Posts

Posted on

Maybe You’re Not Dumb–But the Alternative Is Far Worse

This is not my content originally. But it makes the point in a bold and concise manner—including receipts…I mean links—so rather than write something similar I just want to share it.


A real question from a Trump supporter: ‘Why do liberals think Trump supporters are stupid?’

THE SERIOUS ANSWER: Here’s what the majority of anti-Trump voters honestly feel about Trump supporters en masse:

That when you saw a man who had owned a fraudulent University, intent on scamming poor people, you thought “Fine.” (https://www.usatoday.com/…/trump-university…/502387002/)

That when you saw a man who had made it his business practice to stiff his creditors, you said, “Okay.” (https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-hotel-paid-millions…)

That when you heard him proudly brag about his own history of sexual abuse, you said, “No problem.” (https://abcnews.go.com/…/list-trumps-accusers…/story…)

That when he made up stories about seeing Muslim-Americans in the thousands cheering the destruction of the World Trade Center, you said, “Not an issue.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/…/donald-trumps…/)

That when you saw him brag that he could shoot a man on Fifth Avenue and you wouldn’t care, you exclaimed, “He sure knows me.” (https://www.usatoday.com/…/president-donald…/4073405002/)

That when you heard him relating a story of an elderly guest of his country club, an 80-year old man, who fell off a stage and hit his head, to Trump replied: “‘Oh my God, that’s disgusting,’ and I turned away. I couldn’t—you know, he was right in front of me, and I turned away. I didn’t want to touch him. He was bleeding all over the place. And I felt terrible, because it was a beautiful white marble floor, and now it had changed color. Became very red.” You said, “That’s cool!” (https://www.gq.com/story/donald-trump-howard-stern-story)

That when you saw him mock the disabled, you thought it was the funniest thing you ever saw. (https://www.nbcnews.com/…/donald-trump-criticized-after…)

That when you heard him brag that he doesn’t read books, you said, “Well, who has time?” (https://www.theatlantic.com/…/americas-first…/549794/)

That when the Central Park Five were compensated as innocent men convicted of a crime they didn’t commit, and he angrily said that they should still be in prison, you said, “That makes sense.” (https://www.usatoday.com/…/what-trump-has…/1501321001/)

That when you heard him tell his supporters to beat up protesters and that he would hire attorneys, you thought, “Yes!” (https://www.latimes.com/…/la-na-trump-campaign-protests…)

That when you heard him tell one rally to confiscate a man’s coat before throwing him out into the freezing cold, you said, “What a great guy!” (https://www.independent.co.uk/…/donald-trump-orders…)

That you have watched the parade of neo-Nazis and white supremacists with whom he curries favor, while refusing to condemn outright Nazis, and you have said, “Thumbs up!” (https://www.theatlantic.com/…/why-cant-trump…/567320/)

That you hear him unable to talk to foreign dignitaries without insulting their countries and demanding that they praise his electoral win, you said, “That’s the way I want my President to be.” (https://www.huffpost.com/…/trump-insult-foreign…)

That you have watched him remove expertise from all layers of government in favor of people who make money off of eliminating protections in the industries they’re supposed to be regulating and you have said, “What a genius!” (https://www.politico.com/…/138-trump-policy-changes…)

That you have heard him continue to profit from his businesses, in part by leveraging his position as President, to the point of overcharging the Secret Service for space in the properties he owns, and you have said, “That’s smart!” (https://www.usnews.com/…/how-is-donald-trump-profiting…)

That you have heard him say that it was difficult to help Puerto Rico because it was in the middle of water and you have said, “That makes sense.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/…/the-very-big-ocean…/)

That you have seen him start fights with every country from Canada to New Zealand while praising Russia and quote, “falling in love” with the dictator of North Korea, and you have said, “That’s statesmanship!” (https://www.cnn.com/…/donald-trump-dictators…/index.html)

