Trump is a Wannabe Dictator. His Supporters Need to Get Honest About How That Makes Them Feel.
PLUS: A review of the fifth season of "Fargo"
Yes, I get it: Joe Biden is old. Eighty-one years old to be precise. Polls reveal voters find this fact very concerning, although it’s hard to pinpoint what exactly they find concerning about it. Are they worried about an octogenarian’s ability to carry out the exhausting duties of the presidency during a second term? Do they believe President Biden’s age is already showing in his work? Has his age put him out of touch with many voters? Or maybe Americans chalk up whatever grievances they have with Biden to “age.” Perhaps it’s some or all of the above.
And look, it’s legitimate for voters to be concerned with Biden’s age. I’d note there really is no evidence his advanced age has hindered his stewardship of the nation; in fact, I’d argue that despite the inevitable missteps that befall any president over the course of a four-year term, Biden and his team rank among the most competent administrations of the modern era. While I see no reason why that trend wouldn’t continue in a second term, I have still argued it would be wise for Biden to step aside to allow a new generation of Democratic leaders to take the reins. More than anything else, though, that recommendation is a political consideration, not a commentary on his record, which is actually pretty good if people take an honest accounting of his actions and the circumstances that both enabled and constrained those actions.
So yes, Biden is old. His achievements, however, are noteworthy. There have been setbacks and disappointments during his administration, but nothing catastrophic, and nothing has happened that our regular democratic system of checks and balances would be unable to address or correct. He has proven himself a reasonable, steady, capable president.
So go ahead and complain about Biden’s age. But also acknowledge this: His likely opponent in the 2024 presidential election, Donald Trump, is a wannabe dictator. A wannabe dictator should not serve as President of the United States. Regardless your party affiliation, if given a choice for president between a competent but uninspiring old man and a wannabe dictator fueled by rage and revenge, always pick the competent but uninspiring old man.
But that framing doesn’t actually get the choice right. The main issue in the 2024 election is whether the United States should be a democracy or not, and the choice is between a candidate who believes in democracy (Biden) and a candidate who would dismantle democracy (Trump). Regardless your party affiliation, if given a choice for president between a candidate who believes in democracy and a candidate who would destroy democracy, always pick the candidate who believes in democracy. The reason why is that the histories of nations whose citizens chose otherwise are written on gravestones (if those graves are even marked.)
Trump and his supporters know that authoritarianism is wrong and has no place in the United States. We know this because he regularly attacks his political opponents by calling them “communists” and “fascists.” Every communist and fascist regime in recorded history has been a dictatorship. The problem (albeit not the only problem) with Trump’s use of such rhetoric is that the group of people he has classified as “communists” and “fascists” are not “communists” and “fascists.” Nor do they have dictatorial inclinations. Yet even as Trump and his supporters smear his opponents for their nonexistent dictatorial inclinations, he keeps revealing in his own dictatorial ambitions. Even though Trump knows authoritarianism is wrong, he strives to be an authoritarian.
You can see Trump’s dictatorial inclinations on display in his rhetoric. It’s always been there in his speech (“I alone can fix it”) but over the past month, with Trump salivating at the sight of polls suggesting his odds of returning to power are better than even, this rhetoric has appeared with an unnerving frequency and has taken on a more ominous tone. Consider:
In a sweeping condemnation of his opponents, Trump referred to those he perceived as his enemies as “vermin.” This sort of dehumanizing rhetoric, which is intended to make it easier for his followers to harm other people, is characteristic of regimes that have engaged in the oppression of racial and ethnic groups, ethnic cleansing, and genocide. In particular, it recalls the way Nazis referred to Jews in the 1930s and the way Hutus referred to Tutsis leading up to the Rwandan genocide in the 1990s.
At a recent rally, Trump said immigrants were “poisoning the blood of our country.” That sort of rhetoric is characteristic of regimes based on theories of racial or ethnic supremacy. Again, such regimes have often engaged in the oppression of racial and ethnic groups, ethnic cleansing, and genocide. In particular, it recalls how Adolf Hitler urged Germans to “care for the purity of their own blood” by eliminating Jews.
Disliking their coverage of him, Trump suggested investigating MSNBC and NBC for “treason.” Dictatorial regimes seek to silence independent media.
Trump insinuated former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley should be executed for treason. News networks reported his followers echoed the sentiment in follow-on interviews.
