Thank you for taking time to read this article. It is true that the description this regime uses for all the changes we're seeing creates a cognitive dissonance in our minds, as nothing is "efficient" or really makes America "great" in any way. I see another parallel with the choice of words chosen by the CCP during the Cultural Revolution. While it destroyed culture by confiscating historical documents, literature and art, prosecuting people with a higher education, and tearing down temples of worship, etc. CCP called it a revolution of "culture." Whoever resisted were called "counter-revolutionaries." One needs to do mental gymnastics to make sense of the madness. Now I'm experiencing the same 😵💫
Thank you, Victoria, for reading this and for empathizing with my feelings. I can imagine that countless people who have experienced political trauma, whether first-hand or through their family history, are sharing these déjà-vu's and the anger and pain I'm feeling right now.
Wow! What a well-researched, incisive piece which I really appreciated for how much I learned and how it inspires me to stay active and involved in fighting against authoritarianism. Thank you for writing this! It’s important to share your unique perspective with others.
Hi Amy, thank you so much for reading this and for reflecting back to me how it has inspired you in staying active and standing up against authoritarianism. Much of modern Chinese history has been in my consciousness my whole life and I didn't realize the relevance of my own experience and perspective until we've entered this perilous situation. I never imagined that we would have to face a similar authoritarian development here in the "Land of the Free." It was a rude awakening!
Thank you for all this info through the lens of your unique perspective! I also appreciated your caveat at the end - that you don't always talk about politics. I feel this so much. The tension. I want to write about other stuff, but when I do, it somehow feels frivolous and irrelevant.
Hi Anne, thank you so much for reading all the way to the end :-) I hear you. At times I feel like writing about something unrelated to the current events, but have thought about the possibility that it may sound frivolous or irrelevant. However, in my reading experience on Substack, I’ve come across content that’s completely unrelated to the current situation, and it was actually refreshing to read. The parts of me that have been parched for creative delights got lit up when I read those “irrelevant” essays. So I think nothing is really irrelevant. If you write from a place of truth, I believe your writing will find resonance!
This is so powerful and well done as painful as it is. Your points are excellent. "To choose one's way." I am going to dig in more. I have to search for you, I missed some of your incredible work. I hope to catch up. Thank you!!!
Hi Prajna, my courageous and beautiful Salty Crone. Thank you for stopping by and reading my piece. The times are rough right now. So much chaos and uncertainty. All these incredulous things happening in front of our eyes are bringing me back to the horror of the Cultural Revolution in China.
I have missed your recent writing as well. I remember you tagged me on your latest, and I have saved it. I look forward to visiting your page again! Please take good care 💕
Thank you for reading this, Aimee! I feel like I'm reliving the trauma of being told lies and having the freedom of thoughts and expression squashed. America really needs to wake TFU!
Thank you for this vital, unflinching account. You’ve illuminated something that too often gets lost in policy analysis or political commentary: the deeper architecture that underlies authoritarian systems—an architecture that long predates any single regime.
What we’re seeing now isn’t just a power grab by individuals—it’s the perpetuation of a hierarchical worldview rooted in patriarchy, white supremacy, and rigid gender roles. This isn’t about greed alone. It’s about a centuries-old framework that depends on control through division: colorism, gendered power, manufactured binaries of "us vs. them." It has been sustained over time by narratives that erase, distort, and overwrite reality—often under the guise of science, progress, or tradition.
Much of today’s authoritarianism is simply a new costume on an old structure. Whether it’s Darwin’s race theory, Victorian ideals of femininity and masculinity, or the colonial erasure of Indigenous knowledge systems—these forces still shape who is heard, who is erased, and whose pain is made invisible.
That’s why the erasure of history feels so dangerous—not only because of what’s lost, but because of what’s preserved beneath the silence: unexamined violence, unquestioned entitlement, and the normalization of domination. It’s no accident that these regimes target memory, art, language, and emotion. They are attacking the very tools that allow people to recognize themselves as whole, connected, and capable of change.