That Trump separated children from their families and put them in cages, managed to lose track of 1500 kids, has opened a tent city incarceration camp in the desert in Texas – he explains that they’re just “animals” – and you say, “Well, OK then.” (https://www.nbcnews.com/…/more-5-400-children-split…)

That you have witnessed all the thousand and one other manifestations of corruption and low moral character and outright animalistic rudeness and contempt for you, the working American voter, and you still show up grinning and wearing your MAGA hats and threatening to beat up anybody who says otherwise. (https://www.americanprogress.org/…/confronting-cost…/)

What you don’t get, Trump supporters, is that our succumbing to frustration and shaking our heads, thinking of you as stupid, may very well be wrong and unhelpful, but it’s also… hear me… charitable.

Because if you’re NOT stupid, we must turn to other explanations, and most of them are less flattering.

– Adam-Troy Castro

Posted on

The Death of Democracy Doesn’t Need an Enabling Act—Just a Complicit Congress

History Repeats Itself—But With New Names

In 1933, Germany’s Reichstag—once the legislative heartbeat of the Weimar Republic—ceased to function as an independent governing body. With the passage of the Enabling Act, Adolf Hitler assumed unchecked power, and the Reichstag became little more than a stage for his speeches. Its members, rather than fulfilling their duty to legislate and hold the executive branch accountable, became instruments of a totalitarian state.

In 2024, the United States has not yet passed its own version of an Enabling Act, but it may not need one. The Republican Party, dominated by Donald Trump and his MAGA movement, is already showing signs of voluntary submission to an authoritarian leader. The GOP-controlled House and Senate, despite wielding legislative power, operate not as a check on Trump’s ambitions, but as an extension of his will. The collapse of a democracy does not require a single decisive law—it can happen through the slow, steady capitulation of those elected to defend it.

The Reichstag and the Republican Party: Parallel Paths to Powerlessness

When the Enabling Act passed in 1933, the Nazi regime systematically eliminated political opposition. The Communists were arrested en masse, the Social Democrats were forced into exile, and remaining lawmakers were either intimidated or coerced into submission. There are whispers and rumors of eerily similar actions now–as Republican legislators stay silent and vote against the interests of their constituents and democracy not out of loyalty to Trump or MAGA, but out of fear for their own lives and the lives of their families.

The Reichstag met only 19 times between 1933 and 1945, passing just seven laws—all dictated by Hitler. Compare this to the current state of the Republican-led House of Representatives. Since reclaiming control, the House has prioritized obstruction, partisan revenge investigations, and performative politics over governance.

Republican lawmakers who dare to challenge Trump face political exile—just as Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger did when they stood against the January 6 insurrection. Those who remain fall in line, fearing the wrath of Trump’s base more than they fear the collapse of democracy.

The Reichstag became an empty institution under Hitler. The United States Congress today isn’t any different.

Eliminating Opposition: From Political Arrests to Political Exile

In Nazi Germany, opposition figures were not just removed from power—they were jailed, exiled, or executed. While America has not yet seen political prisoners on that scale, the Republican Party’s internal purges are undeniable.

  • Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, who served on the January 6th Committee, were ostracized and effectively removed from Republican politics.
  • Former allies like Mike Pence and Chris Christie, once loyal to Trump, are now persona non grata for daring to challenge his narrative.
  • Election officials and judges who ruled against Trump’s baseless fraud claims have been harassed and threatened.
  • Trump and Musk, with the help of a cadre of authoritarian sycophants, are punishing anyone who is not a MAGA loyalist and purging the federal government of employees who will not bend the knee to a would-be tyrant.

This isn’t an exact parallel to Nazi Germany, but the underlying principle remains the same: opposition is not tolerated, and those who speak out are punished.

The Death of a Legislature: The GOP’s March Toward Irrelevance

With no opposition left, the Reichstag ceased to function. Today, with the Republican Party reshaped into an arm of the MAGA movement, Congress risks the same fate.