Trump also wants the Justice Department to investigate his former chief of staff John Kelly, his former attorney general William Barr, and his ex-attorney Ty Cobb, each of whom has spoken critically about Trump. He also wants to prosecute Joe Biden for “corruption” even though there is no evidence Biden has committed a crime. During an appearance on Univision, Trump said, “If I happen to be President and I see somebody who’s doing well and beating me very badly, I say, ‘Go down and indict them.’ They’d be out of business.” Authoritarian regimes often use the legal system to prosecute people for their political views and to suppress political dissent.
Trump and his advisers have discussed using the Insurrection Act to put down protests on Inauguration Day and days thereafter. They have also floated the idea of using the Insurrection Act to deploy the military to American cities to “fight crime” in Democratic-led cities. Democracies historically have not used their militaries to police their own citizens.
These are not the ideas of someone committed to democracy. These are the musings of a wannabe dictator.1
You can say these are merely words, the talk of a tough guy who is all bark and no bite. But Trump has used words to inspire violence, with no more prominent example than the 2021 Capitol Insurrection, which was aimed at subverting the democratic process. All signs suggest Trump was not chastened by that episode. Instead, the lesson he likely learned is to push harder next time.
The reason there is a “next time” for Trump after that disgraceful episode is because the Republican Party can’t quit him. The GOP is aiding and abetting a wannabe dictator. Many Republican members of Congress clamor to impeach Joe Biden without a shred of evidence yet couldn’t bring themselves to keep Trump from ever again serving as president even after they personally witnessed the mob Trump sent after them. Despite off-the-record assurances to DC reporters that they are personally appalled by Trump (assurances, by the way, that no one, including those reporters, should take sincerely) Republican politicians have fallen over one another to excuse Trump’s authoritarianism. The worst among them cheer the rhetoric on. Others, including millions of Republican voters whose consciences are panged by guilt every time they try to rationalize a vote for Trump, stay silent, having concluded their party’s hold on power and their personal policy preferences matter more than the rule of law, individual liberty, free and fair elections, civil respect, and a democratic society.
Even more terrifying is that Trump knows his Republican base—not just his MAGA base, but many if not most everyday Republican voters—will stand by him no matter what. The list of offenses he has committed that would have seriously damaged if not ruined any other politician’s career is long. But Trump is more than a bad character or a bad executive. He is also a bad small-d democrat, the sort of leader your government teacher warned you about, the reason you watched Schindler’s List or read Nineteen Eighty-Four in high school. The danger now isn’t just that Trump could shoot somebody in the middle of Fifth Avenue and not lose any voters, but that he could turn that into a political program and his supporters, cloaked in the righteousness of God and country, wouldn’t give a damn.
That means the problem just isn’t that Trump is a wannabe dictator, but that millions of Americans—whether wholeheartedly or reluctantly—support a wannabe dictator. That effectively means Trump’s supporters and his party no longer support democracy. Regardless your party affiliation, if given a choice between a party that believes in democracy and a party that doesn’t believe in or is ambivalent toward democracy, always pick the party that believes in democracy.
But back to Trump’s threats. You may doubt Trump is capable of such things. Yet after he fomented the Capitol Insurrection, I wouldn’t put anything past him. There is no reason to trust him to uphold the Constitution, nor any reason to believe he would be constrained by basic ethical principles. There is no evidence to suggest he is a better person now than he was in 2020 or 2016. Back in 2016, Republicans assured us Trump was just a blowhard, that he’d govern in a more traditional fashion once he was faced with the responsibilities of the office, that his aides and the leadership of the Republican Party would keep him in check. Yet he only grew more reckless as his presidency wore on, and it culminated in a riot predicated on false pretenses aimed at overturning the results of a presidential election. He has made it a point to surround himself with sycophants whose only qualification for the job is their loyalty to Trump and his mission. Anyone with a conscience or a sense of integrity need not apply. Almost no one affiliated with the Republican Party has the courage to stand up to him. Trump knows this. He’s knows once he’s back in power that he can wreck democracy little by little or in big foul swoops and get away with it. He’s a dictator in waiting.
But I know my readership. I’m preaching to the choir. The people who need to read this probably aren’t or won’t be moved by what I have said so far. But I do have something very specific I would like to ask them that might change their minds. So if you are a loyal reader who knows a Trump supporter, feel free to share this post with them and encourage them to stick with me all the way to the end.
