Blog Posts

Weekly Reader — 2/22/2026

Another in a (hopefully) weekly series of posts with interesting reading / viewing material.

CBS decided to “comply in advance” to a suggested FCC rules change. So, they censored Stephen Colbert, banning him from broadcasting an interview with a Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate — but the Streisand effect kicked in, and things… got lively. You can read all about it, as seen by Dan Rather / AP News / Variety / The Atlantic / Adam Kinzinger / Mike Nellis / Jay Kuo (with embedded video) / Wonkette / Democracy Docket / Terry Moran.

Meanwhile, here’s the interview (on YouTube) that CBS wouldn’t allow Colbert to air.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem managed to stir up a hornets’ nest online (not much coverage in the corporate media) when she discussed the upcoming midterms — stating that “we’ve been proactive to make sure that we have the right people voting, electing the right leaders…” Sounds like election subversion to me, and to some other folks too.

This is a bit of an oldie — but maybe it counts since I just ran across it? “Adam Ruins Everything” produced this educational summary of the disturbing history of the suburbs (it has so much impact on modern life).

Looking for an issue to engage with? Obviously, there are so many to choose from that it’s easy to get overwhelmed. Here are some straightforward ones:

  • The SAVE Act — it’s voter suppression dressed up as voter protection (read more here). Call Senator Hickenlooper’s and Bennet’s offices and tell them to vote NO on any version of this bill.
  • It’s not too late to save NCAR, and it’s important! Submit feedback to the National Science Foundation by March 13, 2026. In 1–2 pages, tell NSF that you support NCAR and that its work must continue. Even if you’re not a scientist, your voice matters — our future depends on this research.  Submit to: NSF_NCAR@nsf.gov. You can also call your U.S. Senators and House Representative and urge them to join Rep. Joe Neguse’s bipartisan effort to keep NCAR operating.
  • Resist and Unsubscribe — a new initiative to push back against the tech companies that have an outsized influence on the economy and our president. The Bulwark goes a bit broader in their explanation of this effort.
  • Join the Colorado Bridge Trolls — looks like a fun way to make a point!

Weekly Reader — 2/15/2026

Another in a (hopefully) weekly series of posts with interesting reading / viewing material.

A new take on an existing idea — Scott Galloway and Kara Swisher explain how everyday Americans can push back against government overreach—by focusing on the economic decisions they make each day.

Epstein, Epstein, Epstein! It’s been… quite a week. At the very least, Pam Bondi put on quite the show when she was supposed to answer questions from Congress. Even MAGA figures are now (figuratively, at least) calling for her head. Jen Rubin discusses what Trump knew and when he knew it.

Meanwhile, in temporarily shutdown DHS-land, NBC News lays out the damages caused by ICE’s use of “less lethal” munitions on protesters. Of course, they’re still misusing regular ammo — this time, at least, less fatally than evidenced by the deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti.

On the bright side, Chris Bowers spells out 3 large Trump walk-backs (and one legal defeat) that we saw this week.

If you’re looking for a way to help out, the public comment period is now open for the White House ballroom proposal — time to type!

Weekly Reader — 2/08/2026

Another in a (hopefully) weekly series of posts with interesting reading / viewing material.

In the United States, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is a unique legal entity with characteristics unlike any other, which then allow its powers to be abused unlike any other. Lawyers have long seen ICE as a threat to American democracy, and for good reason. An immigration attorney explains Why Lawyers Want to Abolish ICE (YouTube, 35 minutes). Meanwhile, Wired magazine explains how to film ICE and CBP as safely as possible while still having an impact.

Democratic members of the House and Senate Oversight Committees held a joint hearing on the violence and murder that have been inflicted on Americans by Homeland Security. The forum was convened by the ranking Democratic members of both committees, and perhaps because of that, no Republican members of Congress bothered to attend. Still, the testimony was compelling and more than a little chilling.

It’s getting obvious that the U.S. has a media problem. But are you sure you can spot media manipulation? Shane Snow has tips for you. Jeff Bezos’ handling of the Washington Post is also instructive, as is Bari Weiss’ handling of CBS News.