  • The House, despite Republican control, is incapable of governing—spending more time on political spectacle than on passing meaningful legislation.
  • GOP lawmakers routinely echo Trump’s rhetoric, even when it contradicts facts, legal rulings, or their own previous positions.
  • Trump has openly declared that he wants to “terminate” parts of the Constitution that limit his power, yet Republicans refuse to condemn him.

A legislature that refuses to act as a check on executive power is no longer a legislature—it is a rubber stamp for autocracy.

Nuremberg and the Future Reckoning

After World War II, the Nuremberg Trials held Nazi officials accountable—including former Reichstag members who enabled Hitler’s rise. They claimed they were just following orders, just going along with the system—but history did not excuse them.

As Trump bulldozes American democracy, today’s Republican leaders–and maybe some of the elected Democrats–should expect to face a similar reckoning.

History will remember politicians like John Cornyn, Tommy Tuberville, Marjorie Taylor-Green, Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, and countless others as spineless enablers, too afraid or too ambitious to stand against an autocratic tide. And when the US version of the Nuremberg Trials comes, they will face the same fate as their Nazi dopplegangers–Göring, Hess, Frick, and the rest of the Reichstag members who were complicit.

The Final Warning

The collapse of democracy does not always require a single defining moment. The United States may never see its own Enabling Act because it may not need one.

A Congress that refuses to act, a political party that submits to a strongman, and a citizenry too distracted to resist—this is how democracy is suffocated.

We have already seen this playbook. We already know how this works out. Democracy will prevail and those enabling authoritarian fascism will be held accountable–even if they have to be hunted down decades later.

I just hope they all know that “I was just following orders” wasn’t a valid defense then, and it won’t be a valid defense now.

Posted on

The Myth of ‘Earning’ a Billion

The world is increasingly defined by staggering economic inequality in which billionaires occupy a paradoxical position: revered as heroes of innovation while often escaping scrutiny for the exploitation and systemic inequities that underpin their wealth. Figures like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg, much like their Gilded Age predecessors Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller, are idolized for their transformative achievements. Yet, these towering fortunes are rarely examined through the lens of the questionable practices, unethical tactics, and systemic flaws that made them possible.

A recent Oxfam report highlights the alarming concentration of wealth, revealing that the top 1% amassed over $40 trillion in new wealth in the past decade. This disproportionate gain, enabled by tax systems and policies favoring the ultra-rich, mirrors a pattern established during the Industrial Revolution. Just as the Gilded Age’s “robber barons” extracted immense value from the labor and resources of society, today’s billionaires leverage technological monopolies, tax avoidance, and worker exploitation to consolidate their fortunes. No one “earns” a billion dollars in isolation—such wealth is extracted, not created.

The Allure of the Billionaire Narrative

The myth of the self-made billionaire is a potent narrative in popular culture. It celebrates individual brilliance, grit, and hard work, perpetuating the idea that immense wealth is the ultimate reward for those who dare to dream big. Henry Ford is remembered for revolutionizing manufacturing with the assembly line, Elon Musk for electrifying the auto industry with Tesla, and Jeff Bezos for transforming global commerce with Amazon.

But this narrative omits a crucial element: the cost of these achievements. Workers in Amazon warehouses, for example, endure grueling conditions, while Musk’s Tesla factories have faced allegations of unsafe work environments. These stories rarely make headlines compared to tales of space exploration or electric cars. The media’s fixation on billionaire successes blinds us to the exploitation and systemic inequalities that make these fortunes possible.

The Achievements and Their Cost

There is no denying that many billionaires have left indelible marks on society. Carnegie’s steel empire built America’s bridges and railroads. Ford’s affordable Model T democratized transportation. Musk’s SpaceX has reignited global interest in space exploration. These achievements have reshaped industries and transformed lives.

