It appears that the US has had a particular “trip hazard” within it all along. Not an error of commission so much as an error of omission. We have been so busy heaping praise and devotion to our Constitution that the cold eyes of criticism have not held sway. To be sure, here criticism also means “analysis and judgment of the merits and faults of a literary or artistic work“. For crying out loud, even Einstein’s theory of relativity, which has been endlessly validated, is still subject to criticism yet it is physics and based on mathematics.

Can it be true that the Founders were able to construct a constitution so tight, internally consistent and prescient that the future could never evolve in a way that calls for revision. Seriously, could they have believed this?

The view from 30,000 ft shows that there are circumstances wherein safety rails meant to restrain a runaway President have failed. To date the US President is still subject to many restraints except for a part requiring Congress provide effective a counterweight to the executive. The current circumstance is where the Congress chooses not to summon self-control enough to exert its constitutional responsibility to declare war or not. To declare war is to draft and execute a policy directing the US to summon resources and direct military engagement with another state. This was done properly and for the last time by FDR in 1942 against axis-aligned Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania (Google).

Perhaps the Constitution does not disallow a wide-eyed march into chaos and ruin by majority rule. In other words, within the constraints of this founding document, there are pathways to self-destruction. It is conceivable that the founders hadn’t considered a self-immolation led by a madman in the future. Could they have anticipated that 1 or 2 of the 3 branches of government would choose not to execute its responsibility to provide effective checks and balances? After all, why would rational citizens allow the nation they love to celebrate fall into collapse?

Actually, the Republican majority party in Congress probably doesn’t believe that there is a failure of checks and balances on their part. Why would they challenge the president, their national party leader and lord of the MAGA movement? The Trump network is large and powerful and getting ‘primaried’ is a likely outcome for sheep who stray from the flock.

In effect, accusations of constitutional disobedience spread across all party members is less fearsome than near-term personal electoral defeat. MAGA Republicans fear that their careers hanging separately is more likely than hanging together. Safety in numbers.

Somewhere there is a coterie of planners who, having drafted Project 2025 now underway, are busy plotting the transition to illiberal democracy. Who are these big-money usurpers, and how do we turn the rock over and expose them to the light of day?