Need a mood boost? I’d suggest you read “If They Call Me a Domestic Terrorist,” a timely poem by Michael F. Dubois. Meanwhile, if you were waffling on the effectiveness of protest, the folks behind Indivisible have a thing or two to say on the subject.

Did you think the Epstein files mess was all about politicians? Guess again, lots of big name sports figures are in the files as well. But of course, Trump and his cronies are all over them, as is (of course) Elon Musk.

Greg Dobbs puts Trumpism in perspective as a cult of personality.

Weekly Reader — 2/01/2026

Another in a (hopefully) weekly series of posts with miscellaneous interesting reading / viewing material.

Earlier this week, I stumbled across the Albert Einstein Institution online — “a nonprofit organization founded by Dr. Gene Sharp in 1983 to advance the study and use of strategic nonviolent action…” The site has an awesome online library (click on the “Resources” tab) of material, great stuff for people looking for additional ways to push back against authoritarianism. A 2-page flyer, “198 Methods of Nonviolent Action,” is the sort of thing that you can print out and hang on a wall for inspiration.

In a similar vein, the ICNC (International Center on Nonviolent Conflict) hosts an excellent monograph by Michael A. Beer — Civil Resistance Tactics in the 21st Century.

The Justice Department released a massive pile of Epstein documents on January 29 — a preliminary review reveals some very ugly stuff.

Wonkette hosts an excellent discussion of the mental gymnastics displayed by right wingers attempting to wrap their heads about women protesting against ICE.

The 50501 Friday Briefing for 1/30/2026 hosts its own excellent collection of reading material.

Weekly Reader — 1/25/2026

The first in a (hopefully) weekly series of posts with miscellaneous interesting reading / viewing material.

Attorney General Phil Weiser announced an update to the Colorado Department of Law’s public complaint filing system, adding a new section for Coloradans to report federal agent misconduct. Could come in handy, what with ICE skulking around.

If you’re feeling down, take heart! Ruth Ben-Ghiat feels we’re living in a global wave of protest — take a few minutes to read her essay on this.

Speaking of protests, have you ever heard the story of the one mass public demonstration by Germans in the Third Reich against the deportation of Jews? It’s called the Rosenstrasse protest, and it led to the release of 1,800 Berlin Jews, many of whom survived the war.

Do you like numbers? FactCheck.org has published a look at the statistics of Trump’s second term (so far).

The current administration recently completed the process of extracting the U.S. from the World Health Organization. Morgan McSweeney, PhD (a.k.a. “Dr. Noc”) explains the consequences of this decision, and why they won’t show up until they’re really impactful.

Trump: What’s the Deal? A full (82 minutes long) documentary on the man, commissioned in 1988 by Leonard Stern, and released in 1991. Trump threatened to sue any broadcaster or distributor that took on the film — so it was screened only twice & subsequently suppressed.

It’s well worth spending half an hour to watch Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Meanwhile, Paul Krugman has a few things to say on Trump’s behavior at Davos.

Fascism! A fact sheet produced by the U. S. Army in 1945, it’s still a very good summary of the subject.

If you’re as upset as I am with recent ICE actions in Minneapolis, it’s time for us all to Stand With Minnesota.

The Seduction of Authoritarianism

Why some embrace it — a guest post by Paul Edward Robinson
(Inspired by Anne Applebaum’s Twilight of Democracy)

Over the past weeks, I’ve written about competitive authoritarianism—how democracies don’t always die with a bang, but erode bit by bit as leaders tilt the playing field to keep power. We’ve seen real-world examples of this in action and explored ways to resist it.

But here’s the uncomfortable question: Why do so many people—sometimes even former democrats—go along with this shift? Why do some actively support leaders who dismantle democratic norms?

Anne Applebaum tackles this in Twilight of Democracy. She doesn’t just examine how authoritarianism rises—she asks why people welcome it. And the answer is unsettling.

1. The Allure of Stability and Order

Democracy is messy. It thrives on debate, disagreement, and compromise.

Authoritarian-leaning leaders promise to “cut through the noise” and restore order—something that appeals to those tired of political chaos.