However, these accomplishments came at a steep price. Carnegie’s success relied on suppressing labor rights, with incidents like the Homestead Strike highlighting the violence faced by workers demanding fair conditions. Ford’s celebrated $5-a-day wage was coupled with invasive surveillance of employees’ private lives. In the modern era, Amazon’s logistical innovations rest on the backs of workers subjected to intense productivity demands, while tech giants like Meta profit from invasive data collection and misinformation.

Exploitation and Unethical Practices

Billionaires often achieve their wealth through practices that would be unacceptable in most contexts:

  • Monopolistic Domination: Rockefeller’s Standard Oil crushed competitors to create a near-total monopoly, while today’s Big Tech empires use acquisitions and market control to stifle innovation.
  • Labor Exploitation: Workers across industries, from Tesla’s factory floors to Walmart’s retail operations, often face low wages, unsafe conditions, and minimal job security.
  • Shady Tactics: Whether it was Gould’s stock manipulation in the Gilded Age or modern tax avoidance schemes exploited by billionaires today, questionable ethics have been a consistent tool for amassing wealth.

As the Oxfam report illustrates, the systemic advantages enjoyed by the ultra-wealthy—such as favorable tax systems—further exacerbate inequality. While ordinary people pay a larger share of their income in taxes, billionaires utilize loopholes to shield their wealth, accumulating resources that could otherwise benefit society.

Philanthropy: A Paradox

Philanthropy is often touted as a defense for immense wealth. Carnegie built libraries, Gates combats global health crises, and Bezos has pledged billions to climate initiatives. While these efforts are impactful, they represent a fraction of their wealth and often serve to rehabilitate reputations tarnished by exploitative practices.

It is a “smoke and mirrors” distraction meant to sway public perception, but does little to address systemic inequality. It offers a band-aid solution to problems created, in part, by the systems that enabled billionaires’ fortunes. For example, Gates’ contributions to global health are admirable, but Microsoft’s aggressive business practices in the 1990s crushed smaller competitors and concentrated wealth.

The Role of Systemic Advantages

Billionaires do not operate in a vacuum; their success is built on a foundation of societal resources and systemic privilege:

  • Government Subsidies: Many industries, from fossil fuels to tech, benefit from taxpayer-funded subsidies and incentives.
  • Tax Avoidance: The Oxfam report underscores how billionaires exploit tax loopholes, hoarding wealth that could be used for public services.
  • Infrastructural Dependence: Publicly funded infrastructure, such as roads, education, and internet technologies, provides the groundwork for their enterprises.

Without these systemic advantages, their wealth would be inconceivable.

Insane Compensation Disparity

The inequity in wealth distribution is stark not only among billionaires but also within individual corporations, where CEOs often earn magnitudes more than their average employees. In 2023, the average CEO of an S&P 500 company earned $17.7 million, which is 268 times the compensation of the typical worker in those companies.

This disparity is not necessarily reflective of a proportional difference in effort or contribution. Actually, that is too mild. I’m not suggesting that CEOs or other execs don’t bring value to their companies, but this disparity is DEFINITELY not reflective of a proportional difference in effort or contribution.

The Economic Policy Institute reports that CEO compensation has grown 1,460% since 1978, while typical worker compensation has increased by just 18% during the same period.

This growing gap underscores a systemic issue where executive pay is disproportionately high compared to the value provided by average employees.

Such disparities are indefensible, as they often result from structural advantages and compensation practices that favor top executives, rather than a fair assessment of individual contributions. Addressing this imbalance requires a critical examination of corporate governance and the implementation of policies that promote equitable compensation structures.

Reframing Wealth

It is time to rethink how we view billionaires and their role in society. No individual amasses such wealth through merit alone—it is accumulated through systemic exploitation and societal structures. Recognizing this truth allows us to shift the narrative from glorifying billionaires to questioning the systems that enable such extreme inequality.

