What Happens When an Unstoppable Force Meets an Immovable Object?
We’re about to find out
Very reluctantly, I find myself peeking over the wall of my mental bunker to see how things are going with the planning and preparation for our new Administration … you know, the one 76 million patriotic Americans decided would be a swell idea to try out, just for fun. So far, I have to say, things are not looking good, but are unfolding pretty much as expected.
I keep coming back to the pesky idea of truth. As many experts on authoritarian regimes have pointed out, one of the first things such regimes try to do is destroy people’s belief in objective truth (source). If truth is allowed to be a criterion of choosing between beliefs — i.e., if beliefs can be determined to be true or false — this weakens the authoritarian’s grip because it provides a method by which the leader’s “truths” can be evaluated and judged. Beliefs can be compared to something called “evidence”, and they can be determined to be either true or false based on their conformance with that evidence. This is not good for the fledgling authoritarian, because it constrains his freedom to tell the lies he needs to tell to get people to do what he wants them to do, which is to engage in behavior that benefits him and his allies, not the people themselves.
As long as one remains in the realm of ideas, false beliefs are simply that — beliefs that do not, in fact, conform with reality. You and I may hold any number of false beliefs, which we can blissfully embrace as long as we don’t try to test them in the real world. But if we decide to take action on the basis of a false belief, the result of that action is unlikely to match the expectations embedded in the belief. We are instead likely to confront unintended consequences that tend to flow from acting on a belief that does not align with reality.
Unfortunately, unintended consequences only arise after a false belief has been released into the world, so they may include unintended but very real damage and suffering.
This is an extremely expensive way to learn if a belief is true or false.
But if the authoritarian has successfully eroded the legitimacy of objective truth and the methods by which it is determined, it becomes the only test available. Instead of letting our ideas die for us, we end up dying for our ideas — or at least suffering greatly for them.
Thanks to a very talkative band of cheerleaders and a helpful 1000-page guidebook called Project 2025, we know quite a bit about what the new Administration believes and what it intends to do based on those beliefs. In summary, its most cherished beliefs are represented in six high-priority objectives we now know all too well:
- Imposing tariffs on most, if not all, imported goods and parts.
- Awarding another massive tax cut to the nation’s wealthiest citizens and corporations.
- “Rounding up,” deporting, or incarcerating between 10 million and 20 million undocumented immigrants.
- Firing and replacing up to 50,000 federal government civil servants and replacing them with political loyalists with little relevant experience or knowledge.
- Harassing and punishing an “enemy’s list” of high-profile individuals, including Democratic officeholders, military officers, judges, journalists, and inadequately-loyal Republicans.
- Rolling back regulations designed to address climate change and CO2 emissions. At the same time, accelerating oil and gas production, and ending all federal subsidies for renewable energy development.
Other objectives have been hinted at (often quite strongly) but not openly declared: a national ban on family planning practices like abortion, contraception, and IVF; a rollback of other privacy and healthcare-related rights like same-sex marriage; an end to naturalized citizenship; dissolving the Constitutional separation of church and state; a repudiation of America’s longstanding alliances, NATO specifically; and many other “reforms” covered in the Project 2025 playbook.
Let’s consider each of these six big objectives in turn, asking two questions:
- What is the truth-value of the beliefs underlying this objective?
- What are the likely consequences — intended and unintended — of trying to implement this objective?
Answering these two questions will allow us to answer a third:
- What outcomes is this Administration likely to produce for the American people, and how will Americans react to those outcomes?
1. Tariffs
Tariffs are taxes paid to the federal government on imported goods. The incoming President has promised 25% across-the-board tariffs on all imports from Canada and Mexico on Day 1. This is in addition to promised increases in tariffs on imports from China, Europe, and elsewhere. During the campaign, he went even further and speculated that he might completely replace the federal income tax with tariffs, taking the US back to a mode of revenue generation abandoned in 1913. Such a radical move is unlikely (source), but it seems a near certainty that tariffs will be a big part of the new Administration’s economic agenda.
Underlying beliefs
As discussed prominently in the media, the incoming President believes, incorrectly, that import tariffs are paid by the importing country, not by the domestic company receiving the imported goods. He also appears to believe that income from tariffs can compensate for the massive tax cuts he has promised during the campaign (see below). Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, he does not believe that import tariffs will raise prices for consumers and reignite inflation. Finally, he does not believe that importing countries will retaliate with their own tariffs targeting American exports, even though this is exactly what happened during his first Administration (source).