Your writing reminds us that authoritarianism thrives not only by silencing dissent but by distorting the meaning of power itself—turning care into weakness, interdependence into danger, and control into safety. Unraveling these distortions means naming them, as you do so clearly here, and insisting on complexity in the face of simplification.
Hi Jay, thank you very much for giving this essay such a thorough read and sharing your perspectives through your own lens of your inherited and lived experiences. You're absolutely right about this examination of a "centuries-old framework that depends on control through division." I believe the modern history of China provides a textbook example for us to learn how a literally centuries-old ruling system welds control over the people.
I particularly appreciate your response to the erasure of history as a common strategy among despots:
"That’s why the erasure of history feels so dangerous—not only because of what’s lost, but because of what’s preserved beneath the silence: unexamined violence, unquestioned entitlement, and the normalization of domination. It’s no accident that these regimes target memory, art, language, and emotion. They are attacking the very tools that allow people to recognize themselves as whole, connected, and capable of change."
There are any ways in which dictators erase history. I've listed some in this essay. But there are more. The most traumatizing is through fear, which in turn silences people en masse. The Cultural Revolution is a case in point. The Tianamen Square Massacre is another. The mass silence (self-censorship) has resulted in a collective amnesia. But the trauma lives on even in silence, through the body and passed down through generations. This is the tragedy. That's why I'm so acutely sensitive to any attempt of censorship and silencing.
Thank you for your generous response. I find your emphasis on how fear silences people—creating not just amnesia but inherited trauma—so important. It brings us back to the heart of what authoritarian regimes aim to destroy: the capacity to remember, to feel, and to resist.
In many ways, authoritarian regimes—regardless of ideological alignment—rely on the same core playbook. That’s how they entrench power across decades. Whether we look to the left: the Soviet Union (1922–1991), China (1949–present), North Korea (1948–present), Vietnam (1945/1976–present), Cuba (1959–present), or the GDR (1949–1990); or to the right: Franco’s Spain (1939–1975) or Salazar’s Portugal (1933–1974)—they all rest on control through fear, manipulation, and historical distortion.
And yet, paradoxically, many of these long-lasting leftist regimes did provide a basic level of care for their populations—as long as those populations conformed. Systems like the GDR prioritized healthcare, education, housing, and cultural access, not from altruism, but to maintain control and loyalty. After reunification, many who had been held by that system found themselves unmoored. The cushion was gone, and suddenly they were expected to function in a hyper-individualist system shaped by market logic.
By contrast, the U.S.’s current authoritarian shift seems like an inversion of that model. There’s no social safety net for obedience—just contempt. The vulnerable are openly devalued: the disabled, the elderly, the sick, the incarcerated, the poor, the “woke”—anyone who costs more than they produce, or who cannot be easily controlled. This isn’t just authoritarianism; it’s abandonment as policy.
And those who protest, who remember, who won’t assimilate—they are not only threats to power, they are perceived as liabilities. Too costly to accommodate. Too stubborn to manage. That’s why erasure—of memory, art, identity, dissent—is such an efficient tool. Because truth-telling, like care, is expensive.
Thank you again for your clarity, your courage, and for offering space where these patterns can be recognized, named, and challenged
Thanks again for the continuation of this meaningful dialog, Jay. I'm glad you mentioned how "many of these long-lasting leftist regimes did provide a basic level of care for their populations—as long as those populations conformed."
Again, I was able to draw a parallel between what you wrote and the basic level of care for the Chinese population under Mao's reign. It may surprise outsiders to hear that on the other side of the cruel atrocities and decimation of human lives during many years of his chaotic reign of terror, there were positive gains that have been appreciated by the huge number of peasants who became freed from their feudal landlords, millions who were lifted from poverty and obtained a basic level of education, and women who obtained an unprecedented level of equality with men. Because of these initial positive gains, Mao was able to maintain widespread support during the divide-and-conquer phase of the Cultural Revolution when he purged all dissident voices.