Instead of idolizing the ultra-rich, we should celebrate collective achievements and advocate for policies that redistribute wealth more equitably. Progressive taxation, living wages, and labor protections are steps toward creating a fairer society. Moreover, reframing success as a collaborative, community-driven effort can help dismantle the myth of the self-made billionaire.

By challenging the myth of “earning” a billion dollars, we can begin building a more equitable society—one where success is measured not by individual wealth but by collective progress.

Posted on

When Wealth Breaks Democracy: The True Cost of Greed

billionaire greed Citizens United

Imagine spending $50,200—a median annual income for an individual in the United States in 2024—every single day for a year and ending the year richer than when you started. This isn’t a hypothetical exercise; it’s the reality for someone with $1.75 billion in wealth. Even after daily indulgence in this absurd level of spending, the compounding growth of their investments ensures they have more at year’s end.

This staggering inequality isn’t just about numbers; it’s about a system that allows wealth to grow unchecked, democracy to falter, and the social contract to erode. As billionaires amass unimaginable fortunes, their influence extends far beyond their bank accounts, shaping policies, economies, and even the fate of nations. This article explores the absurdity of extreme wealth, debunks the persistent myth of trickle-down economics, and examines how billionaire greed threatens democracy itself.

A Day in the Life of a Billionaire

Consider the absurdity of wealth inequality in real terms: $1.75 billion is more money than most people can comprehend, let alone earn in multiple lifetimes. To put it in perspective, someone earning $50,200 a year—representative of the U.S. median income—would need nearly 35,000 years to reach that figure. Yet billionaires wield this fortune as a baseline, spending extravagantly, lobbying aggressively, and growing their wealth exponentially.

To be fair, I am not an economist and my math is simplistic. I just assumed that 8% of the net worth is paid in taxes every year and the net remaining wealth grows at 10%. Someone with only $1.25 billion in wealth would actually lose a little money each year under this formula—but it would still take more than 140 years for them to reach zero.

There are a thousand other factors that can impact those figures either way, but the reality is that most billionaires aren’t paying 8% of their net worth in taxes, and many—if not most—are able to achieve better than 10% returns on their investments. Also, who in the hell needs to spend $50,000 every day of every year? So, if anything, my math may be far too conservative.

The Federal Reserve’s data paints a grim picture. The top 1% of Americans control over 30% of the nation’s wealth, while the bottom 50% struggle with just 2%. This chasm widens as the ultra-wealthy find new ways to hoard money and minimize taxes, exacerbating economic and social divides.

The Persistent Myth of Trickle-Down Economics

The foundation of modern wealth inequality lies in the myth of trickle-down economics—the idea that cutting taxes for the wealthy spurs investment, job creation, and economic growth for everyone. Originating during the Reagan era, this theory has shaped decades of policy. Yet its promises remain unfulfilled.

According to Robert Reich, trickle-down economics has systematically failed. Rather than reinvest in their businesses or employees, the wealthy use tax cuts to pad their portfolios, fund stock buybacks, and stash money in offshore accounts. Meanwhile, workers face stagnant wages and rising costs of living. Data shows that direct investment in lower- and middle-income households produces a far greater economic impact than tax breaks for billionaires. When wealth is hoarded, it is effectively removed from circulation, starving the economy of the spending that drives growth.

This is just common sense.

If you give more money to people who are poor or middle class, they don’t have the luxury of hoarding it. They need to pay rent and buy groceries. They have medical bills to pay, and automobile repairs to deal with. They need to replace their broken refrigerators. Bottom line—when you funnel money to lower and middle class families, it is virtually guaranteed to flow back into the economy…and eventually line the pockets of the wealthy anyway. But, if you give money to people who already have more money than it is even possible to spend, they simply add it to the hoard and jealously guard their wealth like Smaug in The Hobbit.

The numbers tell the story: Despite decades of tax cuts favoring the rich, income inequality in the U.S. has surged to historic levels. The supposed benefits of trickle-down policies remain trapped at the top, never reaching the vast majority of Americans.