Perhaps a more important reason tariffs might be attractive to this President is that they allow him, through the strategic allocation of tariff waivers, to pick winners and losers in an industry based on subservience to his agenda (source). Tariff waivers provide a powerful weapon for rewarding business allies and punishing perceived enemies.
Likely consequences
Mainstream economists are nearly unanimous in their opinion that these recently proposed tariffs, if enacted, would raise prices for Americans across the board (not just on the taxed imported goods). Nonpartisan analyses of the likely impact on household expenditures estimate thousands of dollars in additional costs per year (source). This does not include the add-on effects of retaliatory tariffs, likely to be imposed on American exports, which would put significant pressure on many export-oriented industries, leading to both job losses and business failures. All told, the inflationary effects of higher-priced consumer goods and higher taxes on individuals and small businesses are likely to impose a significant drag on US economic growth, especially if retaliatory tariffs escalate into a full-scale global trade war, as they did in the 1930s when the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act and retaliatory tariffs combined to reduce American imports and exports by 67% during the Great Depression (source).
To date, the new Administration has not acknowledged any potential risks associated with its proposed tariff policies, nor has it offered any assurances as to how it plans to avoid the economic and political damage that has regularly accompanied previous high-tariff periods in American history.
2. Tax Cuts
Many billionaires have invested billions in the 2024 election (source). Their reward, as is traditional whenever a Republican President is elected, is yet another tax cut for the very wealthy and big corporations. We can expect a timeline and outcome quite similar to what transpired in the last Republican Administration, when the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was passed in December 2017, a mere 11 months after the Party took over the Presidency and both houses of Congress.
Several important provisions of that last tax cut are scheduled to expire in 2025, including returning the standard deduction to half its current value and increasing tax rates for lower-income wage earners. Whether these provisions will be extended, modified, or allowed to expire as originally planned remains an open question.
Underlying beliefs
Republican tax cuts are traditionally justified by invoking a belief in “trickle-down economics,” a theory that giving tax breaks and other incentives to the rich will eventually “trickle down” to benefit the lower echelons of society as well. More a pretense than an actual belief, this rationale for ongoing tax relief for large corporations and the wealthiest among us has failed to produce its promised effects time and time again, including the last time it was invoked in 2017 (source).
Likely consequences
The immediate consequence of another big tax cut for the wealthy is that many Americans will be surprised to see their tax burden increase significantly under a new tax regime they will first encounter when filling out their 2026 tax returns in early 2027. In the longer term, we can expect outcomes similar to those produced by previous Republican tax cuts: increased wealth inequality, rising budget deficits, a convenient excuse to cut social services, and growing resentment from working class and middle class Americans, including current MAGA supporters, as promises of universal prosperity via “trickle-down” economics once again prove to be illusory.
3. Deportations
It is almost certain that the new Administration will issue some form of executive order to deport immigrants. How it plans to implement such an order remains to be seen. The rhetoric surrounding immigration, however, strongly suggests that this will be one of the earliest and most visible actions of the new government.
Underlying beliefs
The belief driving these deportations is that undocumented immigrants are a drain on American society — taking jobs from American workers, costing taxpayers in social services, and somehow undermining American values. These beliefs ignore substantial evidence to the contrary, such as many studies showing that immigrants contribute significantly to the economy and have lower rates of criminal behavior than native-born citizens (source).
Likely consequences
Logistically, any attempt to do what the new Administration is threatening to do to undocumented immigrants is likely to face significant challenges. Consider the logistics of identifying, arresting, and removing 10 million people from the American population. Today, the total prison population in the US (the largest imprisoned population in the world, by the way) is around 2 million (source). The largest prison in the US is the Louisiana State Penitentiary, with 6,300 inmates and 1,200 staff. Assuming the new Administration wants to incarcerate 10 million immigrants in anticipation of deportation, it will need to build the equivalent of 1,600 Louisiana State Penitentiaries and find nearly 2 million people to run them. This is not going to happen on “Day 1”.