Many believe that a strong leader is the answer to polarization, unaware that this “order” comes at the cost of rights and freedoms.

2. The Comfort of a Simplified Worldview

Democracy requires critical thinking, engagement, and accepting uncertainty.

Competitive authoritarian regimes, on the other hand, offer easy answers—blaming outsiders, the media, or political opponents for all problems.

This attracts those who find it exhausting to navigate a world where truths are complex and policies require debate.

3. The Role of Political and Media Elites

Applebaum, like Levitsky & Way, emphasizes that democratic decline isn’t just about the leader—it’s about the elites who enable them.

Politicians, journalists, and intellectuals sometimes choose to support an emerging autocrat—not because they are forced to, but because it benefits them.

Whether it’s access to power, wealth, or ideological alignment, many will rationalize their support even as democracy erodes.

4. The Fear of Losing Power

Not everyone supports authoritarianism because they like it—some do it because they fear what happens if the “other side” wins.

Many competitive authoritarian regimes exploit this fear, convincing supporters that democracy will lead to their marginalization.

This fear—of demographic shifts, cultural change, or economic uncertainty—often overrides concerns about democratic principles.

5. The Slow Normalization of Autocracy

Applebaum warns that the transition from democracy to authoritarianism often feels normal to those experiencing it.

At first, it’s just small changes—the courts get reshaped, the media shifts, elections still happen but feel less meaningful.

By the time people realize what’s happened, it’s too late to easily reverse course.

Final Thought: The Fight for Democracy Is Also a Fight for Minds

Levitsky & Way help us understand how competitive authoritarianism works. Applebaum helps us understand why people let it happen.

Resisting authoritarianism isn’t just about policies and elections—it’s also about pushing back against the narratives that make people want a strongman, that make them fear open debate, or that convince them democracy isn’t worth the trouble.

History shows that no country is immune. The best defense isn’t just voting or protesting—it’s challenging the mindsets that make democracy vulnerable in the first place.

Misinformation vs. Disinformation

Why the difference matters — a guest post by Paul Edward Robinson

In a world flooded with information, not everything we hear, read, or share is true. But did you know there’s a difference between misinformation and disinformation? Understanding the distinction is crucial—because one is based on mistake, while the other is based on manipulation.

Misinformation = False information spread by mistake

Someone believes what they’re saying is true, but they’re wrong. They aren’t trying to deceive; they just don’t have the right facts.

Example: A person shares a fake news article about a politician without realizing it’s satire.

Disinformation = False information spread deliberately

This is intentional. Someone knows it’s false but spreads it anyway to mislead, manipulate, or push an agenda.

Example: A foreign government creates a fake news website pretending to be real journalism, aiming to influence an election.

Why Does This Matter?

When we accidentally spread misinformation, we help confusion grow. When people intentionally spread disinformation, they subvert truth itself.

So, how can we stop both?

Pause before sharing—ask: where did this come from?

Check the source—is it reputable or a known misinformation site?

Be open to correction—if someone shows you credible evidence that you’re wrong, own it!

What do you think? Have you ever fallen for misinformation? (We all have!)

How to Fight Back when Democracy Starts to Slip

A guest post by Paul Edward Robinson

In my last post, we looked at real-world examples of competitive authoritarianism—how leaders slowly rig the system to stay in power while still holding elections. But here’s the good news: these regimes aren’t invincible. Throughout history, ordinary people have pushed back—sometimes through massive protests, sometimes through strategic resistance that chips away at authoritarian control.

So, what can you do if you see democracy being eroded in your country? Here are some key ways people fight back:

Support Independent Media

Competitive authoritarian regimes often control state media or flood the airwaves with propaganda. That’s why independent journalism is crucial—it exposes corruption, holds leaders accountable, and keeps people informed. Follow independent news sources, support journalists under attack, share credible fact-checked information to counter propaganda.

Defend the Right to Vote

Many of these regimes hold elections but make it harder for opposition voices to win—through voter suppression, gerrymandering, or legal loopholes. Advocate for free and fair elections, monitor elections for fraud or irregularities, encourage people to vote (even when the odds seem stacked, upsets can happen).

