The Perils of Succession: When Tyranny Gives Way to a Greater Darkness

I submit to you there loom things and people worse than Trump...and that is what folks better recognize as he sets up his "legacy."

It could be worse…and very well may get so.

The belief that the removal of a tyrant will inevitably usher in a new era of so-called freedom and prosperity is a comforting, and misleading, notion. It is the equivalent of a sociopolitical and electoral placebo. History implies that the power vacuum left by a fallen despot can be a breeding ground, like a festering swamp, for forces far more ruthless and destructive.

The ousting of one tyrant, in many cases, serves not as a victory for liberty, but as a prelude to a deeper, more profound degenerative danger and peril. Examples abound from the French and Russian Revolutions, or the rise of the Khmer Rouge. These geopolitical historical matters may feel distant but the insidious nature of this historical pattern is now manifesting in more subtle, yet no less dangerous, ways within established “democracies.” The modern template for tyranny is not a sudden, violent coup, but a slow, methodical erosion of societal norms, creating a legacy that can empower a successor to push the boundaries even further.

As we can clearly see.

In the United States, the presidency of Donald “Smitty” Trump has provided a sobering illustration of this phenomenon. His term(s), and his ongoing political influence, have not been defined by the traditional, hard-line despotism of a monarch or a revolutionary dictator. Instead, it has been characterized by a relentless stress-testing of so-called “democratic” institutions, a process that has revealed their inherent fragility. The "checks and balances" designed by the old, racist European-Amerikan men known as your “founders” to prevent the concentration of power have appeared to cower, contract and retract, their constitutional authority seemingly nullified by a combination of executive force and political will.

A central tool in this stress-testing has been the prolific and often legally dubious use of executive orders. While past presidents have used this authority to bypass congressional gridlock, Trump’s administration has taken it to a new level, using executive actions to pursue policies that have been widely challenged in court. For instance, he used a rare administrative tool to freeze billions in foreign aid (a most disturbing moniker), funds that had already been appropriated by Congress.

This and other actions, such as the use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport migrants and the deployment of troops on “US” soil, have tested the boundaries of presidential authority. While many of these actions were challenged in the courts, and few have been successfully blocked, the very act of their issuance created a template. The message was clear: a president could, at will, bypass the legislative branch and dare the judiciary to stop them. The Supreme Court, in particular, has become the final arbiter of these power struggles, its conservative majority, partly shaped by Trump’s own appointments, making it a critical and, to some, a compromised safeguard. This reliance on the judiciary to defend against executive overreach highlights a fundamental weakening of the legislative branch, as Congress, particularly members of the president’s own party, has often seemed unwilling to challenge the executive's expansive claims of power.

This erosion of institutional resistance is the first element of a dangerous legacy. It demonstrates to future leaders that the traditional guardrails of Amerikan quasi democracy—Congress, the judiciary, and even the non-partisan civil service—are not unbreakable. When a president can politicize federal agencies and test legal limits with impunity, it sets a precedent that a successor, unbound by the same political constraints or ethical norms, can follow and expand upon.

And you bet your ass they will.

The Amerikan Backstop: Racism

The second, and perhaps more insidious, element of this template is its powerful appeal to a deep and resonant strain within the Amerikan psyche: racism. The strategy of "othering" a group by European-Amerikans is a well-worn path in Amerikan history. From genocide of Original Americans to the kidnapping, enslavement, rape, lynching and murder of the “property” known as Alkebulanians, to the Jim Crow era and the segregationist rhetoric of figures like George Wallace and to George Floyd, Amerikan politics has always been fertile ground for populist demagogues who can tap into white racial resentment. Trump’s political success, and the sustained loyalty of his base, is a testament to the fact that this tactic, however unpalatable to some, is clearly successful. By stoking fears about immigration, crime, and cultural change, he has proven that a modern political campaign can thrive by invoking a politics of division and grievance that has historical roots in the nation's “founding.”

Or floundering.

In a 1787 letter from Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, the son-in-law of John Adams Jefferson writes: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” His final statement is the most devastating. He concludes the statement with “It is it's natural manure.”

Real shit.

This is the dangerous legacy that has been forged because it is a template that works. It is a political blueprint that combines an aggressive and unconstrained view of executive power with a potent populist message rooted in white supremacy and entitlement as well as racial and cultural grievances. This blueprint, and the success it has generated, paves the way for a successor who could be far worse. While a figure like Donald Trump Jr. is one possibility, the more chilling prospect is a future tyrant, perhaps more disciplined and politically astute, who can take this template and push it to its logical conclusion. A successor who, having observed the weaknesses exposed during the Trump presidency, could move from merely stress-testing the system to actively dismantling it.

History is replete with examples of a more radical, ideological successor inheriting the mantle of a less ruthless predecessor. The Russian Revolution, for example, saw the relatively restrained Bolshevik leadership of Lenin give way to the murderous, systematic purges of Stalin. In an Amerikan context, a more ideologically-driven successor could use the established template to move beyond simple executive orders to a full-scale assault on civil liberties, a total overhaul of the judiciary, and the creation of a permanent, politicized civil service. This figure, having learned that the "checks and balances" may not hold, could enact policies that Trump merely threatened, such as the mass deportation of millions, the criminalization of political dissent, or the consolidation of media under state control.

Therefore, the peril and impending doom is not simply in the actions of the current president/tyrant, but in the precedent he has set. The normalization of an expansive view of executive power and the political efficacy of racial and cultural division have created a fertile ground for a more dangerous kind of political figure to emerge. The erosion of sociopolitical, quasi democratic norms and the cowering of institutions that should serve as a bulwark against authoritarianism have made the Amerikan political system more vulnerable than it has ever been.

The tragic lesson of history is that a greater darkness is always possible, and sometimes, it is the predictable, if unintended, consequence of the actions of those who came before. In this new era, the fight is not just against a single leader, but against the dangerous legacy they are leaving behind, a legacy that could empower a successor to take Amerikan tyranny to a place it has never been. Welcome to a modern Dark Age.

Fine with me, as a “darkie,” I mean.