We also cannot discount the disruptive impact on communities across the country as they are “invaded” by military or quasi-military “immigrant hunters”, creating a police-state atmosphere Americans have never experienced before. Simply trying to identify and remove millions of residents from their homes will turn targeted towns and cities into war zones. Will MAGA supporters continue to indulge their bloodlust for mass deportations when they see armored vehicles and armed troops parading down their streets, breaking down doors, and arresting friends and neighbors?
Should the new Administration succeed in removing even a fraction of the individuals it is targeting, the immediate impact will be severe economic disruption of industries reliant on immigrant labor, particularly agriculture, construction, and service sectors. Mass deportations and/or incarcerations will likely lead to labor shortages, higher prices for goods and services, and potentially economic contraction in areas heavily dependent on immigrant labor. The consequences for families and communities are likely to include family separations, increasing risks for those trying to evade deportation, and a further exacerbation of racial and ethnic tensions in U.S. communities (source).
4. Civil Service Replacement
The new Administration has made clear that it intends to overhaul the federal civil service by firing tens of thousands of government employees and replacing them with political loyalists, many of whom will lack relevant experience or qualifications for the roles they will be taking on. The Project 2025 playbook describes this as a “draining the swamp” exercise, but with the additional aim of creating a highly politicized, compliant bureaucracy loyal only to the President and his agenda.
Underlying beliefs
At the core of this proposal is the idea that government employees, particularly career civil servants, are inherently partisan, inefficient, or even corrupt. The incoming Administration believes that the federal government can only function properly if it is staffed by political loyalists who share its vision and values. There is a longstanding myth in conservative circles that government employees are lazy, overpaid, and work against the public good, even though many studies suggest that the federal workforce is highly competent and essential for maintaining the country’s functioning and the rule of law (source).
Likely consequences
The immediate consequence of large-scale firings and replacements with political loyalists is a loss of institutional knowledge and expertise throughout the federal government. Many crucial government functions — from managing public health and safety to ensuring the proper enforcement of laws and regulations — rely on experienced professionals with deep knowledge of their fields. Replacing them with loyalists who have little experience in the areas they are managing is likely to create inefficiency, errors, and mismanagement. Longer-term, this action will undermine public trust in the government, as people experience delays or poor service from government agencies. The U.S. could also face challenges in international diplomacy or national security if the experienced people currently responsible for those tasks are replaced by political operatives with insufficient qualifications.
Finally, a political purge of civil servants risks creating an even more deeply fractured and polarized government in which even routine administrative functions become politicized, making it harder to implement policies or respond to national emergencies. If MAGA voters think government is going to be more responsive to their needs after this Administration “deconstructs the administrative state”, they are likely to be both surprised and disappointed (source).
5. Political Retributions
The new Administration has already signaled its intent to weaponize the Department of Justice (DOJ) and other federal agencies against its political opponents. The focus will be on a wide array of targets, including Democrats, journalists, military leaders, judges, and even Republicans who fail to demonstrate sufficient loyalty to the President. There have been ongoing and persistent declarations that the Administration will actively seek to jail individuals it considers to be “enemies of the people.”
Underlying beliefs
The Administration’s belief in this case appears to be that those who oppose its agenda are not political opponents to be tolerated, but enemies to be neutralized. The idea of using the DOJ for political retribution is rooted in authoritarian practices that seek to eliminate dissent by punishing critics through legal and semi-legal means. It is fueled by a deep suspicion of political adversaries and journalists, who tend to be depicted as inhabitants of a “deep state” or “swamp” that must be eradicated for the country to be truly free.
Likely consequences
Should these acts of political retribution be carried out, the consequences are likely to be far-reaching and severe. First, such acts deeply undermine the rule of law and the longstanding principle that justice should be blind to political considerations. Over time, such practices will cause the DOJ to lose its reputation for neutrality, as both citizens and businesses lose confidence that the government’s investigations and legal decisions are made based on facts and fairness. Instead, they will come to see the legal system as just another tool in the President’s partisan arsenal.
Additionally, aggressive political retributions might stoke widespread civil unrest. Political purges often provoke violent resistance, particularly when they are seen as illegal or unconstitutional. The repression of political opponents will further divide the country, further erode faith in the government, and further weaken vital checks on executive power. The international community is also likely to react, as it faces the reality that the United States is no longer a global advocate for the rule of law and democratic government.