Because here’s my question to the Trump supporter or the prospective Trump supporter who has graciously agreed to read this essay at their friend’s behest. (Thank you, by the way; I know what I’ve said so far has perhaps angered, upset, or embarrassed you.) My question: What if a reinstalled and emboldened President Trump did something you disagreed with? Actually, check that: What if Trump crossed one of your red lines and did something you really objected to, something you felt violated the pact he made with you as a voter to win your support, something you felt you needed to oppose on a moral or ethical basis? Would you object?
Better yet: In Trump’s America, would you feel you could object? Would you feel you could stand up to him if he finally went too far?
I’m comfortable standing up to Joe Biden. Watch: Hey, Joe Biden, if you’re reading this, please don’t run for re-election but instead help Democrats develop a deliberative primary process that would allow them to select the best possible nominee for president in 2024.
See? I know Biden won’t threaten to imprison me because I wrote that. I also know if he wins re-election, he won’t seek revenge by throwing me in jail.2
How much confidence do you have in Trump not to retaliate against you or your friends and loved ones if any of you were to stand up to him on something that really mattered to you?
You think he’ll do this only to his enemies, to people who really deserve it. But remember, many of the people he is threatening to throw in jail are people who not only worked alongside him, but people he chose to work beside him. When they objected to something he did, Trump turned on them hard. He’s destroyed the political careers of Republicans who have stood up to him, including Republicans who have been strong supporters of his agenda. He sent a mob after his own vice president. He’s threatening to throw people protesting him in jail. When Trump smears someone in his social media posts, the target of those posts often receive death threats from his followers.
How do you know Trump’s ire and the vitriol of the MAGA movement will never be turned against you? Is that something you’re willing to endure? Is that something you’d want your friends and family to endure? All because you or your acquaintances felt the need to do the right thing?
How would you live with yourself if you chose not to do the right thing in a moment like that?
How confident are you Trump would be more restrained during a second term? Isn’t he actually promising the opposite? Aren’t many of his supporters actually rooting for that? Who would be able to stop him when he began abusing his powers?
How far would he have to go before you felt compelled to object? Would you still feel safe objecting to him at that point? Or would it be too late?
It would be too late, wouldn’t it?
So we need to stop him now. Before it’s too late for you, for me, for our friends and families, and for our democracy.
Further must-read reading: “A Trump Dictatorship is Increasingly Inevitable. We Should Stop Pretending” by Robert Kagan of the Washington Post
Signals and Noise
“One man’s misinformation may be somebody else’s Holy Grail, right?”—Steve Bannon, in a profile by Chris Heath of Esquire
By Sean Trende of RealClearPolitics: “Not Only Can Trump Win, Right Now He’s the Favorite to Win” (Follow-on article: “There’s a Bomb Under the Table” by Pamela Paul of the New York Times)
Nate Cohn of the New York Times finds convincing evidence Joe Biden is struggling with young voters (but cautions there is a lot of volatility built into the polls this far out from Election Day 2024.)
By Ronald Brownstein for The Atlantic: “How Biden Might Recover”
Christian Paz of Vox looks at how likely it really is that minority voters are fleeing the Democratic Party in droves.
Dan Pfeiffer reminds readers Don Trump is an incredibly weak candidate.
Jonathan J. Cooper of AP takes a look at the numerous third party candidates running for president, arguing one of them could catch fire this cycle given the political weaknesses of the two major party candidates.
Don Trump appears interested once again in “terminating” Obamacare. That development has excited Democratic strategists. (And Trump doubled-down—“Obamacare Sucks!!!”—on his comments.)
By Catherine Rampell of the Washington Post: “Supposed ‘Moderates’ Like Nikki Haley Would Blow Up Government, Too”. Rampell highlights a proposal by Haley to fire every government worker after working for the government for five years, writing, “This sounds like a clever idea until you think about it for, oh, two seconds. It means we’d have to purge and replace every single air traffic controller every five years. Also all the nuclear physicists working for the Energy Department and rocket scientists at NASA, whose depth of expertise can’t easily be recreated on a five-year deadline.” More: “It’s tempting to believe most Republican presidential candidates — including the latest media darling, former ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley — are more ‘moderate’ than front-runner Donald Trump. And if your low-bar definition of ‘moderate’ is ‘unlikely to foment an insurrection,’ then sure. But when it comes to how they’d actually govern, many of their policy proposals are essentially a warmed-over Trump agenda. Among them: plans to dismantle the federal government’s basic functions and abilities to serve regular Americans.”