I also appreciated very much that you mentioned the "those who protest, who remember, who won’t assimilate—they are not only threats to power, they are perceived as liabilities." Indeed, this is true across the board, whether it's in a country where a new political entity or dictator tries to exert its power, or if it's a colonizer trying to assimilate the indigenous and erase their identity. Recently I watched a documentary about Greenlanders. The story of the Danish colonizers trying to erase their culture and identity was heartbreaking.
Lily, I find myself in complete agreement with you, especially regarding the point about the equality of women. This is a facet we also recognize from the GDR. Women there achieved a greater degree of emancipation earlier than their counterparts in West Germany.
Your inclusion of the liberation from feudalism is also significant, as this was indeed a powerful driving force behind many left cultural revolutions, fostering support among the common people who, in certain ways, did experience gains. While financial prosperity might have remained elusive for many, advancements in education, access to previously unattainable positions, and the availability of affordable basic goods were undoubtedly valued.
And Lily, your insightful observation about the erasure of cultures throughout history resonates deeply.
We can see it already with Alexander the Great, the crusaders, the Portuguese and Spanish conquerors, the British Empire, and American Colonization. Even the Vikings or Normans invading England fits this pattern.
This dynamic of domination, the imposition of a perceived superior culture onto another, often involves a missionary element, and the Christian churches have played a significant role in this. They too inflicted considerable damage by supplanting indigenous cultures with imposed Christianity, despite often introducing schools and so-called civilization. Schools were often only a means to an end – to spread Christianity.
An incredible breakdown. Thank you. Too many echoes even as this regime describes itself as taking an entirely new approach.
Thank you for taking time to read this article. It is true that the description this regime uses for all the changes we're seeing creates a cognitive dissonance in our minds, as nothing is "efficient" or really makes America "great" in any way. I see another parallel with the choice of words chosen by the CCP during the Cultural Revolution. While it destroyed culture by confiscating historical documents, literature and art, prosecuting people with a higher education, and tearing down temples of worship, etc. CCP called it a revolution of "culture." Whoever resisted were called "counter-revolutionaries." One needs to do mental gymnastics to make sense of the madness. Now I'm experiencing the same 😵💫
Painfully clear. Thanks for taking the time to lay this out for us. I feel your anger-pain in this Déjà-vu.
Thank you, Victoria, for reading this and for empathizing with my feelings. I can imagine that countless people who have experienced political trauma, whether first-hand or through their family history, are sharing these déjà-vu's and the anger and pain I'm feeling right now.
Excellent, Lily Pond. Love hearing from you. Happy Stacking.
Thank you for reading, Carl!
Wow! What a well-researched, incisive piece which I really appreciated for how much I learned and how it inspires me to stay active and involved in fighting against authoritarianism. Thank you for writing this! It’s important to share your unique perspective with others.
Hi Amy, thank you so much for reading this and for reflecting back to me how it has inspired you in staying active and standing up against authoritarianism. Much of modern Chinese history has been in my consciousness my whole life and I didn't realize the relevance of my own experience and perspective until we've entered this perilous situation. I never imagined that we would have to face a similar authoritarian development here in the "Land of the Free." It was a rude awakening!
Thank you for all this info through the lens of your unique perspective! I also appreciated your caveat at the end - that you don't always talk about politics. I feel this so much. The tension. I want to write about other stuff, but when I do, it somehow feels frivolous and irrelevant.
Hi Anne, thank you so much for reading all the way to the end :-) I hear you. At times I feel like writing about something unrelated to the current events, but have thought about the possibility that it may sound frivolous or irrelevant. However, in my reading experience on Substack, I’ve come across content that’s completely unrelated to the current situation, and it was actually refreshing to read. The parts of me that have been parched for creative delights got lit up when I read those “irrelevant” essays. So I think nothing is really irrelevant. If you write from a place of truth, I believe your writing will find resonance!