Refuse to Normalize Corruption & Power Grabs

One of the most dangerous things authoritarian-leaning leaders do? Make corruption seem normal. They change the rules bit by bit, and people get used to it. Call out abuses of power immediately—don’t let small changes go unchallenged. Hold politicians accountable, even if they’re on “your side.” Support organizations that expose corruption.

Use Social Movements to Build Pressure

Authoritarian regimes often ignore individual critics—but they struggle when millions mobilize. Join (or support) movements that fight for democracy, press freedom, and human rights. Protest when necessary—peaceful mass movements have toppled authoritarian leaders before. Keep pushing, even when it feels like nothing is changing.

Change often happens slowly, then suddenly.

Protect the Independence of Courts & Institutions

When courts, election commissions, and watchdog agencies become politically controlled, there’s no one left to check abuse of power. Speak out when judicial independence is threatened. Support legal challenges against undemocratic laws. Pay attention to court rulings—corrupt leaders quietly change laws to protect themselves.

Educate & Organize Locally

Competitive authoritarian regimes often divide society—spreading misinformation and creating conflict to keep people distracted. The best way to fight back? Build local networks of informed, engaged citizens.

Have conversations with family, friends, and coworkers—awareness is the first step. Support civic education programs—authoritarians thrive when people don’t understand their rights. Organize at the local level—change starts in communities before it spreads nationally.

Don’t Give Up—Even When It Feels Hopeless

Remember: no authoritarian leader is invincible. History has shown that even the most repressive governments can and do fall—but only if people keep resisting.

Need proof? In Malaysia (2018), Serbia (2000), and Chile (1988), people fought back against competitive authoritarianism and won. It took years of persistence—but in the end, democracy prevailed.

The key is to not wait until it’s too late. The earlier people resist, the harder it is for authoritarian-leaning leaders to cement their power.

When Democracy Becomes a Rigged Game

Real-World Examples — a guest post by Paul Edward Robinson

In my last post, we talked about the warning signs of competitive authoritarianism—how leaders can tilt the playing field just enough to stay in power while keeping a democratic façade. But this isn’t just a theory. It’s happening in real countries, right now.

Here are some examples of how competitive authoritarianism has played out across the world:

Russia (Early 2000s–Today)

Elections still happen in Russia, but can anyone really challenge Putin? Opposition figures are either harassed, jailed (like Alexei Navalny), or mysteriously fall out of windows. State-controlled media drowns out alternative voices, and new laws make it nearly impossible for independent political parties to operate freely. The illusion of democracy remains, but the outcome is never in doubt.

Hungary (2010–Today)

Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and his party, Fidesz, have systematically weakened Hungary’s democracy. They changed election laws to favor their party, took over independent media, and stacked courts with loyalists. Orbán still holds elections, but with a system designed to ensure he wins—classic competitive authoritarianism in action.

Turkey (2010s–Today)

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan started out as a democratically elected leader, but over time, he concentrated power. After a failed coup attempt in 2016, he used emergency powers to silence critics, arrest thousands of journalists and academics, and rewrite the constitution to extend his rule. Elections still happen, but opposition parties face constant legal and political obstacles.

Venezuela (2000s–Today)

Hugo Chávez was elected democratically, but his government gradually chipped away at checks and balances. His successor, Nicolás Maduro, took it further—jailing opposition leaders, rigging elections, and rewriting the constitution to maintain power. Despite elections and opposition movements, Venezuela operates under a thin veil of democracy while functioning as an authoritarian state.

Malaysia (1990s–2018)

For decades, Malaysia had elections, but they were skewed in favor of the ruling coalition. The government controlled the media, gerrymandered districts, and used corruption investigations to weaken opponents. It wasn’t until 2018 that a massive political shift finally broke this cycle—showing that competitive authoritarian regimes aren’t always permanent.

So, what can we learn from these cases?

Democracy doesn’t usually die in one big moment—it erodes slowly.

Leaders often use legal means to stay in power, making it hard to push back.

Even in competitive authoritarian regimes, change is possible—but it takes persistence and pressure.