Andrew Marantz

they've already not lost in the sense that, okay, a couple of the students that they tried to put in jail have been freed. Mahmoud Khalil is still last I checked in prison. I don't mean last I checked glibly. I mean, like, I checked yesterday and I don't know what happened today. I don't think, on the flip side, that one should see as much alarm and hair on fire either everywhere you look. But...

There's a little bit of goalpost shifting that I worry about where we'll say, well, what if something really scary happens like defying the Supreme Court? And then we all watch on live TV as they sit in the Oval Office and defy the Supreme Court. And we go, maybe in the future, something scary will happen. Like, I don't know how much more. So I think that's right.

There's a little bit of goalpost shifting that I worry about where we'll say, well, what if something really scary happens like defying the Supreme Court? And then we all watch on live TV as they sit in the Oval Office and defy the Supreme Court. And we go, maybe in the future, something scary will happen. Like, I don't know how much more. So I think that's right.

So I totally agree that you don't want to. I think... don't obey in advance includes don't treat him like a dictator before he's a dictator. And I think that's very important. And it is also what I worry about when we talk about having crossed a bright line. That's why I push back on the permanence of the death metaphor.

So I totally agree that you don't want to. I think... don't obey in advance includes don't treat him like a dictator before he's a dictator. And I think that's very important. And it is also what I worry about when we talk about having crossed a bright line. That's why I push back on the permanence of the death metaphor.

If we're talking about erosion or rebuilding, then it starts to be a little more clear. So I actually... If you talk about they lose the midterms or the next president is a Democrat, you say they can instantly rebuild. It's hard for me to see how we just go back to normal from here.

If we're talking about erosion or rebuilding, then it starts to be a little more clear. So I actually... If you talk about they lose the midterms or the next president is a Democrat, you say they can instantly rebuild. It's hard for me to see how we just go back to normal from here.

Part of what I worry about and part of why I worry that we're not plainly saying what's in front of us is the way in which the Trumpist regime has already gotten some of what it wants in informal ways. Precisely because it's not agreeing to the consensus of, you know, it feels very vaporous to talk about norms and institutions.

Part of what I worry about and part of why I worry that we're not plainly saying what's in front of us is the way in which the Trumpist regime has already gotten some of what it wants in informal ways. Precisely because it's not agreeing to the consensus of, you know, it feels very vaporous to talk about norms and institutions.

And I am very much not into the norms will save us, the courts will save us. Like I get all the critiques of that and I share many of them. But to say that Trump doesn't have the formal power to do X, Y, or Z, I think ignores the ways in which he's already done those things. So can he disappear people? Yes, he can. He already has. Can he freeze and impound funds? Yes, he has.

And I am very much not into the norms will save us, the courts will save us. Like I get all the critiques of that and I share many of them. But to say that Trump doesn't have the formal power to do X, Y, or Z, I think ignores the ways in which he's already done those things. So can he disappear people? Yes, he can. He already has. Can he freeze and impound funds? Yes, he has.

And you've written when he did those things.

And you've written when he did those things.

I get it. But what I'm saying is that whether they're entrenched, to me... is not merely a measure of whether they're written down on paper in a judicial order. Whether they're entrenched also has to do with when you do them, what happens informally to you.

I get it. But what I'm saying is that whether they're entrenched, to me... is not merely a measure of whether they're written down on paper in a judicial order. Whether they're entrenched also has to do with when you do them, what happens informally to you.

So all I'm saying is I don't think we're all going to end up in a gulag, but I don't necessarily think that that power is unentrenched because it is informal. So let me back up. There's this idea of political orders. I know you're a Gary Gerstle head, as am I. Gary Gerstle has this whole notion of what a political order is. It's this big hegemonic, right?

So all I'm saying is I don't think we're all going to end up in a gulag, but I don't necessarily think that that power is unentrenched because it is informal. So let me back up. There's this idea of political orders. I know you're a Gary Gerstle head, as am I. Gary Gerstle has this whole notion of what a political order is. It's this big hegemonic, right?

So he has this notion that there was the New Deal political order, which was succeeded by the Reagan neoliberal political order. It's not just, oh, people used to like Democrats. Now they like Republicans.

So he has this notion that there was the New Deal political order, which was succeeded by the Reagan neoliberal political order. It's not just, oh, people used to like Democrats. Now they like Republicans.

Great episode. And so what I sort of see that political order thing as doing is trying to get outside, trying to get on a much bigger timeline. And I sort of see, I don't know if Gerstle would co-sign this, I might be out on a limb here, but I sort of see it as like a structure of scientific revolutions of politics. Mm-hmm.