Wow Lily,
This is so powerful and well done as painful as it is. Your points are excellent. "To choose one's way." I am going to dig in more. I have to search for you, I missed some of your incredible work. I hope to catch up. Thank you!!!
Hi Prajna, my courageous and beautiful Salty Crone. Thank you for stopping by and reading my piece. The times are rough right now. So much chaos and uncertainty. All these incredulous things happening in front of our eyes are bringing me back to the horror of the Cultural Revolution in China.
I have missed your recent writing as well. I remember you tagged me on your latest, and I have saved it. I look forward to visiting your page again! Please take good care 💕
That must be so hard, i understand honey, go slow, titrate well. i’m here for you. im glad you are writing and giving voice.
Thank you dear 🙏
So comprehensive and important! Thank you for putting this all together. The parallels and warnings are chilling. We need to wake America TFU
Thank you for reading this, Aimee! I feel like I'm reliving the trauma of being told lies and having the freedom of thoughts and expression squashed. America really needs to wake TFU!
@Lily Pond,
Thank you for this vital, unflinching account. You’ve illuminated something that too often gets lost in policy analysis or political commentary: the deeper architecture that underlies authoritarian systems—an architecture that long predates any single regime.
What we’re seeing now isn’t just a power grab by individuals—it’s the perpetuation of a hierarchical worldview rooted in patriarchy, white supremacy, and rigid gender roles. This isn’t about greed alone. It’s about a centuries-old framework that depends on control through division: colorism, gendered power, manufactured binaries of "us vs. them." It has been sustained over time by narratives that erase, distort, and overwrite reality—often under the guise of science, progress, or tradition.
Much of today’s authoritarianism is simply a new costume on an old structure. Whether it’s Darwin’s race theory, Victorian ideals of femininity and masculinity, or the colonial erasure of Indigenous knowledge systems—these forces still shape who is heard, who is erased, and whose pain is made invisible.
That’s why the erasure of history feels so dangerous—not only because of what’s lost, but because of what’s preserved beneath the silence: unexamined violence, unquestioned entitlement, and the normalization of domination. It’s no accident that these regimes target memory, art, language, and emotion. They are attacking the very tools that allow people to recognize themselves as whole, connected, and capable of change.
Your writing reminds us that authoritarianism thrives not only by silencing dissent but by distorting the meaning of power itself—turning care into weakness, interdependence into danger, and control into safety. Unraveling these distortions means naming them, as you do so clearly here, and insisting on complexity in the face of simplification.
Hi Jay, thank you very much for giving this essay such a thorough read and sharing your perspectives through your own lens of your inherited and lived experiences. You're absolutely right about this examination of a "centuries-old framework that depends on control through division." I believe the modern history of China provides a textbook example for us to learn how a literally centuries-old ruling system welds control over the people.
I particularly appreciate your response to the erasure of history as a common strategy among despots:
"That’s why the erasure of history feels so dangerous—not only because of what’s lost, but because of what’s preserved beneath the silence: unexamined violence, unquestioned entitlement, and the normalization of domination. It’s no accident that these regimes target memory, art, language, and emotion. They are attacking the very tools that allow people to recognize themselves as whole, connected, and capable of change."
There are any ways in which dictators erase history. I've listed some in this essay. But there are more. The most traumatizing is through fear, which in turn silences people en masse. The Cultural Revolution is a case in point. The Tianamen Square Massacre is another. The mass silence (self-censorship) has resulted in a collective amnesia. But the trauma lives on even in silence, through the body and passed down through generations. This is the tragedy. That's why I'm so acutely sensitive to any attempt of censorship and silencing.
Lily,
Thank you for your generous response. I find your emphasis on how fear silences people—creating not just amnesia but inherited trauma—so important. It brings us back to the heart of what authoritarian regimes aim to destroy: the capacity to remember, to feel, and to resist.