How Billionaires Rig the System

Few events have so profoundly shifted the balance of power in favor of the wealthy as the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. In a narrow 5-4 ruling, the Court determined that corporations and unions could spend unlimited amounts on political campaigns, effectively equating money with speech. This decision unleashed a flood of dark money into American politics, allowing billionaires to openly buy influence and tilt the democratic process in their favor.

The ruling didn’t happen in a vacuum—it was part of a broader pattern of billionaires leveraging their wealth to erode democratic safeguards. And now, we know that at least one Supreme Court justice who cast a vote in favor of this decision, Clarence Thomas, has been deeply entangled in ethical scandals involving billionaire Harlan Crow. Reports from ProPublica and other outlets have revealed that Thomas accepted undisclosed luxury travel, expensive gifts, and even real estate transactions from Crow, a conservative mega-donor. These revelations cast doubt on the impartiality of the Court and suggest that billionaires can effectively buy Supreme Court decisions.

Harlan Crow’s largesse is not merely about personal generosity—it’s an investment in a system that benefits him and his peers. By influencing a justice on the nation’s highest court, Crow has helped secure rulings that perpetuate the dominance of the ultra-wealthy. The Citizens United decision is a prime example, making it easier for billionaires to drown out the voices of ordinary Americans by flooding campaigns with money, shaping policy to their liking, and entrenching their power.

This ruling, coupled with unchecked wealth concentration, has transformed the United States into an oligarchy in all but name. Politicians no longer answer to voters but to donors with deep pockets. Billionaires now dictate policy agendas, block reforms that would benefit the majority, and stack the courts to ensure their grip on power remains unshaken.

The Citizens United decision has also exacerbated political polarization and corruption. Unlimited spending has emboldened billionaires to pour money into divisive, fringe candidates and causes, further destabilizing American democracy. Meanwhile, the public trust in institutions, including the Supreme Court, continues to erode as revelations like Thomas’s relationship with Crow come to light.

This is more than a policy debate; it’s a fundamental threat to democracy. When a handful of billionaires can buy political influence, judicial decisions, and even legislators themselves, the principles of equality and representation are obliterated. The scales of justice are no longer blind—they are weighed down by the interests of the ultra-wealthy.

Addressing this crisis requires urgent action. Public calls for stronger judicial ethics rules, campaign finance reform, and transparency measures must grow louder. It’s time to reverse the damage done by Citizens United, limit the corrupting influence of money in politics, and restore trust in democratic institutions.

If billionaires like Harlan Crow can buy Supreme Court decisions today, what hope is there for a fair and representative system tomorrow? The fight to reclaim democracy begins with acknowledging the rot at its core—and demanding systemic change to excise it.

The Moral and Societal Cost of Billionaire Greed

The societal cost of extreme wealth concentration is staggering. As billionaires hoard resources, millions struggle to afford healthcare, education, and housing. This erosion of the social contract fuels distrust, resentment, and unrest.

Consider countries with more equitable tax systems, such as those in Scandinavia. These nations invest heavily in public goods, resulting in lower poverty rates, better health outcomes, and greater social mobility. By contrast, the U.S. allows billionaires to hoard wealth while basic needs go unmet for millions.

This isn’t just an economic failure—it’s a moral one. What does it say about a society where a select few can live in unimaginable luxury while others ration insulin or face eviction? At what point does wealth accumulation become not just excessive but actively harmful?

The Path Forward: Restoring Balance and Democracy

Addressing wealth inequality requires bold action. Progressive wealth taxes, closing tax loopholes, and enforcing financial transparency are crucial first steps. By ensuring billionaires contribute their fair share, we can fund public goods like healthcare, education, and infrastructure—investments that benefit everyone, not just the elite.

