target Americans Who Oppose Him” Peter Wade, Rolling Stone, (Oct 2024) https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-military-target-americans-oppose-him-1235132806/

32.  Social Media Sentiment Analysis: Decoding Public Opinion in 2024 Explore the latest trends, tools, and techniques in social media sentiment analysis to understand and improve public perception of your brand in 2024, Brandwatch https://www.brandwatch.com/blog/social-media-sentiment-analysis/

33.  "Missed period? The significance of period-tracking applications in a post-Roe America" Kelly et al, Sep 2023, doi: 10.1080/26410397.2023.2238940

34.  On the frontiers of Twitter data and sentiment analysis in election prediction: a review, Alvi et al, Aug 2023 https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10495957/

Bonus Content – What is a protection racket and why use it as a metaphor?

“A protection racket is a scheme where a person extorts money from a victim by suggesting that they need “protection” from property damage or attacks. In exchange for money, the perpetrator promises to keep the victim safe, recover any stolen property, and collect reparations for damaged property. The person the victim needs protection from is usually the person running the scheme. If people refuse to pay up, they may experience harassment, property destruction, and other problems.”

Mary McMahon, My Law Questions

Extending that to securing other forms of loyalty and compliance

A protection racket typically involves an individual or group extorting money from a victim under the pretence of offering “protection” from threats, often created by the perpetrators themselves. In exchange for regular payments, the victim is promised safety, recovery of any stolen property, and compensation for damages. Refusal to pay can lead to harassment, property destruction, and other forms of harm.

This concept of a protection racket can be extended metaphorically to describe systems of autocratic control, where loyalty and compliance are secured through intimidation, manufactured dependence, or threats of violence. In this context, "protection" can manifest as protection from political, financial, legal, professional, or social repercussions rather than physical harm. Here’s a breakdown of the main components of traditional protection rackets alongside their political parallels.

1. Leadership and Enforcement

In a traditional protection racket, a boss maintains control over a geographic area, delegating enforcers to collect payments and intimidate anyone who doesn’t comply. Similarly, in a political context, an authority figure might exert influence by placing loyalists in strategic positions, using threats or punitive actions to maintain control.

2. Financial Mechanisms

Financially, protection rackets depend on regular extortion payments. Politically, this can translate to pay-to-play practices where campaign contributions or regulatory favours create a system of financial dependency, reinforcing loyalty and compliance.

3. Territorial Control

 In both systems, controlling territory or institutions is critical. For an autocratic political figure, control might extend through loyal state officials, manipulation of federal agencies, and influence over the judiciary.

4. Key Players in a Modern Context

·  Central Authority: A President as "boss," with close associates and loyal enforcers in various roles (e.g., potential Attorney General picks, state-level lieutenants).

·  Supporting Infrastructure: Organizations like the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society help provide policy frameworks and influence over the courts.

·  Financial Backers: Key financial supporters include tech billionaires, traditional donors, and corporate allies, who sustain and promote the agenda.

5. Operational Methods

 Intimidation, from public shaming to DOXing and legal threats, reinforces loyalty. Non-compliance and dissent is made progressively more expensive in every way. Control mechanisms such as threats to livelihoods, selective economic pressure (IRS audits, SLAPP suits, business boycotts, loyal media smear campaigns), and laws passed to favour loyalists or interpreted by loyal judiciary in favour of leaders and their allies.

6. Future Implications

The metaphor of a protection racket highlights risks of institutional capture and economic control that could erode social trust and normalize corruption. Anticipated effects include:

•   Institutional Capture: Government agencies could be used as political tools, with media becoming outlets for propaganda.

•   Economic Control: Deregulatory favouritism and contract allocation may distort the market, while selective resource distribution could serve as a form of reward or punishment.

•   Social Impact: Trust erosion, fear-based compliance, and community fragmentation may become widespread.

7. Resistance Points

 Resistance to political racketeering may require a coalition of independent institutions, civil society organizations, and international allies.

9. Key Differences from Traditional Protection Rackets

 While traditional rackets operate locally, autocratic political rackets function on a national and even global scale. They often exploit democratic institutions, corrupting legal frameworks in ways that legitimate crime syndicates cannot.

10. Strategic Implications

For Resistance: Traditional forms of resistance may be inadequate. A comprehensive response requires collective action, institutional safeguards, economic alternatives, and legal protections.

For Prevention: Building democratic safeguards, economic resilience, and community solidarity is essential. Preventing institutional corruption demands a multi-level, collaborative approach.

All of which highlights the need for more sophisticated and comprehensive strategies. How have protection rackets been resisted historically? Are there transferable lessons? 

It seems so. The study below explores prior tactics. But more than almost anything else look out for your loved ones and local community. There lies the Kryptonite for extreme self-interest and manipulative incitement. As we have seen in recent international climate and military crises, local people overwhelming move to help others and resist bad faith actors. That spirit is still out there. We must keep searching out and supporting helpers. We must, when we have drawn breath, celebrate and amplify decency.

“Countering Protection Rackets Using Legal and Social Approaches: An Agent-Based Test” Áron Székely et al, Wiley (Dec, 2018) https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2018/3568085