ABC News reports one of Trump’s former attorneys informed special prosecutor Jack Smith’s investigative team that she “very clearly” told Trump that it would be a crime for him to tell the government he had turned over all the classified documents he had taken with him when he left the White House when he knew he still had some in his possession. The attorney indicated Trump “absolutely” understood the warning.
Jose Pagliery of The Daily Beast reports Trump, who is barred by court order from moving money between bank accounts without notifying a court-appointed auditor, was caught transferring $40 million from a Trump Organization account to a personal bank account to pay a $29 million tax bill.
An appeals court ruled Trump can be held civilly liable for the actions of the mob on 1/6. Trump will certainly appeal that ruling.
Peter Wade of Rolling Stone found that a pardon Trump issued on the last day of his presidency derailed a federal investigation into predatory lenders.
CNN has a preview of Liz Cheney’s new book, which dishes on the personal interactions she had with numerous Republican politicians following the 2020 election. Good line, spoken by a Republican congressman as they signed a petition objecting to the 2020 election: “The things we do for the Orange Jesus.”
Senate Democrats appear ready to swallow a compromise on border security to win funding for the wars in Ukraine and Israel. Securing citizenship status for Dreamers—a long-time Democratic objective connected to immigration—does not appear to be included in the deal.
Republican House Freedom Caucus Chairman Scott Perry called for the next House spending bills to set a topline at the $1.59 trillion level. That’s the same level Biden and former speaker Kevin McCarthy had agreed to to resolve the debt ceiling standoff and that set off the protests from House right-wingers that led to McCarthy’s ouster and the GOP’s Speaker fiasco.
The House voted to expel “George Santos” from their ranks. (Note: That gives Republicans a 3-vote majority, which explains why GOP House leadership voted against expelling him. There is talk at least two other Republican seats, including former speaker Kevin McCarthy’s, may come open in the very near future. A special election will be held to fill Santos’ vacant seat in Long Island; Cook Political Report rates it as a toss-up.)
Conservative House members are starting to get fed up with Speaker Mike Johnson.
“Scott McKay presents a valuable and timely contribution with The Revivalist Manifesto because he has managed here to articulate well what millions of conscientious, freedom-loving Americans are sensing.” That’s what House Speaker Mike Johnson wrote in a forward to McKay’s 2022(!) book, which gives credence to the Pizzagate conspiracy theory, suggests Chief Justice John Roberts is the subject of blackmail and connected to sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, defends podcaster Joe Rogan from charges that he is racist after he used the n-word, disparages homosexuals, and claims poor voters are “unsophisticated and susceptible to government dependency,” particularly when exposed to Black Lives Matter rhetoric. Said Johnson, “I obviously believe in the product, or I wouldn’t have written the foreword. So I endorse the work.” Johnson also promoted the book on his social media platforms and called McKay a dear friend.
Ordinarily, I would focus this point on how Republican Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee loaned his campaign $320,000 even though there is no evidence he had $320,000 to his name. But let’s take a moment to note this is yet another story about corruption in Tennessee broken by Phil Williams—“Nashville’s Nosiest Bitch” according to John Oliver—who has been on an absolute tear lately.
Looks like “My Kevin” McCarthy and Donald Trump had a tense phone call when Trump explained to His Kevin why he didn’t step in to stop Matt Gaetz from pulling the plug on McCarthy’s speakership.
Kyle Cheney of Politico reviews court documents that reveal the extensive network Republican Rep. Steve Perry cultivated as he attempted to reverse the outcome of the 2020 election. Should Trump be convicted for attempting to subvert an election, it’s hard for me to see why people like Perry or Jim Jordan couldn’t be held liable as well.
In all sincerity, this is a good reminder from Republican Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana: “Anybody who thinks that there are secrets in [Washington DC], there are not… You find out everything that happens. You eventually find it out. There are no secrets.”
The Commerce Department reported U.S. economic growth in Q3 2023 was better than previously thought, with GDP growing at a 5.2% rate.