6. Climate and Energy Policies
One of the most controversial aspects of the incoming Administration’s agenda is its approach to climate change and energy policy. Administration spokespersons have made it clear they plan to roll back key environmental regulations that address CO2 emissions, and intend to double down on oil and gas production. In fact, the President has promised to accelerate fossil fuel extraction, while also ending federal subsidies for renewable energy development. This proposed approach is a sharp contrast to global efforts to combat climate change and decarbonize national economies.
Underlying beliefs
The core belief here is that climate change policies are too costly and limit economic growth. The incoming Administration believes that the USA should exploit its domestic natural resources, especially oil and gas, and that it should abandon renewable energy technologies as unrealistic and harmful to traditional industries. Additionally, the belief in deregulation is rooted in a commitment to removing what the Administration sees as burdensome environmental restrictions that stifle business innovation and growth.
These beliefs ignore the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change and the risks associated with unchecked carbon emissions. They also overlook the potential for the renewable energy sector to provide a transitional path to phase out fossil fuels and cap (if not roll back) global warming, a path many countries are pivoting toward as they accelerate their adoption of clean energy technologies.
Likely consequences
The consequences of rolling back climate policies and ramping up fossil fuel production will be significant. On the one hand, the fossil fuel industry will likely see a temporary boom in drilling and extraction, especially in America’s shale oil fields. This might initially create jobs in these sectors, but these will be unsustainable in the long term. In the near future, the environmental costs are likely to be devastating: increasing CO2 emissions, worsening air and water quality, and escalating environmental degradation. MAGA voters may notice.
On the global stage, the U.S. will lose its leadership role in combating climate change, alienating international allies and potentially facing punitive trade measures. Domestically, the effects of climate change — extreme weather events, rising sea levels, spreading wildfires, and other calamities — will worsen, hitting vulnerable communities hardest, particularly in Red States where people are most resistant to climate science. With fewer resources allocated to disaster relief and mitigation, these states can be expected to experience more frequent and more poorly managed climate disasters, increasing the likelihood that their MAGA voters might reconsider their loyalty to an Administration that consistently fails to help them in times of greatest need.
In Conclusion: What Outcomes Can We Expect?
The incoming Administration is either going to succeed in achieving its ambitious objectives or it is going to fail. Given that its beliefs about reality appear to be fundamentally flawed, success is highly unlikely — probably impossible. So, it is the nature and magnitude of the failures — and more importantly, how Americans will react to them — that will determine what happens next.
I have a slight sliver of hope that this Administration’s collision with reality will produce enough chaos and suffering that even the most faithful of MAGA acolytes may begin to question their loyalty to a leader and Party that promised so much and delivered so little. MAGA America (along with the rest of us) is about to get hit from all sides:
- Price hikes across the board, from food to gas to cars to appliances (due to tariffs).
- Stagnant wages, lost jobs, business failures, and rising unemployment as the economy contracts.
- Higher taxes on middle- and lower-income Americans as 2017 tax breaks expire, standard deductions are cut in half, and tax rates for lower tax brackets are increased to fund tax cuts for the rich.
- Cuts to government programs for all retired and lower-income Americans (not just minorities and immigrants) as tax revenues shrink.
- Loss of health insurance for millions (due to canceling Obamacare subsidies and rolling back Medicare and Medicaid).
- Life-threatening restrictions on maternal healthcare for mothers, wives, and daughters (due to abortion bans).
- More frequent and more poorly-managed climate disasters, especially in vulnerable Red States (due to increasing global warming and shrinking disaster relief funding).
- Disrupted social life in many communities under siege due to occupying deportation forces and related violent incidents.
Perhaps, if the Administration has not outlawed elections by then, we will have a midterm in 2026 and Democrats will have a shot at recapturing the House and Senate (Senate Republicans are quite vulnerable in ’26, defending 20 seats vs. 13 for Democrats). That could stall the right-wing juggernaut for the final two years and possibly deliver another chance for a democratic (small-d) reset in 2028.
But it is important to recognize that even in failure, the consequences of these actions will reverberate throughout the country, and how we as a nation react to them will determine whether this path leads us toward renewed democracy or a deeper descent into fascism. The collision between the unstoppable force of blind authoritarian ambition and the immovable object of truth, facts, and evidence will shape the next phase of the American story. Whether that story will tell of a renewed commitment to freedom or a descent into something much darker is a question we will begin to answer on January 20, 2025.
