KILLING AND WHITEWASHING INCONVENIENT INFORMATION
Chronicling the ongoing authoritarian kleptocrat assault on American democracy and rule of law is getting very interesting. The tactics that past tyrants and other kinds of authoritarians typically use to kill democracy or gain power generally are being applied here and now. One of the normal tactics that authoritarians routinely employ is shutting down as much inconvenient or threatening information as possible. Since DJT now controls the executive branch, he is going to shut off all inconvenient communications to the public. Everything of importance coming out of the executive branch will be vetted and sanitized before release to the public.
In a recent major authoritarian move, DJT has ordered HHS (Department of Health and Human Services) to temporarily halt most external communications, including public health information and research updates, until at least February 1, 2025 (also reported here). DJT's order affects agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
The pause includes regulations, guidance documents, announcements, press releases, social media posts, website updates, and any public communications not directly related to emergencies or critical to preserving health. To create an illusion of open communications about critical public matters, all communications essential for public health and safety require review and approval by a presidential appointee before release. That way, DJT can whitewash, deny or downplay serious problems. From here on out, we will be lied to or distracted whenever DJT feels the need to distract or lie to us. Expect a torrent of lies and deceit.
RE-EDUCATING INCONVENIENT RESEARCH
Another anticipated authoritarian move by DJT gets rid of inconvenient federally funded research. This authoritarian goal was made explicit in Project 2025. To start the re-education of science process, DJT has ordered a complete halt of research-grant reviews at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the world's largest public funder of biomedical research. Funding for travel to research meetings and training of scientists is also blocked. All of this is for an indefinite time. This puts a temporary freeze on ~80% of the NIH's $47-billion budget that funds research across the country and elsewhere.
There is a strong emphasis on scaling back or completely eliminating climate science research. EPA research activities would also be realigned with authoritarian political goals (brass knuckles capitalism and dictatorship[1]). In addition, Project 2025 proposes banning certain words and phrases from government documents, including terms related to diversity, gender (Christian theocracy), and climate change. That would indirectly influence the direction of federally funded research by imposing an ideological framework on policy and programs.
Not surprisingly, scientists are aghast because they have not read Project 2025, or if they did, they didn't take it seriously. Now that the cash flow is stopped, they are taking it damned seriously. Dumb fucks. Did they really think that DJT and Project 2025 were kidding? Idiots. A Nature article comments:
‘Never seen anything like this’: Trump’s team halts NIH meetings and travel
Confusion and anxiety is rippling through the US health-research community this week following Donald Trump taking office as the 47th US president. His administration has abruptly cancelled research-grant reviews, travel and trainings for scientists inside and outside the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the world’s largest public biomedical funder. Adding to the worry: the Trump team appears to have deleted entire webpages about diversity programs and diversity-related grants from the agency’s site.
Without advisory-committee meetings, the NIH cannot issue research grants, temporarily freezing 80% of the agency’s US$47-billion budget that funds research across the country and beyond.
“I’ve never seen anything like this before,” says Carole LaBonne, a developmental biologist at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, who has received funding from the agency for more than 20 years. The uncertainty caused by the pause will be “devastating for the scientific community”, particularly for early-career researchers, LaBonne adds.
The pause includes “mass communications and public appearances that are not directly related to emergencies or critical to preserving health”, according to an NIH spokesperson. “This is a short pause to allow the new team to set up a process for review and prioritization.”
Once the new team is set for review and prioritization, we can expect a torrent of lies and deceit to flow from the NIH. I bet MAGA yahoos will restart research on eugenics! If nothing else, increased MAGA oversight will ensure ideological conformity in federally funded science, or else YOU’RE FIRED!!
There, DJT has already fixed science. MAGA!!