But policy alone isn’t enough. We must also dismantle the myths that sustain the billionaire class, starting with trickle-down economics. Public education on economic systems and civic engagement can counter billionaire narratives and empower citizens to demand change.

Reclaiming democracy from the grip of extreme wealth is not just possible—it’s essential. History shows that collective action and informed advocacy can challenge entrenched power.

Reclaiming the Future

Change is possible. I’ll let you in on a little secret: Billionaires need consumers. Consumers don’t need billionaires. The wealth they covet has to come from somewhere. If nobody has money to buy goods and services, the economy will collapse.

Extreme wealth is not just absurd—it’s dangerous. When billionaires can spend the median annual income daily and still grow richer, it reveals a system designed to serve the few at the expense of the many. When that wealth is used to rig democracy, the stakes become even higher.

By addressing inequality, holding billionaires accountable, and demanding policies that prioritize the common good, we can restore balance to our economy and society. The future of democracy depends on it. The only question is whether we’re willing to fight for it.

Posted on

Make America Detroit Again: Reviving the Engine of the Middle Class

Make America Detroit Again

During a rally in Detroit, Donald Trump warned an audience that if his opponent is elected: “The whole country will be like — you want to know the truth? It’ll be like Detroit,” intending it as an insult.

This remark encapsulates a widespread misunderstanding of the city’s history and resilience. Detroit’s journey from industrial powerhouse to economic decline and back to reinvention mirrors the challenges the United States faces today. Far from being a cautionary tale, Detroit is a testament to the grit, ingenuity, and innovation that define the American spirit.

Today, Trump’s Agenda 47 and Project 2025 initiatives promise to dismantle social safety nets, roll back labor protections, and focus on deregulation—a direction that risks exacerbating inequality and economic instability. In stark contrast, Detroit’s story of rise, fall, and resurgence offers a blueprint for the nation to embrace policies that prioritize innovation, labor rights, and inclusive growth.

Making America look like Detroit means reigniting the principles of resilience, community strength, and collective progress that once made the Motor City the envy of the world. Detroit’s historical narrative offers a compelling blueprint for national rejuvenation. Once the epicenter of American industry and innovation, Detroit’s journey of rise, decline, and resurgence embodies the resilience and ingenuity that can guide the nation toward a more equitable and prosperous future.

It’s time to “Make America Detroit Again.”

Recipe for Disaster

For decades, Republican administrations have championed the mantra of fiscal conservatism and small government. But history tells a different story: a persistent “rinse and repeat” cycle of economic mismanagement, soaring deficits, and ballooning national debt. Democratic administrations, by contrast, have consistently stepped in to clean up the mess, restoring stability and setting the country back on a sustainable path.

The pattern is undeniable. Bush Sr.’s continuation of Reaganomics hollowed out the middle class, leaving the nation in a recession with soaring deficits by 1992. Bill Clinton reversed this with fiscally responsible policies, balancing the budget and creating a surplus. George W. Bush inherited this prosperity but left office after an eight-year economic collapse—job losses, a housing crisis, a stock market crash, two unfunded wars, and a $1.4 trillion deficit. Obama stabilized the economy, slashed unemployment, and reduced the deficit, handing Trump a strong foundation. Yet Trump exploded the deficit with a $1.7 trillion tax cut for the wealthy, mismanaged key industries, and added $8 trillion to the national debt.

This recurring cycle undercuts Republican claims of fiscal responsibility and highlights the need for an alternative approach—one rooted in resilience and community-building, as exemplified by Detroit’s resurgence.

In the wake of the 2024 election, President-elect Donald Trump seems to have adopted a “Hold my beer” attitude, intent on doing more damage than his first term or any of his predecessors. He has unveiled a series of initiatives under the banners of Project 2025 and Agenda 47, signaling a shift toward policies that emphasize deregulation, reduced federal oversight, and a rollback of social programs. Notable among these are proposals to dismantle the Department of Education, impose high tariffs on imports, and implement stringent immigration controls. Additionally, recent cabinet appointments, such as nominating Matt Gaetz for Attorney General and Tulsi Gabbard for Director of National Intelligence, have sparked controversy and concern regarding the direction of the incoming administration.