In many ways, authoritarian regimes—regardless of ideological alignment—rely on the same core playbook. That’s how they entrench power across decades. Whether we look to the left: the Soviet Union (1922–1991), China (1949–present), North Korea (1948–present), Vietnam (1945/1976–present), Cuba (1959–present), or the GDR (1949–1990); or to the right: Franco’s Spain (1939–1975) or Salazar’s Portugal (1933–1974)—they all rest on control through fear, manipulation, and historical distortion.
And yet, paradoxically, many of these long-lasting leftist regimes did provide a basic level of care for their populations—as long as those populations conformed. Systems like the GDR prioritized healthcare, education, housing, and cultural access, not from altruism, but to maintain control and loyalty. After reunification, many who had been held by that system found themselves unmoored. The cushion was gone, and suddenly they were expected to function in a hyper-individualist system shaped by market logic.
By contrast, the U.S.’s current authoritarian shift seems like an inversion of that model. There’s no social safety net for obedience—just contempt. The vulnerable are openly devalued: the disabled, the elderly, the sick, the incarcerated, the poor, the “woke”—anyone who costs more than they produce, or who cannot be easily controlled. This isn’t just authoritarianism; it’s abandonment as policy.
And those who protest, who remember, who won’t assimilate—they are not only threats to power, they are perceived as liabilities. Too costly to accommodate. Too stubborn to manage. That’s why erasure—of memory, art, identity, dissent—is such an efficient tool. Because truth-telling, like care, is expensive.
Thank you again for your clarity, your courage, and for offering space where these patterns can be recognized, named, and challenged
Thanks again for the continuation of this meaningful dialog, Jay. I'm glad you mentioned how "many of these long-lasting leftist regimes did provide a basic level of care for their populations—as long as those populations conformed."
Again, I was able to draw a parallel between what you wrote and the basic level of care for the Chinese population under Mao's reign. It may surprise outsiders to hear that on the other side of the cruel atrocities and decimation of human lives during many years of his chaotic reign of terror, there were positive gains that have been appreciated by the huge number of peasants who became freed from their feudal landlords, millions who were lifted from poverty and obtained a basic level of education, and women who obtained an unprecedented level of equality with men. Because of these initial positive gains, Mao was able to maintain widespread support during the divide-and-conquer phase of the Cultural Revolution when he purged all dissident voices.
I also appreciated very much that you mentioned the "those who protest, who remember, who won’t assimilate—they are not only threats to power, they are perceived as liabilities." Indeed, this is true across the board, whether it's in a country where a new political entity or dictator tries to exert its power, or if it's a colonizer trying to assimilate the indigenous and erase their identity. Recently I watched a documentary about Greenlanders. The story of the Danish colonizers trying to erase their culture and identity was heartbreaking.
Lily, I find myself in complete agreement with you, especially regarding the point about the equality of women. This is a facet we also recognize from the GDR. Women there achieved a greater degree of emancipation earlier than their counterparts in West Germany.
Your inclusion of the liberation from feudalism is also significant, as this was indeed a powerful driving force behind many left cultural revolutions, fostering support among the common people who, in certain ways, did experience gains. While financial prosperity might have remained elusive for many, advancements in education, access to previously unattainable positions, and the availability of affordable basic goods were undoubtedly valued.
And Lily, your insightful observation about the erasure of cultures throughout history resonates deeply.
We can see it already with Alexander the Great, the crusaders, the Portuguese and Spanish conquerors, the British Empire, and American Colonization. Even the Vikings or Normans invading England fits this pattern.
This dynamic of domination, the imposition of a perceived superior culture onto another, often involves a missionary element, and the Christian churches have played a significant role in this. They too inflicted considerable damage by supplanting indigenous cultures with imposed Christianity, despite often introducing schools and so-called civilization. Schools were often only a means to an end – to spread Christianity.