Jeff Stein and Taylor Lorenz of the Washington Post examine how a misleading viral social media post about a $16 McDonald’s meal demonstrates the challenges the Biden administration faces when talking to Americans about inflation.
Annie Lowrey writes in The Atlantic that while Americans hate inflation, it has not kept them from buying things, which drives up inflation. Her conclusion: “People want to blame Joe Biden for their bills. They want to accuse stores of gouging them (though the evidence for “greedflation” is scant). The strange truth is that most people really are in a more comfortable position, even if they’re not happy about it. It’s not like a weak economy, stagnant wages, crummy consumer spending, and cheaper stuff would be better, after all.”
Yascha Mounk wonders in The Atlantic why it is so hard and expensive for Americans to get an eye test and a pair of glasses.
The United Nations climate summit quickly produced an agreement to create a reparations fund for poor nations affected by climate change.
After a week-long truce in Gaza to facilitate prisoner/hostage exchanges, the war has resumed, with dozens killed in Israeli airstrikes shortly after the ceasefire expired.
Ronen Bergman and Adam Goldman of the New York Times report Israel obtained Hamas’s attack plan, which Israel codenamed “Jericho’s Wall,” more than a year ago, but did not believe it was plausible. Hamas followed the plan with what Bergman and Goldman said was “shocking precision.” Israeli intelligence even observed a rehearsal of the attack that hewed to the plan and still dismissed it as unlikely.
Biden doesn’t want to place conditions on future aid to Israel.
Progressive Democratic politicians like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are catching heat from (and alienating) progressive activists for their party’s handling of the war between Israel and Hamas.
By Thomas Friedman of the New York Times: “This is the 9/11 Lesson Israel Needs to Learn” (Included in the article is Friedman’s case for why Israel should “call for a permanent cease-fire…followed by an immediate Israeli withdrawal of all military forces in Gaza on the condition that Hamas return all the hostages it has left, civilians and military, and any dead.”)
Jen Kirby of Vox observes there are more landmines in Ukraine than any other place on Earth.
In military-industrial complex news, Politico reports Biden’s new pitch to encourage Americans to support the war in Ukraine involves showing them how the money spent arming Ukraine supports local American economies.
In a shocking outcome, Geert Wilders’ far-right party won the most seats in the Dutch Parliament during recent elections in the Netherlands.
Far-right protests following a stabbing incident in Dublin, Ireland, turned into a full-blown riot.
George Packer writes in The Atlantic about what the recently deceased Henry Kissinger did not understand, including the following very telling anecdote featuring a surprise appearance from Dr. Ruth: “But my most memorable encounter was with a more public Kissinger. It was in the fall of 2015, at a dinner for Chancellor Angela Merkel at the German consul’s residence in Manhattan. I was a last-minute addition to the table and found myself seated next to Ruth Westheimer, the diminutive TV sex therapist, whose presence was a mystery to me. Kissinger was lecturing the chancellor about her decision to allow into Germany a million refugees fleeing wars in Syria, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. He could appreciate the humanitarian desire to save one person, but a million? That was like Rome opening its gates to the barbarians—it would irrevocably alter ‘German civilization,’ said the author of a dissertation on Metternich, an admirer of Bismarck, and a Jewish refugee from German civilization. Dr. Ruth, who had been silent throughout dinner, now spoke. Almost apologetically, she told us the story of how, when she was 10, shortly after Kristallnacht, the Gestapo had taken her father away from their home in Frankfurt, and she had never seen him again. Two months later, she was put on a train to Switzerland—part of the rescue of Jewish children just before the start of the war. ‘If not for the Kindertransport, I would not be here today,’ Dr. Ruth said. Kissinger could not have missed her point. They had both been refugees, but only one of them seemed to remember what it had been like. The conversation moved on, but it was now clear why Merkel had wanted Dr. Ruth there.”
Vincent’s Picks: Season 5 of Fargo
Some places are places, and Minnesota is definitely a place. There is a wholesomeness to the state, a byproduct perhaps of its Lutheran heritage and a storied history of social and labor activism that imprinted a strong sense of community on both its rural towns and big cities. Minnesotans, more than most other Americans, seem to think seriously about how they might live well together. But the decisive cultural variable may be the fact that nothing stands between Minnesota and the North Pole to block the arctic winds that plunge the state into lengthy winters. Minnesota’s winters are dark and foreboding, but its residents are hardy souls. They accept and even embrace the cold, which is often contrasted with the warmth of a meeting room or the coziness of a home. To live in Minnesota—a place that is neither East nor West but uniquely North—is to know one is at the mercy of nature but that civilization and civility can fortify us against nature’s harshest elements.