Detroit’s Rise: A Symbol of the American Dream

In the early 20th century, Detroit emerged as the heart of the automotive industry, earning the moniker “Motor City.” Henry Ford’s introduction of the $5-a-day wage in 1914 not only revolutionized manufacturing but also set a new standard for worker compensation, attracting a diverse workforce and fostering the growth of a robust middle class.

However, it’s important to acknowledge that Ford was not a good human being and certainly not without significant controversy. He was a rabid antisemite whose writings in The Dearborn Independent spread hateful conspiracy theories, and he openly supported and enabled Nazi Germany through his company’s dealings. These reprehensible beliefs and actions tarnish his legacy, but the industrial advancements he spearheaded in Detroit—particularly the moving assembly line and fairer wages—undeniably transformed the city and contributed to the creation of a thriving middle class.

The establishment of the United Auto Workers (UAW) in 1935 further solidified labor rights, leading to improved wages, benefits, and working conditions, building on Ford’s industrial innovations while striving for a more equitable and inclusive labor movement.

This era of prosperity extended beyond the assembly lines. Detroit became a cultural hub, giving birth to the Motown sound that resonated across the globe. The city’s neighborhoods thrived, characterized by homeownership, quality public education, and vibrant community life. Detroit’s success story was a testament to the power of industrial innovation coupled with strong labor movements, illustrating that equitable wages and worker protections are foundational to building a thriving middle class.

The Fall: Deindustrialization and Economic Decline

The latter half of the 20th century brought significant challenges to Detroit. Globalization, automation, and competition from foreign automakers led to factory closures and mass layoffs. The erosion of union jobs undermined the economic stability of the middle class, leading to urban decay, population decline, and social unrest. The 1967 Detroit riot, a five-day period of civil disturbance, highlighted the racial and economic tensions exacerbated by these economic hardships.

These challenges were not unique to Detroit; they mirrored broader national trends of industrial decline and the weakening of labor unions. The city’s struggles underscored the consequences of neglecting manufacturing sectors and the importance of adapting to changing economic landscapes while safeguarding workers’ rights.

The Resurgence: Lessons in Reinvention

Despite these hardships, Detroit has embarked on a path of reinvention. Public-private partnerships have played a pivotal role in revitalizing the city’s infrastructure and economy. A notable example is the restoration of the Michigan Central Station, transforming it into a hub for innovation and technology.

Grassroots initiatives have also been instrumental. Community organizations have worked tirelessly to rebuild neighborhoods, support small businesses, and promote cultural growth. The city’s burgeoning tech scene and emphasis on entrepreneurship have attracted a new generation of innovators, positioning Detroit as a leader in sectors like green energy and information technology.

National Implications: Making America Detroit Again

Detroit’s narrative offers valuable lessons for national policy. Investing in infrastructure and manufacturing can stimulate economic growth and job creation. Empowering labor movements ensures fair wages and job security, fostering a stable middle class. Community-driven revitalization efforts highlight the importance of inclusive growth that benefits all citizens.

In contrast, policies that prioritize deregulation and reduced federal oversight, as proposed in Project 2025 and Agenda 47, risk repeating the mistakes of the past by neglecting the needs of workers and communities. Embracing Detroit’s spirit of resilience and innovation can guide the nation toward a future where economic prosperity is shared, and the American Dream is attainable for all.

Reclaiming the American Dream

Detroit’s story is a powerful reminder that resilience, innovation, and collective action can overcome even the most daunting challenges. By learning from Detroit’s experiences, the nation can build a stronger, fairer, and more resilient future. It’s time to make America Detroit again, embracing the grit and ingenuity that define the American spirit.

Follow by Email
Facebook
Twitter