Skip to main content
Making Sense

#439 — How to Lose a Democracy

22 min episode · 2 min read
·
Damon Linker

Episode

22 min

Read time

2 min

Topics

Design & UX, Science & Discovery, History

AI-Generated Summary

Key Takeaways

  • Immigration enforcement optics: Trump administration deploys masked ICE officers without visible badges conducting raids that detain legal immigrants and citizens, creating camera-ready shows of force designed to provoke left-wing reactions that would justify escalating federal intervention and military deployment.
  • Civil unrest scenarios: The administration seeks pretexts to invoke the Insurrection Act, particularly hoping for violence in Portland or Chicago against ICE officers, which would enable military deployment and broader crackdowns on political dissent under emergency powers framing.
  • Historical crime context: Current urban violence remains dramatically lower than past decades—New York murders dropped from over 2,000 annually in early 1990s to 10-20% of that level today—undermining claims of national emergency requiring extraordinary federal intervention measures.
  • Manufactured terrorism narrative: Stephen Miller promotes false claims of organized left-wing terrorism despite minimal evidence, contrasting sharply with actual 1970s terrorism when 500 bombings occurred between 1971-1973, revealing deliberate distortion of reality to justify authoritarian responses.

What It Covers

Sam Harris and political scientist Damon Linker examine threats to American democracy under Trump's second term, analyzing immigration enforcement tactics, potential civil unrest scenarios, and the intersection between authoritarian impulses and manufactured crises.

Key Questions Answered

  • Immigration enforcement optics: Trump administration deploys masked ICE officers without visible badges conducting raids that detain legal immigrants and citizens, creating camera-ready shows of force designed to provoke left-wing reactions that would justify escalating federal intervention and military deployment.
  • Civil unrest scenarios: The administration seeks pretexts to invoke the Insurrection Act, particularly hoping for violence in Portland or Chicago against ICE officers, which would enable military deployment and broader crackdowns on political dissent under emergency powers framing.
  • Historical crime context: Current urban violence remains dramatically lower than past decades—New York murders dropped from over 2,000 annually in early 1990s to 10-20% of that level today—undermining claims of national emergency requiring extraordinary federal intervention measures.
  • Manufactured terrorism narrative: Stephen Miller promotes false claims of organized left-wing terrorism despite minimal evidence, contrasting sharply with actual 1970s terrorism when 500 bombings occurred between 1971-1973, revealing deliberate distortion of reality to justify authoritarian responses.

Notable Moment

Linker describes his greatest fear as the intersection of two dystopian scenarios: Trump's tyrannical impulses combining with escalating civil unrest, where administration officials deliberately provoke violence to justify invoking emergency powers and deploying military force against domestic political opposition.

Know someone who'd find this useful?

Episode Transcript

Welcome to the Making Sense podcast. This is Sam Harris. Just a note to say that if you're hearing this, you're not currently on our subscriber feed and will only be hearing the first part of this conversation. In order to access full episodes of the Making Sense podcast, you'll need to subscribe at samharris.org. We don't run ads on the podcast, and therefore it's made possible entirely through the support of our subscribers, so if you enjoy what we're doing here, please consider becoming one. I'm here with Damon Linker. Damon, thanks for joining me. Thanks for having me, Sam. It's great to be here. So, many people will be familiar with your your writing, but remind people, of what you've been up to below these many years as a writer and a political commentator and and where they can find your stuff currently. Well, like, it seems like everyone these days, I have a sub stack titled, Notes from the Middle Ground. And then I also, teach political science at the University of Pennsylvania as a a senior lecturer there. And I mainly teach courses in political theory and, the political right. Well, we're gonna get into the political right and the, the theory or or lack of theory that may apply to the current moment. And how how would you describe your politics at this point? You know, for the last decade or so, I've described myself as being a liberal on the center left. I used to be a conservative about, twenty to twenty five years ago. I was, an editor at First Things Magazine, which Andrew Sullivan once called the intellectual nerve center of the religious right. And so I spent some time in the midst of that during the Bush administration and became frustrated with some of the Bush policies, the Iraq war, opposition to same sex marriage, and so broke from that, wrote a book about it called The Theo Cons. Mhmm. And since then, I've been on the broad center left with the emphasis mainly on center. I'm really not that far to the left, but I do incline that way, mostly out of aversion to what the right has become. Although that's kind of amusing because that break, as I just said, was initiated under Bush. And now I look back at the Bush administration, and it seems like the good old days. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. As do I. But I don't think we've ever crossed paths, but I seem to remember you having some critical things to say about the new atheists. I don't know if, those same criticisms still apply and perhaps we'll we'll get to some areas of disagreement. But when I look at your writing now, certainly on the topic of politics, you know, we you and I are more or less in lockstep in how we view the current moment. That sounds about right. I would expect that. Everything I've I've heard of you and …

Get the full transcript (3,516 words) + summary by email — free

One-time email with the complete transcript and AI summary of this episode. No account needed.

One email, no spam. We’ll also show you what SignalCast does.

Browse all Making Sense transcripts →

You just read a 3-minute summary of a 19-minute episode.

Get Making Sense summarized like this every Monday — plus up to 2 more podcasts, free.

Pick Your Podcasts — Free

Keep Reading

More from Making Sense

We summarize every new episode. Want them in your inbox?

Similar Episodes

Related episodes from other podcasts

Explore Related Topics

This podcast is featured in Best Philosophy Podcasts (2026) — ranked and reviewed with AI summaries.

You're clearly into Making Sense.

Every Monday, we deliver AI summaries of the latest episodes from Making Sense and 192+ other podcasts. Free for one show.

Start My Monday Digest

No credit card · Unsubscribe anytime