I’m sure many Minnesotans would contend, however, that their home state is not as wholesome—and therefore, not as exceptional—as it may seem. Its Lutheran roots have instilled in some a stern Germanic/Scandinavian disposition. That feeling of community can be stultifying; after all, the town of Gopher Prairie from Sinclair Lewis’s 1920 novel Main Street was based on the author’s hometown of Sauk Centre, Minnesota, and Robert Zimmerman had to leave the state to become Bob Dylan. The most famous (and perhaps most quintessential) fictional Minnesotan town, Lake Wobegon—“the little town that time forgot and the decades cannot improve;” “where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average”—has been tainted by its association with its creator, Garrison Keillor. The deaths of Philando Castile and George Floyd certainly challenge the idea that Minnesota is a welcoming, tolerant, progressive state.
The opening shot of the fifth season of FX’s Fargo (streaming on Hulu, with new episodes released weekly) is an intertitle featuring the definition of the phrase “Minnesota Nice”: “An aggressively pleasant demeanor, often forced, in which a person is chipper and self-effacing, no matter how bad things get.” While “Minnesota Nice” is often used as a compliment, that definition implies the niceness of Minnesotans should never be taken at face value. Yes, many Minnesotans are among the kindest and most cheerful people you’ll ever meet, but that go-along-to-get-along attitude can not only be wielded as passive-aggression but can also be used to deny the gravity of a situation or conceal a mean streak. Even that particular definition alludes to something more sinister: The makers of a show based on the 1996 movie Fargo don’t just casually drop the word “chipper” into their opening scene.
As the directors of that 1996 film, Joel and Ethan Coen sent the message that many of their nice Minnesotan neighbors maybe weren’t as nice as their Minnesotan reputations would suggest. One of the reasons Fargo is so memorable is that we don’t expect such outwardly good people to get entangled in such sordid business. The effect is both comic and tragic: Ostensibly nice people who are no good at being bad end up way over their heads in trouble, events spiral out of control, and then those “nice” people are devoured by their sins.
The first four seasons of the anthology TV show Fargo by showrunner Noah Hawley have followed a similar pattern even as the events of the film and each successive season are only tangentially related to one another. Each season is essentially a morality play, with the overdone Norwegian accents helping to set the stage for an Old World clash in the New World of Minnesota between the forces of damnation and grace. The characters can be placed on a continuum from good to bad: There are the incorruptible do-gooders who must steel themselves to confront evil; the naïve good guys at the mercy of others; the basically good but flawed people who succumb to temptation or snap in a stressful situation and spend the show with their souls hanging in the balance; the callous, self-interested businessmen who only think in terms of money; the clever criminals for whom the ends justify the means; the henchmen who long to do bad and therefore gravitate toward those who give them permission to do so; and the truly—even supernaturally—evil who stalk the show like twisted agents of Satan himself.
The fifth season of Fargo, set in the pre-pandemic fall of 2019, follows a similar pattern. (Spoilers from the first two episodes follow in the next two paragraphs.) This season’s main character is “Dot” Lyon (Juno Temple of Ted Lasso) who we might have believed is an unremarkable housewife and mother living in Scandia, Minnesota, if she wasn’t so quick to taser a teacher during a riot at a local school board meeting. That gets her arrested and fingerprinted, which puts Dot on edge. Soon enough, two masked goons, Donald Ireland (Devon Bostick) and the ogre-like Ole Munch (Sam Spruell), show up at Dot’s home to kidnap her. They succeed, but not before Dot uses an ice skate, a bottle of hair spray, and a lighter to inflict some serious pain on her abductors.