Footnote (for the wonks):
1. Yes indeed ladies 'n germs, there is a lot of social science research on the ill-effects of dictatorship and kleptocracy on societies. Hold on to your butts, here we go:
Q: Is there social science research into the effects of dictatorship on societies under dictators or kleptocrats?A: Yes, there is extensive social science research examining the effects of dictatorships and kleptocracies on societies.Political Beliefs and Preferences: Research indicates that exposure to dictatorships during youth can significantly influence individuals' political beliefs and preferences later in life. For instance, studies have shown that past exposure to non-democratic regimes can reduce current satisfaction with democracy, preference for democracy, and confidence in institutions. Individuals exposed to dictatorships tend to lean more towards the left of the political spectrum, suggesting a lasting impact on their political orientation 1.Economic Policies and Social Mobility: Dictatorships, particularly kleptocracies, often implement highly inefficient economic policies that favor the ruler's personal enrichment over societal welfare. A study on Chile under Pinochet's dictatorship highlighted how the regime's conservative ideology and technocratic approach led to a contraction in higher education, disproportionately affecting less affluent backgrounds. This contraction hindered social mobility, contributing to increased inequality 3.Repression and Propaganda: Dictatorships use a combination of repression and propaganda to maintain control. Research suggests that repression can make citizens more amenable to propaganda, as it removes the most disloyal elements, allowing for more effective manipulation of the remaining population. This dynamic creates a cycle where repression and propaganda reinforce each other, ensuring the regime's stability 9.Mental Health: The mental health implications of living under a dictatorship are profound. There's evidence of increased posttraumatic stress disorders due to state violence and repression, leading to intergenerational trauma. Additionally, dictatorships can foster internalized oppression, where individuals believe in their own inferiority and mistrust their own thinking, which can have long-lasting psychological effects 7.
Public Good Provision: Dictatorships can excel at solving specific problems, like health outcomes, through centralized planning and coercion. However, this often comes at the expense of political freedoms. For example, in Cuba and the former Soviet Union, improvements in health outcomes were partly a by-product of the regime's efforts to monitor and repress potential opponents 10.Kleptocracy and Authoritarianism: The relationship between kleptocracy and authoritarianism is complex. Kleptocrats use their control over state resources for personal enrichment while also cultivating international ties to secure allies and enhance their global reputation. This dual strategy involves both inward-looking control over resources and outward-looking efforts to influence international perceptions 5.
Divide-and-Rule Strategy: Kleptocratic rulers often employ a divide-and-rule strategy to maintain power. By exploiting the collective action problem, they can bribe or punish pivotal groups, ensuring that no effective coalition forms against them. This strategy not only helps in maintaining power but also in implementing highly distortionary economic policies without significant opposition 2.Authoritarian Attitudinal Effects: There's evidence that authoritarian regimes can produce lasting attitudinal effects, where individuals internalize the regime's ideology. This internalization can lead to a lack of correlation between authoritarian ideology and mass attitudes or even resistance, but in many cases, it aligns with the regime's goals, producing a populace more in line with the dictator's vision 4.Q2: Does the NIH fund any research like this?A2: Yes, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) does fund research related to the effects of dictatorship and kleptocracy on societies.Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research (OBSSR): The NIH's OBSSR supports research that examines the behavioral and social aspects of health, which can include the impacts of political systems like dictatorships and kleptocracies on health outcomes. While the OBSSR itself does not directly fund research, it coordinates and promotes behavioral and social sciences research across the NIH, which can encompass studies on how political environments influence health behaviors, mental health, and public health outcomes 9.Health Outcomes under Dictatorships: Research funded by the NIH has explored how dictatorships can influence health outcomes. For instance, studies have shown that dictatorships can improve health outcomes through centralized planning and coercion, but this often comes at the expense of political freedoms. This research highlights the complex relationship between authoritarian governance and health, where improvements in health can be a by-product of efforts to monitor and repress potential opponents 4.
Kleptocracy and Health: While not explicitly mentioned in the search results, the NIH's broad research portfolio includes studies on corruption, governance, and their impacts on health systems, which can be directly related to kleptocracies. The effects of kleptocracy on health can be inferred from research on how corruption undermines public health infrastructure, diverts resources, and affects the quality of healthcare services.In summary, while the NIH does not have a specific program dedicated solely to the study of dictatorships or kleptocracies, its funding supports research that intersects with these themes, particularly in understanding how political systems influence health outcomes, governance, and societal well-being.
