The tyranny of modifiers. (A sorta strange post.)

Lessons in assessing American governance:

Peter Baker, news analyst, The NY Times (3 Aug.):"[Pace opinions,] an old rule in Washington holds that ... you are not entitled to [make stuff up, as dictators do]. Trump seems determined to prove that wrong."

He seems dictatorially determined.

Paul Krugman, economist, political commentator (4 Aug.): "This [is] an extremely dangerous moment. If authoritarianism does come to America, don’t count on it being soft."

If authoritarianism comes.

Harry Litman, former U.S. Attorney, Deputy Assistant Attorney General (4 Aug.): "[It's time to recognize] that our longstanding constitutional democracy is at genuine risk of falling to Trump-instigated authoritarianism."

At risk of falling to authoritarianism.

Heather Cox Richardson, historian (4 Aug.): Like Trump's, "Authoritarian governments make up statistics to claim their policies are working well."

We may put aside, for the moment, lessons 1,2 and 3. Only Richardson accurately assesses the contemporary state of American governance — in her essay you'll find no seeming dictatorialism, no authoritarian if, no mere risk of it. Her appraisal is unencumbered by complicating modifiers, qualifiers and conditions. Its principal feature is clarity.

And here it gets more interesting (to me, at least). Though Richardson singularly assigns authoritarianism to American governance upfront, unfailingly and as objective fact, which it is, Messers. Baker, Krugman and Litman join her in thumping straightforwardness, but only as their assessments proceed.

In Baker's piece, does this seem like dictatorial behavior described, or does his passage convey Trump's dictatorialism as demonstrably in place?

Don’t like an intelligence report that contradicts your view? Go after the analysts. Don’t like cost estimates for your tax plan? Invent your own. Don’t like a predecessor’s climate policies? Scrub government websites of underlying data. Don’t like a museum exhibit that cites your impeachments? Delete any mention of them.

Likewise, later in Krugman's Substack column, the if of coming authoritarianism vanishes. "I don’t think we’re in Hungary anymore," he writes, meaning Trumpism has transcended any Orbánesque, "soft authoritarianism" stage. He further notes that "Republicans are trying in multiple ways to, in effect, rig the midterm elections" — essentially, to abolish the Democratic Party's ability to regain power, or for that matter, interrupt their own.

(Yesterday I heard a commentator marvel at such an "unprecedented" maneuver, which reminded me of the National Socialists' precedent of 1933: By assorted hooks and no little crooks, they rigged Germany's parliamentary election of 5 March against the Communist Party so that enough votes for the Enabling Act could be secured on 23 March. After that, those pesky Reichstag communists were no problem.)

As for Mr. Litman, positively blown away is his initial assessment — there lurks a risk of constitutional democracy "falling to Trump-instigated authoritarianism" — by a subsequent litany of unconstitutional kneecappings: frozen "approved" grants to universities; "brutal nationwide sweeps" of immigrants; a flagrant emolument from Qatar; the "chilling ... ouster" of a bureau commissioner; the "corruption through and through" of DOJ's investigation of Trump-prosecuting Jack Smith — its Stalinist goal: "to erase the historical record."

Concludes Litman: "Taken together, [these and other acts] reflect a regime that is not just flirting with authoritarianism—it’s already well upstream."

My forceful objection to this nearly everywhere majority approach — Richardson, the minority — to unearthing fascistic Trumpism may strike you as a minor one, perhaps even a petty one. But in words, I see the immense power of influence on readers.

I deeply respect Paul Krugman and Harry Litman, and Peter Baker's analyses I often admire. Yet the intended potency of their commentaries is undermined by the use of weakening modifiers. In no way does Trump seem dictatorial. He is. And constitutional democracy is scarcely at risk of falling to authoritarianism, if it comes.

It's here, daily it rains down, and by the English language, it must be shown no quarter. Be direct, gentlemen, as Heather Cox Richardson is. Trump is an authoritarian. If he seems so, you're cutting him undeserved slack.