Midway across North Dakota, Munch, Ireland, and Dot get pulled over by Deputy Witt Farr (Lamorne Morris), which gives Dot a chance to escape. Holed up in a rural gas station with a wounded Farr, Dot adroitly improvises a way to incapacitate Ireland and Munch and then flees back to Scandia, where, despite her absence, evidence of a home invasion, and her own injuries, she tells her husband Wayne (David Rysdahl) nothing unusual happened to her. In short order, however, she begins booby-trapping her home. Meanwhile, viewers learn Dot is actually the estranged wife of Stark County, North Dakota, Sheriff and Ammon Bundy clone Roy Tillman (Jon Hamm), an arch-conservative lawman who believes husbands hold dominion over their wives and (much to the consternation of a couple FBI agents) that federal laws are subordinate to local authority.
As mentioned earlier, these characters are familiar types from earlier editions of Fargo. (It’s also worth mentioning Dot’s mother-in-law Lorraine [Jennifer Jason Leigh], the beyond vile CEO of the nation’s largest debt collection agency, and Tillman’s son Gator [Joe Keery of Stranger Things], who, unlike his father, does not hide his will to power behind fundamentalist Christianity or flaky constitutional theories.) What separates this season of Fargo from its predecessors, however, is that this season is clearly a commentary on contemporary America. That out-of-control school board meeting that opens the season—the antithesis of “Minnesota Nice”—symbolizes our national discord. Leigh’s Lorraine is a gun nut who profits off other people’s misery. Hamm’s Roy Tillman isn’t just a vigilante sheriff but Trump’s base, the sort of man whose violent, authoritarian tendencies have been emboldened by the former president. (It’s telling that in a show typically set in Minnesota yet named after a city in North Dakota that Tillman hails from the western expanses of North Dakota. Fargo in Fargo is where evil emanates from; to go to Fargo is to go too far. Tillman is way beyond Fargo.)
And then there’s Dot, who decides she can change the reality of a situation by denying the facts that inform that reality. It’s yet to be seen if her character parallels that of election-deniers or vaccine-deniers, but she does seem comparable to other Americans who have convinced themselves that if they believe in something hard enough, it can become real and others can be forced to accept it; that all that matters is spin and our reaction to it; and that we can live in a world of illusion.
Or maybe Dot is ultimately a critique of “Minnesota Nice,” the idea that people ought to remain pleasant and “chipper” no matter how bad things get. On the one hand, I can’t really blame Dot for escaping the clutches of Roy Tillman and seeking out some sort of domestic tranquility. But at least through the show’s first three episodes, it seems Hawley is suggesting Americans shouldn’t content themselves with making Bisquick for breakfast while their communities (and eventually their homes) are ruined by vandals. Such actions can’t be papered over with pleasantries or ignored as if nothing is amiss. Nor should we expect a façade of normalcy to conceal the abnormalities that obviously warp our daily lives. Better, perhaps, to confront that stuff head-on. Such sentiments also suggest, however, that we’ll need to live in an America that resembles that chaotic school board meeting from the first episode.
This swerve toward social commentary is new terrain for Fargo. It remains unclear where Hawley is taking viewers, but it should be interesting to go along for the ride.
Further reading: “It’s High Noon in America” by Noah Hawley (The Atlantic, December 19, 2022)
Exit Music: “The Middle” by Jimmy Eat World (2001, Bleed American)
We can get into an academic argument over whether Trump is a “wannabe dictator,” an “autocrat,” an “authoritarian,” a “fascist,” a “strongman,” a “democratic backslider,” etc. We can also debate whether LeBron James is truly a point guard, a shooting guard, a small forward, a power forward, a point forward, etc. At the end of the day, though, we know LeBron James is a basketball player. And it’s clear from the debate what sort of game Donald Trump is playing, too.
Yes, I hear you saying, “But Biden is prosecuting Trump!” I probably can’t convince you Biden isn’t involved in the prosecution (he’s keeping his hands out of it, the same way he isn’t interfering in the Justice Department’s investigation of his son.) But note what the federal government is prosecuting Trump for: Attempting to subvert an election and refusing to turn over (not just possessing) classified documents. The classified documents case is a mess of Trump’s own making. And the election subversion case cuts to the heart of my argument about Trump’s disdain for democracy and his willingness to act in ways that undermine it for his own benefit. One can argue Trump sure seems like a frequent target of government prosecution, but evidence also indicates Trump is someone who frequently flaunts the law, so it’s not all that surprising he’d end up in the crosshairs of the legal system. Just as it isn’t surprising to find LeBron James on a basketball court, it’s not all that surprising to find Donald Trump in a court of law.