Historian Anne Applebaum observes that significant US constitutional amendments often follow profound national traumas like the Revolution or the Civil War. This suggests that without a similar large-scale crisis, mustering the collective will to address deep-seated issues like systemic corruption is historically difficult, as there is no single moment of reckoning.
Related Insights
An 1810 amendment that would strip citizenship from anyone accepting a foreign title of nobility was ratified by 12 of the required states at the time. This "Nobility Amendment" highlights the profound founding-era concern about aristocratic corruption and foreign interference.
Major political realignments are not always triggered by specific crimes but by a pervasive 'vibe' of elite entitlement and impunity. Revelations that expose a culture of being above the law can act as a societal 'let them eat cake moment,' sparking a revolutionary shift in public sentiment and policy priorities.
The legislative process is notoriously slow, but this is an intentional feature. The Constitution's structure creates a deliberative, messy process to ensure that laws with nationwide impact are not passed hastily. This "inefficiency" functions as a crucial check on power, forcing negotiation and preventing rapid, potentially harmful policy shifts.
Introducing legislation in Congress isn't always about immediate passage. Bills frequently function as messaging vehicles to build awareness and support for an idea over several congressional terms. This gradual process allows for the evolution of major policy, like the creation of new government agencies, which rarely happens in a single two-year cycle.
Beyond headline-grabbing scandals, the most insidious impact of a kleptocratic administration is its refusal to enforce existing laws, from financial regulations to anti-corruption acts. This quiet dismantling of the legal framework fosters a culture of impunity where bad actors thrive, ultimately harming ordinary people and destabilizing the entire system.
Using a shipbuilding analogy, Oliver Libby argues that a nation's stability—its ability to right itself after being pushed to extremes—is not guaranteed. This "righting moment" requires constant effort from its citizens, challenging the passive patriotism that assumes the country will always be okay.
The crisis was a tipping point in American political thought. The preceding era was defined by the 'Great Society' belief in robust government services. The bailout's conditions, forcing deep cuts, signaled the dawn of a new 40-year consensus prioritizing austerity and fiscal conservatism over public spending.
Senator Elizabeth Warren argues that the separation of powers is not self-enforcing; it depends on each branch jealously guarding its own authority. A constitutional crisis arises when Congress becomes compliant and allows the executive branch to usurp its powers.
In the late 1890s, political leaders like Theodore Roosevelt feared that decades of relative peace were making American men weak and "effete." They actively sought a conflict, viewing the Spanish-American War as a necessary remedy to restore national vigor and martial virtues.
Political allies often remain silent critics until a leader's power begins to wane. The recent increase in Republicans publicly questioning Trump's economic grasp demonstrates this principle. This belated courage is more about political survival and opportunism than genuine conviction, emerging only after the personal risk has subsided.
