Autocrats are always more dangerous in their second term

In retrospect, the weeks between the election and Trump’s first executive order were a kind of prelude to war. Everyone knew something bad was brewing, but the prevailing belief was that it didn’t have to be anything serious. After all, his previous four years were known to be less disastrous than commentators had predicted. That’s a mistake: ambitious autocrats are always more dangerous the second time they take power. But even those who prepared for the upheaval probably didn’t expect Trump to be so destructive and so openly law-breaking the second time. The same approach—sabotaging agencies, violating the Constitution, and seeing what happens—is now being applied to education.

True, the education secretary he appointed, billionaire Linda McMahon, who made her fortune in the American professional wrestling industry, seems almost innocuous compared to the walking, talking public health hazard known as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Although the new secretary has been dogged by accusations that she condoned the sexual abuse of boys in the world of professional wrestling, McMahon denies any wrongdoing.

Also, unlike Trump's previous education secretary, Betsy DeVos, McMahon doesn't seem particularly interested in promoting charter schools and predatory for-profit colleges. Perhaps nothing more sinister will happen this time than imposing the usual Republican policies, most notably vouchers, which ultimately help wealthier parents send their children to private schools.

It is true that Trump's decrees indicate a desire to "make the entire education system more patriotic," presumably by using yet another amateurish version of the whitewashed American history previously formulated by his ill-fated presidential advisory commission on 1776. But these are just empty wishes: the federal administration has no control over school programs, and the bulk of the education budget comes from local sources or is under Congressional control anyway.

Still, it is somewhat surprising that Trump is not using the strategy followed by other far-right populists in power, what scholars call “autocratic legalism”: respecting the formal procedures for passing laws, while violating the very spirit of the law and, ultimately, the Constitution itself, all with the aim of rapidly concentrating power. Despite the fact that Republicans already have control of virtually all branches of government, Trump and Elon Musk have chosen a strategy of chaos, sabotage, and outright lawlessness: they sabotaged USAID and will most likely try to do the same with the Department of Education.

As lawyers keep repeating on every corner, departments cannot be abolished by decree; that is the prerogative of Congress. And that is why, before Trump's return to office, some commentators said that there was no need to fear; this is not the first time that Trump has threatened to eliminate the Department of Education. The Republican Party has been working on this since the 80s.

But this time, Trump seems to feel emboldened enough to apply the methods and procedures that have made him famous in business ventures: attack everyone without holding back until someone actually sues you. Of course, that motto – tear down everything in front of you, and if something that was destroyed was really important, someone will find a way to rebuild it – is part of the worldview of his new Silicon Valley allies. It is understandable that after all these years in which he has not had to answer for anything – from alleged incitement to sedition to unauthorized handling of important documents – Trump believes that no rules apply to him anymore.

The courts might be able to stop Trump’s sabotage of the American state. It is possible that his administration will succeed in reallocating some of the functions of the Department of Education, shifting the debt problem to private actors, and shifting responsibility for educating children with special needs to the states (which would make the most vulnerable children suffer the most). He could also abolish every single thing Musk says he no longer likes, and declare victory on that basis. This will do enormous damage, including intimidating a large number of administrators at colleges and universities, and perhaps schools, who will comply with Trump’s demands even in the absence of valid laws. Florida has set an example; and in a situation of legal uncertainty, many will be willing to adapt and censor themselves.

In one executive order, he ordered the Justice Department to conduct a review of the operations and compliance of private higher education institutions with endowments exceeding $1 billion. Deans are likely already prepared to comply in advance and eliminate anything that even smacks of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)—which, like critical race theory, is now used as an effective political weapon for all purposes. A freeze on National Science Foundation grants, likely followed by a devastating assault on the institution itself through mass layoffs and a search for signs of DEI policies in existing projects—such as, God forbid, the word “women”—will have a powerful deterrent effect.

Trump has no authority to truly overhaul the education system; but, as we have seen, that does not prevent him from seizing power for himself. Shock and awe tactics will further radicalize right-wing activists; civil rights protections in schools and universities controlled by Trump supporters could be both weakened and abused. One thing is certain: as with USAID, Trump’s actions are harming many individuals and endangering the entire country.

(The Guardian; Peščanik.net, translation: Đ. Tomić)