My post earlier today raised the possibility of a 4th authoritarian power center among kleptocratic American authoritarians, namely single-party rule by our deeply corrupt Republican Party. I asked Pxy about scenarios when four different wealth and power centers are fighting for more wealth and power.
Q: Would a 4-way split in power by America's authoritarian radical right, Trump dictatorship, plutocracy for wealthy people and corporations, Christian nationalist theocrats and a Republican Party in single-party rule state be stable or would those 4 power centers collapse into internal warfare over the wealth and power spoils that comes with American kleptocratic authoritarianism, with one or maybe two of the four coming out on top? Analyze the most likely 2 or 3 scenarios or outcomes.
A: Drawing on comparative authoritarianism scholarship, kleptocratic regime dynamics, and ideological factionalism (Meng et al. 2023, Paine 2024, PRRI 2024), this analysis identifies three plausible trajectories for this hypothetical authoritarian coalition in the United States.
Scenario 1: Cyclical Purges and Personalized Dictatorship
Mechanism: Trump’s inner circle would exploit the inherent instability of multi-factional rule through the "threat-enhancing effect" of power sharing (Paine 2024). By appointing rival faction leaders to key positions-such as a tech billionaire as Treasury Secretary or a Christian nationalist leader as Attorney General-the regime could initially co-opt challengers while systematically purging them through legal persecution or manufactured scandals 2 16. This mirrors Putin’s consolidation strategy against oligarchs post-2014, where selective enforcement of laws and loyalty tests neutralized rivals.
Mechanism: Trump’s inner circle would exploit the inherent instability of multi-factional rule through the "threat-enhancing effect" of power sharing (Paine 2024). By appointing rival faction leaders to key positions-such as a tech billionaire as Treasury Secretary or a Christian nationalist leader as Attorney General-the regime could initially co-opt challengers while systematically purging them through legal persecution or manufactured scandals 2 16. This mirrors Putin’s consolidation strategy against oligarchs post-2014, where selective enforcement of laws and loyalty tests neutralized rivals.
Scenario 2: Plutocrat-Theocratic Alliance Marginalizes Populists
Mechanism: Wealthy elites and Christian nationalists could form a durable pact by aligning economic deregulation with culture war agendas. This mirrors Orbán’s Hungary, where oligarchs fund evangelical projects in exchange for state contracts 4 8. Key enablers: Legal Architecture: The Supreme Court’s Citizens United framework allows corporate funding of church-led voter mobilization drives 15 16. Policy Tradeoffs: Tech giants gain regulatory leniency in exchange for platforming Christian nationalist content; fossil fuel firms secure drilling rights by bankrolling anti-LGBTQ+ legislation 7 14.
Outcome: A stable duopoly emerges, combining Saudi-style religious policing with Singaporean state capitalism. The military-industrial complex becomes the arbiter, using Section 702 surveillance powers to suppress dissident factions 7 16. This scenario depends on maintaining 3%+ GDP growth to fund both corporate tax cuts ($2T over a decade) and theocratic social programs 2 4.
Scenario 3: Military-Bureaucratic Coup Restores "Managed Autocracy"
Mechanism: As factional warfare paralyzes governance (e.g., debt ceiling standoffs, states nullifying federal laws), the "deep state" remnant stages a Pinochet-style corrective coup. This aligns with Geddes’ (1999) finding that military regimes often emerge from single-party collapse 8 12. Key drivers: Economic Crisis: Concurrent inflation and unemployment trigger food riots in urban centers, overwhelming DHS and National Guard forces 7 15. Institutional Self-Preservation: Federal judges and three-star generals invoke the Insurrection Act to "restore order," sidelining both Trumpists and theocrats 5 16.
Outcome: A 5-7 year junta transitions to Erdoğan-style "illiberal democracy," with the GOP rebranded as a nationalist-developmentalist party. The FBI and Treasury’s FinCEN would purge extremist networks using existing anti-money laundering statutes, while retaining core MAGA voters through nationalist rhetoric 8 12. Stability would hinge on avoiding Iraq-style de-Baathification overreach 5 7.
Mechanism: Wealthy elites and Christian nationalists could form a durable pact by aligning economic deregulation with culture war agendas. This mirrors Orbán’s Hungary, where oligarchs fund evangelical projects in exchange for state contracts 4 8. Key enablers: Legal Architecture: The Supreme Court’s Citizens United framework allows corporate funding of church-led voter mobilization drives 15 16. Policy Tradeoffs: Tech giants gain regulatory leniency in exchange for platforming Christian nationalist content; fossil fuel firms secure drilling rights by bankrolling anti-LGBTQ+ legislation 7 14.
Scenario 3: Military-Bureaucratic Coup Restores "Managed Autocracy"
Mechanism: As factional warfare paralyzes governance (e.g., debt ceiling standoffs, states nullifying federal laws), the "deep state" remnant stages a Pinochet-style corrective coup. This aligns with Geddes’ (1999) finding that military regimes often emerge from single-party collapse 8 12. Key drivers: Economic Crisis: Concurrent inflation and unemployment trigger food riots in urban centers, overwhelming DHS and National Guard forces 7 15. Institutional Self-Preservation: Federal judges and three-star generals invoke the Insurrection Act to "restore order," sidelining both Trumpists and theocrats 5 16.
Conclusion:
The most probable path combines Scenario 1’s initial purges with Scenario 3’s military-bureaucratic intervention, producing a hybrid regime resembling modern Egypt: personalized rule tempered by institutional veto players, sustained through $500B+ annual security spending and selective welfare payouts 4 8. This outcome would require continuous external threats, real or manufactured, to justify internal repression-a precarious equilibrium vulnerable to leader health crises or commodity price shocks 7 16.
The most probable path combines Scenario 1’s initial purges with Scenario 3’s military-bureaucratic intervention, producing a hybrid regime resembling modern Egypt: personalized rule tempered by institutional veto players, sustained through $500B+ annual security spending and selective welfare payouts 4 8. This outcome would require continuous external threats, real or manufactured, to justify internal repression-a precarious equilibrium vulnerable to leader health crises or commodity price shocks 7 16.
Dang, a military junta! That didn’t seem plausible. Maybe it is.
This is a topic that deserves more thought and discussion.
